quantification methodology for the use of sulphur concrete in precast applications (first assessment...

8/11/2019 Quantification Methodology for the Use of Sulphur Concrete in Precast Applications (First Assessment Version)_0

1/33

Sulphur Concrete v1.2

v3.0 1

USE OF SULPHUR CONCRETE INPRECAST APPLICATIONS

Document Prepared by Leading Carbon Ltd.

Contact Information:

Keith [email protected]

#200 319 10thAve SWT2R 0A5 Calgary, Alberta

Title Quantification Methodology for the Use of Sulphur Concrete in Precast Applications

Version 1.2

Date of Issue 28-Jun-2012

Type Methodology

Sectoral Scope Manufacturing Industries, Construction

Prepared By Leading Carbon Ltd. and Shell

Contact Timo MakinenSustainable Development ManagerDownstream Specialties Business

(Bitumen & Sulphur)c/o Shell Canada Limited400 4th Avenue SW,P.O. Box 100, Station MCalgary, Alberta T2P 2H5

Reference

Number

Reference number is assigned by VCSA upon approval
mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]


2/33


v3.0 2

Relationship to Approved or Pending Methodologies

Approved and Pending VCS methodologies for all sectoral scopes were reviewed to determine if anexisting methodology could be reasonably revised to meet the objective of this proposed methodology.Two methodologies related to process changes in concrete production were identified, and are outlined inTable 1.

Table 1: Summary o f Related Methodo logies

Methodology Title PrimaryReductionMechanism

Comments

ACM0015 v3 Consolidated baseline andmonitoring methodology forproject activities usingalternative raw materialsthat do not containcarbonates for clinkerproduction in cement kilns,

CDM March 2010

Avoidance ofprocess CO2emissions due toreduction ofcarbonatematerials in thefeedstock.

The production of sulphur concreterequires significant process changesnot reflected in this methodology.The project activity SSRs includecalcination of raw materials and kilnemissions. Calcination does notoccur in sulphur concrete and there

is no clinker.

ACM0005 v5 Consolidated baselinemethodology for increasingthe blend in concreteproduction, CDM October2009

Avoidance ofprocess CO2emissions due tofeedstock switch.

The production of sulphur concreterequires significant process changesnot reflected in this methodology.

A review of the related methodologies indicated that the process changes required to produce sulphurconcrete would result in significant changes to the existing methodologies, and adaptation would not befeasible.

Other approved VCS large scale and consolidated methodologies under Manufacturing Industriessectoral scope are listed in Table 2. Approved Small Scale methodologies under Manufacturing Industiresare listed in Table 3. No other methodologies exist under Construction sectoral scope.

Table 2: List of Approved Large Scale and Consolidated Methodologies under Manufacturing Industries

Methodology Title Methodology Type Comments

AM0007 Analysis of the least-cost fueloption for seasonally-operatingbiomass cogeneration plants ---Version 1.0

Approved Large Scale This methodology is notapplicable to the use ofsulphur concrete inprecast applications.

AM0014 Natural gas-based packagecogeneration --- Version 4.0


AM0036 Fuel switch from fossil fuels tobiomass residues in heatgeneration equipment --- Version4.0.0



3/33


v3.0 3

AM0041 Mitigation of Methane Emissionsin the Wood Carbonization Activityfor Charcoal Production ---Version 1.0


AM0049 Methodology for gas basedenergy generation in an industrialfacility --- Version 3.0


AM0055 Recovery and utilization of wastegas in refinery --- Version 2.0.0


AM0057 Avoided emissions from biomasswastes through use as feed stockin pulp and paper, cardboard,fibreboard or bio-oil production ---Version 3.0.1


AM0065 Replacement of SF6 withalternate cover gas in themagnesium industry --- Version2.1


AM0070 Manufacturing of energy efficientdomestic refrigerators --- Version3.1.0


AM0078 Point of Use Abatement Device toReduce SF6 emissions in LCDManufacturing Operations ---Version 2.0.0


AM0092 Substitution of PFC gases forcleaning Chemical VapourDeposition (CVD) reactors in thesemiconductor industry --- Version1.0.0


AM0095 Waste gas based combined cyclepower plant in a Greenfield ironand steel plant --- Version 1.0.0


AM0096 CF4 emission reduction frominstallation of an abatementsystem in a semiconductormanufacturing facility --- Version1.0.0


ACM0003 Emissions reduction throughpartial substitution of fossil fuelswith alternative fuels or lesscarbon intensive fuels in cement

Approved Consolidated This methodology is notapplicable to the use ofsulphur concrete in


4/33


v3.0 4

or quicklime manufacture ---Version 7.4.1

precast applications.

ACM0009 Consolidated baseline andmonitoring methodology for fuelswitching from coal or petroleumfuel to natural gas --- Version 3.2

Approved Consolidated This methodology is notapplicable to the use ofsulphur concrete inprecast applications.

ACM0012 Consolidated baselinemethodology for GHG emissionreductions from waste energyrecovery projects --- Version 4.0.0

Approved Consolidated This methodology is notapplicable to the use ofsulphur concrete inprecast applications.

Table 3: List of Approved Small Scale Methodologies under Manufacturing Industries

Methodology Title Methodology Type Comments

AMS-II.D. Energy efficiency and fuel

switching measures for industrialfacilities --- Version 12.0

Approved Small Scale This methodology is not

applicable to the use ofsulphur concrete inprecast applications.

AMS-II.H. Energy efficiency measuresthrough centralization of utilityprovisions of an industrial facility --- Version 3.0

Approved Small Scale This methodology is notapplicable to the use ofsulphur concrete inprecast applications.

AMS-II.I. Efficient utilization of wasteenergy in industrial facilities ---Version 1.0


AMS-III.K. Avoidance of methane releasefrom charcoal production ---Version 5.0


AMS-III.N. Avoidance of HFC emissions inrigid Poly Urethane Foam (PUF)manufacturing --- Version 3.0


AMS-III.P. Recovery and utilization of wastegas in refinery facilities --- Version1.0

Approved Small Scale This methodology is notapplicable to the use ofsulphur concrete in

precast applications.

AMS-III.Q. Waste energy recovery(gas/heat/pressure) projects ---Version 4.0


AMS-III.V. Decrease of coke consumption inblast furnace by installingdust/sludge recycling system in

Approved Small Scale This methodology is notapplicable to the use ofsulphur concrete in


5/33


v3.0 5

steel works --- Version 1.0 precast applications.

AMS-III.Z. Fuel Switch, processimprovement and energyefficiency in brick manufacture ---Version 3.0


AMS-III.AD. Emission reductions in hydrauliclime production --- Version 1.0


AMS-III.AN. Fossil fuel switch in existingmanufacturing industries ---Version 2.0


Research into other voluntary and compliance based GHG offset systems did not uncover any existing

GHG quantification protocols that relate to the use of sulphur concrete in precast applications.


6/33


v3.0 6

Table of Contents

1 Sources ................................................................................................................................................. 7

2 Summary Description of the Methodology ............................................................................................ 7

3 Definitions .............................................................................................................................................. 8

4 Applicability Conditions ......................................................................................................................... 8

5 Project Boundary ................................................................................................................................. 10

6 Procedure for Determining the Baseline Scenario .............................................................................. 16

7 Procedure for Demonstrating Additionality ......................................................................................... 16

8 Quantification of GHG Emission Reductions and Removals .............................................................. 16

8.1 Baseline Emissions ..................................................................................................................... 16

8.2 Project Emissions ........................................................................................................................ 17

8.3 Leakage....................................................................................................................................... 19

8.4 Summary of GHG Emission Reduction and/or Removals .......................................................... 19

9 Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................ 20

9.1 Data and Parameters Available at Validation ............................................................................. 20

9.2 Data and Parameters Monitored ................................................................................................. 22

9.3 Description of the Monitoring Plan .............................................................................................. 26

9.4 Uncertainty Assessment ............................................................................................................. 27

10 References and Other Information ...................................................................................................... 27


7/33


v3.0 7

1 SOURCES

This methodology is based on the draft Quantification Protocol for the Use of Sulphur Concrete in Precast

Applications v0.4, issued under the Alberta Specified Gas Emitters Regulation. The methodology

references the following CDM Methodological Tools:

Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and determine additionality v03.0.1; and

Tool for the demonstration and assessment of additionality v05.2.1.

In addition, technical and good practice guidance was obtained from Environment Canadas annual GHG

reporting, the US EPAs Emission Inventory, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),

and various other reliable sources of information pertaining to the concrete production industry. The good

practice guidance and best science used to develop the quantification methodology are presented in

Section 10.

2 SUMMARY DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODOLOGY

Concrete is a commonly used material for infrastructure, industrial and construction applications,consisting of aggregate (rock & sand), water and cement. The production of calcium and/or magnesiumcarbonate-derived cement (often from limestone) releases significant amounts of greenhouse gases(GHG). This methodology is applicable to processes that involve the substitution of calcium and/ormagnesium carbonate-derived (Portland) cement with an alternative binder, such as a modified heatedsulphur product, during the production of concrete and other concrete-based products such as pre-castpipe, paving stones, slabs and tanks. This Methodology is not applicable to concrete standard productionprocess (i.e. for poured in place applications) as it would entail different baseline emissions quantificationmethod. The parameters and equations in the baseline of this methodology are specific to precastapplications as opposed to poured in place applications.

Traditional cementitious binders derived from limestone and clay rely on the chemical bonds formed uponcontact with water to bind together aggregate material (sand and rock) to form concrete. This binder

(clinker) is a key component of cement; however, the production of clinker results in the release of asignificant amount of GHG from two main sources: process emissions and combustion emissions. Carbondioxide process emissions occur as a by-product of the calcination process, where a calcium ormagnesium carbonate such as limestone is heated with clay to form clinker (primarily calcium oxide) andcarbon dioxide. Additional GHG emissions occur because heat for the calcination process is normallysupplied via the combustion of fossil fuels, releasing carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide as aresult.

Portland cement may be completely substituted with modified heated sulphur to form a stable, hardconcrete product, avoiding the process and combustion emissions associated with the manufacture ofPortland cement.

In the case of a modified sulphur alternative, the sulphur itself is generated as a by-product of natural gas

processing and petroleum refining. Unlike concrete made from Portland cement (which can be coldmixed), concrete made with modified heated sulphur needs to be heated during production. Aggregateneeds to be heated too to the same temperature as the molten sulphur prior to mixing in order to maintainthe heat in the sulphur product during the mixing process.

Despite the need to be hot mixed (with heat likely obtained from the combustion of fossil fuels), concreteand cement products made with modified heated sulphur releases far fewer GHGs than concrete madewith Portland cement because it avoids the process emissions resulting from the calcination process usedduring clinker production, as well as the combustion emissions typically generated to supply heat to thatprocess. The clinker production process typically operates at approximately 1450 deg C. The presence of


8/33


v3.0 8

sulphur in sulphur concrete places a temperature ceiling on potential product applications, since themelting point of sulphur is relatively low (113 deg C). The high strength properties of sulphur concrete toallow it to be used in a wide variety of pre-cast applications, such as traffic barriers, drainage tiles, pavingstones, and marine defences.

The baseline condition is defined as the production of concrete using traditional cementitious bindersderived from limestone and clay that rely on the chemical bonds formed upon contact with water to bindtogether aggregate material (sand and rock). This binder (clinker) is a key component of Portlandcement.

The calculation of the emissions related to the production of Portland cement will be based on the massof sulphur cement used in the project condition. An equivalency factor will be used to provide functionalequivalence between the mass of sulphur cement and Portland cement. Finally, an emission factorrepresenting the mass of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gas emissions per tonne of Portlandcement displaced will be applied.

3 DEFINITIONS

Aggregate: Aggregate is composed of such coarse particulate material as sand, gravel,crushed stone, slag, and recycled concrete. It may be sourced from gravel pits,quarries and other local sources near to the pre-cast facility. In addition to sandand rock, aggregate may include other materials such as fly ash and slag thatcan be blended with cement to form a final product. Fly ash and slag arecementous materials partially displacing Portland cement in the baseline product,however can also be included in sulphur concrete products.

Binder: A material that serves as an adhesive that binds with the aggregate to formconcrete.

Portland Cement: A finely ground, usually grey coloured mineral powder that when mixed withwater, acts as a glue to bind together aggregate to form concrete.

Sulphur Cement: A product composed of molten elemental sulphur and a proprietary modifier thatacts as a glue to bind together aggregate to form sulphur concrete. Sulphurcement requires no water to form sulphur concrete.

Concrete: A composite building material made from the combination of aggregate and acement binder.

Precast Products: A form of construction where concrete is cast in a reusable mould or form, whichis then cured in a controlled environment. Examples of precast products includepaving stones, planters, traffic barriers, holding tanks and retaining walls, amongmany others.

4 APPLICABILITY CONDITIONS

This methodology is applicable to the production of sulphur concrete for precast applications, where thefollowing conditions are met:

1. The most reasonable and credible baseline scenario is the production of precast concreteproducts using Portland cement, as demonstrated using the methodology outlined in section 6;

2. The handling, storage, mix production temperature and other key factors specified by themanufacturer for the proper and safe use of sulphur cement have been followed by the project


9/33


v3.0 9

proponent. Evidence of adherence to manufacturer specification must be made available during averification site visit, conducted during precast product production;

3. The resulting sulphur concrete product meets local legal and technical requirements. In theabsence of local technical specifications for concrete, project proponents must demonstrate thatsulphur concrete produced under the project condition provides the equivalent function to

concrete that would have been produced under the baseline condition.


10/33


v3.0 10

5 PROJECT BOUNDARY

Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) included in project and baseline quantification include those that

are within the project site (the physical, geographic location of the hot mix asphalt production facility), as

well as others that are off-site. A generalized process flow diagram of a typical project and baseline are

presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2 respectively. The SSRs represented in those figures were compared

and their relevancy evaluated to determine if they should be included or excluded from the quantification

methodology. Table 4 provides justification for the inclusion or exclusion of each of the potential SSRs in

the project and baseline conditions. Project proponents must justify the baseline and project SSRs

selected for quantification in their project.

Project proponents must account for:

Direct emissions avoided by displacing Portland cement production and use with sulphur cement

production and use

Direct emissions due to fuel combustion at the precast concrete facility for:

o heating of aggregate;o additional heating of the sulphur additive;

Direct emissions due to fuel combustion and process emissions outside the precast concrete

facility for:

o Production of the sulphur modifier;

o Transport of the modifier and modified sulphur product;

Indirect emissions due to the extraction and processing of fossil fuels used; and

Indirect emissions due to the degassing of sulphur (if applicable).

A generalized process flow diagram of a typical project is presented inFigure 1.

The temporal project boundary includes the operation of an existing precast concrete facility during the

incorporation of a sulphur binder. SSRs related to the construction and decommissioning of the facility are

considered outside the scope of this methodology and have been excluded from quantification. This is

reasonable given the minimal emissions associated with the construction and decommissioning phases

and the long operational life of the facility.


11/33


v3.0 11

Figure 1: Project Process Flow Diagram

Project Scenario

MoltenSulphur

Production

ModifierProduction &

Transportation

Sulphur

Degassing

AdditionalSulphurHeating

AggregateTransportation

AggregateHeating

SulphurTransportation

& Storage

ConcreteMixing

ConcreteTransportation

PrecastProduct

Pouring &Forming

ConcreteRecycling &

Disposal

PrecastProduct

Transportation

Fuel Extraction& Processing

AggregateProduction &

Processing

Fuel Delivery

ElectricityGeneration

Project Scenario


12/33


v3.0 12

Figure 2: Baseline Process Flow Diagram

Production ofMoltenSulphur

SulphurDegassing

Transportation& Storage of

MoltenSulphur

LimestoneProduction

Portland

CementProduction

PortlandCement

Transportation

Aggregate

Production &Processing

AggregateTransportation

ConcreteMixing


PrecastProduct

Pouring &Forming

PrecastProduct

Transportation

ConcreteRecycling &

Disposal

WaterTreatment &

Pumping

Fuel Extraction& Processing

Fuel Delivery


Baseline Scenario

Cement Kiln

DustProduction &Processing


13/33


v3.0 13

Table 4: GHG Sources, Sinks and Reservoi rs

SourceControlled,Related, orAffected

Gas Included Justification/Explanation

Baseline


Related

CO2 No Excluded as the quantity of molten sulphurproduced in the project and baseline scenariosare functionally equivalent. Sulphur is a by-product of gas processing and would beproduced in both the project and baselinescenarios in the same quantity.

CH4 No

N2O No

SulphurDegassing

Related

CO2 No If sulphur degassing was occurring in thebaseline condition, it will continue under theproject condition and emissions will beequivalent.

CH4 No

N2O No

Transportationand Storage of

Molten

Sulphur

Related

CO2 No If sulphur is used as it is produced rather thanstoring it, emissions will be lower in the projectcondition. Therefore it is conservative to

exclude this SSR.

CH4 No

N2O No

LimestoneProduction

Related

CO2 No Less limestone will be produced in the projectcondition and therefore emissions will be lowerin the project condition. The emissions fromthis SSR are relatively low and difficult toestimate accurately. Exclusion of this SSR isconservative.

CH4 No

N2O No

PortlandCement

ProductionRelated

CO2 Yes The production of Portland cement in thebaseline condition has relevant emissions andmust be included.

CH4 Yes

N2O Yes

Cement KilnDust

Productionand

Processing

Related

CO2 No Cement kiln dust (CKD) refers to the portion ofthe cement raw materials that does notbecome part of the clinker. CO2might be

emitted from CKD that is not recycled to thePortland cement production process. CKD isnot produced in the project condition, thereforeit is conservative to exclude its production andprocessing related emissions.

CH4 No

N2O No

PortlandCement

TransportationRelated

CO2 No The quantity of Portland cement that istransported in the project condition would beless than the quantity in the baseline scenario,therefore it is conservative to exclude theseemissions.

CH4 No

N2O No

AggregateProduction

and

Processing

Related

CO2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregatewould be produced and processed in theproject and baseline conditions.

CH4 No

N2O No

Transportationof Aggregate

Related

CO2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregatewould be transported in the project andbaseline conditions.

CH4 No

N2O No

WaterTreatment and

PumpingRelated

CO2 No Emissions from this SSR are avoided in theproject condition. This emission reduction isnot the focus of this methodology. Emissionsare excluded as it is conservative to do so.

CH4 No

N2O No

Fuel Related CO2 No The quantity of fuel consumed in the baseline


14/33


v3.0 14



Extraction/Processing

CH4 No condition for the production of Portland cementwill be considered in the SSR: PortlandCement Production.

N2O No

Fuel Delivery Related

CO2 No The quantity of fuel consumed in the baselinecondition for the production of Portland cementwill be greater than the quantity of fuelconsumed in the project condition for mixingsulphur concrete. Emissions are excluded as itis conservative to do so.

CH4 No

N2O No


Related

CO2 No There will be no incremental electricityconsumption in the project condition over thebaseline condition.

CH4 No

N2O No

ConcreteMixing

Controlled

CO2 No The process for concrete mixing is equivalentin the baseline and project conditions.CH4 No

N2O No

Concrete

Transportation Controlled

CO2 No The same quantity of concrete will be

transported in the baseline and projectscenarios.CH4 No

N2O No

PrecastProduct

Pouring andForming

Controlled

CO2 No The process for pouring and forming will notchange between the baseline and projectscenarios.

CH4 No

N2O No

PrecastProduct

TransportationAffected

CO2 No There is no difference in the transportationrelated emissions between the baseline andproject scenarios.

CH4 No

N2O No

ConcreteRecycling or

DisposalAffected

CO2 No Excluded for simplification. This isconservative as the emissions are likely higherunder the baseline condition.

CH4 No

N2O No

Project


Related

CO2 No Excluded as the quantity of molten sulphur

produced in the project and baseline scenariosare functionally equivalent. Sulphur is a by-product of gas processing and would beproduced in both the project and baselinescenarios in the same quantity

CH4 No

N2O No

Sulphurdegassing

Related

CO2 Yes If sulphur degassing is occurring as a result ofthe project and the producer would otherwisenot be degassing the sulphur, the emissionsmust be included.

CH4 Yes

N2O Yes

SulphurTransportationand Storage

Related

CO2 Yes If sulphur was stored in the baseline condition,transportation emissions in the projectcondition are deemed to be additional andmust be included.

CH4 Yes

N2O Yes

ModifierProductionand

Transportation

RelatedCO2 Yes Emissions associated with the production andtransportation of the sulphur modifier are

directly related to the project and must beincluded.

CH4 Yes

N2O Yes

AggregateProduction

andProcessing

Related

CO2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregatewould be produced and processed in theproject and baseline conditions.

CH4 No

N2O No

Transportationof Aggregate

RelatedCO2 No Excluded as the same quantity of aggregate

would be transported in the project andCH4 No


15/33


v3.0 15



N2O No baseline conditions.

Fuel Extractionand

Processing

Related

CO2 Yes Fuel used for Additional Sulphur Heating isincremental in the project condition and

emissions must be included.

CH4 Yes

N2O Yes

Fuel Delivery Related

CO2 No Excluded as the emissions from transportationare likely negligible.CH4 No

N2O No


Related

CO2 No There will be no incremental electricityconsumption in the project condition over thebaseline condition.

CH4 No

N2O No

AdditionalSulphurHeating

Controlled

CO2 Yes Any heat derived from sources that emitgreenhouse gases is incremental to thebaseline condition and must be included.

CH4 Yes

N2O Yes

AggregateHeating

Controlled

CO2 Yes Any heat derived from sources that emitgreenhouse gases is incremental to thebaseline condition and must be included.

CH4 Yes

N2O Yes

ConcreteMixing

ControlledCO2 No The process for concrete mixing is equivalent

in the baseline and project conditions.CH4 No

N2O No


Controlled

CO2 No The same quantity of concrete will betransported in the baseline and projectscenarios.

CH4 No

N2O No

PrecastProduct

Pouring andForming

Controlled

CO2 No The process for pouring and forming will notchange between the baseline and projectscenarios.

CH4 No

N2O No

PrecastProduct

TransportationControlled

CO2 No There is no difference in the transportationrelated emissions between the baseline andproject scenarios.

CH4 No

N2O No

ConcreteRecycling or

DisposalControlled

CO2 No Excluded for simplification. This isconservative as the emissions are likely higherunder the baseline condition.

CH4 No

N2O No


16/33


v3.0 16

6 PROCEDURE FOR DETERMINING THE BASELINE SCENARIO

The baseline scenario for projects applying this methodology is the production of precast concrete

products using Portland cement. Project proponents must demonstrate that this is the most reasonable

and credible baseline for their project using the most recent version of the methodological tool Combined

tool to identify the baseline scenario and determine additionality as published on the UNFCC website.

Project proponents should use Step 1 of the referenced tool to identify all realistic and credible baseline

alternatives, and Step 2 of the tool to identify barriers and to assess which alternatives are prevented by

these barriers. In doing so, relevant local regulations governing the use of different technologies, and

technical specifications of concrete products should be taken into account. Project proponents should

also use Step 3: Investment Analysis, and Step 4: Common Practice Analysis, where applicable in their

project and as described by the referenced tool.

7 PROCEDURE FOR DEMONSTRATING ADDITIONALITY

Additionality will be assessed and demonstrated using the most recent version of the methodological tool

Combined tool to identify the baseline scenario and determine additionality and Tool for the

demonstration and assessment of additionality v05.2.1 as published on the UNFCC website.

8 QUANTIFICATION OF GHG EMISSION REDUCTIONS AND REMOVALS

8.1 Baseline Emissions

The production of clinker results in the release of significant process GHG emissions and combustionGHG emissions. Carbon dioxide process emissions occur as a by-product of the calcination process,where a calcium or magnesium carbonate such as limestone is heated with clay to form clinker (primarilycalcium oxide) and carbon dioxide. The heat required for the calcination process is typically supplied from

the combustion of fossil fuels, resulting in the emission of further carbon dioxide as well as smalleramounts of methane and nitrous oxide.

Baseline quantification in this methodology is projection based, which uses projections of reductions orremovals in the project to estimate the baseline activity that would have occurred in the absence of theproject. The calculation of the emissions related to the production of Portland cement in the baselinecondition will be based on the mass of sulphur cement used in the project condition. An equivalencyfactor will be used to provide functional equivalence between the mass of sulphur cement and Portlandcement. Finally, an emission factor representing the mass of carbon dioxide equivalent greenhouse gasemissions per tonne of Portland cement displaced will be applied.

Emissions under the baseline condition (in tonnes CO2E) are determined using the following equation:

= (1)

Where:

BEy= the sum of baseline emissions in a given year, y

BEPortland= emissions due to the production of Portland cement


17/33


v3.0 17

The emissions due to the production of Portland cement under the baseline condition are calculated as

follows:

= ( %) (2)

Where:

MassPrecast= the measured mass of finished precast products containing sulphur cement in the

project scenario (tonnes)

%PC= the ratio of Portland cement used in the finished product under the baseline

scenario, based on manufacturer specifications. This percentage represent the

amount of Portland cement actually contained within the finished product (in the

baseline) compared to other components such as aggregate, water. (unitless

value)

EFPortland Cement Production= CO2equivalent emission factor for the production of Portland Cement (kg CO 2E

or kg CO2/CH4/N2O per tonne Portland cement)

The emission factor for Portland cement production can be calculated as follows:

= (3)

Where:MassClinker/MassCement = the clinker to cement ratio for the baseline condition. Guidance on this figure

provided in Appendix A, for site specific values and in Table A2 for regionalvalues.

EFClinker= the emission factor per tonne of clinker for the baseline condition. Guidance onthis figure provided in Appendix A for site specific values and based on kiln typeused in the baseline region.

8.2 Project Emissions

Emissions under the project condition (in tonnes CO2E) are determined using the following equation:

= + + + + & + (4)

Where:

PEy= the sum of project emissions in a given year, y

PEDegassing= emissions due to sulphur degassing

PEAdditional S Heating= emissions due to the additional heating requirements of sulphur concrete

PEAgg Heating= emissions due to heating the aggregate

PEFuel= emissions due to the extraction and processing of fuel


18/33


v3.0 18

PES Trans&Storage= emissions due to the transportation and storage of sulphur

PEModifier= emissions due to the production and transportation of the sulphur modifier

The emissions due to sulphur degassing under the project condition are calculated as follows:

= ( 2) + 2 2 ;( 4) ; ( 2)

(5)

Where:

VolFuel i= the volume of each type of fuel combusted under the project scenario (L, m3or other)

EF Fuelx= the emissions factor for fuel production and processing for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L,

m3or other).

Volvent gas= volume of degassing vent gas incinerated (m3)

MFCO2= molar fraction of CO2in degassing vent gas incinerated (%)

mCO2= molar mass of CO2(kg/mol)VSTP= volume of on kg-mole of an ideal gas at standard temperature and pressure (m

3)

The emissions for additional heating of sulphur are calculated as follows:

= ( 2) ;( 4) ;( 2)

(6)

Where:

VolFuel i= the volume of each type of fuel combusted for additional sulphur heating (L, m3or other)

EF Fuelx= the emissions factor for fuel combustion for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L, m3or other).

The emissions for heating of aggregate are calculated as follows:

= ( 2) ;( 4) ;( 2)

(7)

Where:

VolFuel i= the volume of each type of fuel combusted for aggregate heating (L, m3or other)

EF Fuelx= the emissions factor for fuel combustion for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L, m3or other).


19/33


v3.0 19

The emissions due to the extraction and processing of fossil fuels under the project condition are

calculated as follows:

= ( 2) ;( 4) ; ( 2) (8)

Where:

VolFuel i= the volume of each type of fuel combusted under the project scenario (L, m3or other)

EF Fuelx= the emissions factor for fuel production and processing for each GHG listed (kg GHG/L,

m3or other).

The emissions due to transportation and storage of molten sulphur under the project condition are

calculated as follows:

& = (9)

Where:

Mass Distance = the product of the mass of sulphur and the distance shipped from sulphur

manufacturing facility to pre-cast manufacturing facility (tonne.km)

EFTransport= CO2equivalent emissions factor for truck transportation (kg CO 2E/ tonne.km).

The emissions due to the production and transportation of modifier are calculated as follows:

= + (10)Where:

MModifier= mass of modifier used (tonne)

EFModifier= CO2equivalent emission factor for modifier production (kg CO2E/tonne modifier)

Mass DistanceModifier= the product of the mass of modifier and the distance shipped from modifier

manufacturing facility to facility where modifier is added to sulphur (tonne.km)

EFTransport= CO2equivalent emissions factor for truck transportation (kg CO 2E/ tonne.km).

8.3 Leakage

No sources of leakage have been identified for this project activity.

8.4 Summary of GHG Emission Reduct ion and/or Removals

The emission reductions for this project activity are calculated as follows:

= (11)


20/33


v3.0 20

Where:

ERY = Net GHG emissions reductions and/or removals in year y

BEY =Baseline emissions in year y

PEy = Project emissions in year y

9 MONITORING

9.1 Data and Parameters Available at Validation

The following data will be made available at validation by the project proponent. Default values may vary

according the physical location of the project activity. The project proponent must provide evidence and

justification that the values presented here are applicable to their project activity, or provide and justify

project-specific values as needed.

Should the data parameters listed below not be available at the time of validation, the project proponent

must provide a plan for determination and/or monitoring the data during the project. All parameters used

must be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure the most current value is used in calculations.

Data Unit / Parameter: Emission factor for the production of Portland

cement (EFPortland Cement Production)

Data unit: kg CO2E (or kg CO2, CH4, N2O as applicable)

per tonne of Portland Cement

Description: Emission factor describing GHG emissions from

production of Portland cement. This factor

includes emissions from the chemical process of

calcination as well as emissions from fuel

combustion, as provided by project proponentrecords and/or the World Business Council for

Sustainable Development, Cement Industry

Energy and CO2 Performance Getting the

Numbers Right report.

Source of data: Estimation

Justification of choice of data or

description of measurement methods and

procedures applied:

Proponents may use site-specific emission

factors for accuracy if a specific facility can be

justified for the baseline cement production

facility. Reference values may be calculated

following the methodology presented in Appendix

A, using data published by the World Business

Council for Sustainable Development based on

region. Project proponents should justify that the

EFPortland Cement Production in Appendix A is

conservative for their project.

Any comment: Project proponents must provide justification for

factor used based on the region, kiln type and / or


21/33


v3.0 21

baseline facility records.

Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factors for fuel combustion (EFFuel i,

GHG)

Data unit: kg (CO2, CH4, N2O) per L, m3 or other of eachtype of fuel used


combustion of fuel. Used under both the project

and baseline conditions.




procedures applied:

Reference values may be obtained from national

and international GHG inventories. In the

absence of local or regional data, reference

values may be obtained from the most recent

version of the IPCC guidelines for NationalGreenhouse Gas Inventories.

Any comment: Review of best practice guidance and accepted

standards. Reference values are generally

available.

Data Unit / Parameter: Molar mass of carbon dioxide: 0.04401

Data unit: g/mol

Description: Physical property / Constant

Source of data: General Chemistry book, 9th

Edition, Ebbing &Gammon

Justification of choice of data or description

of measurement methods and procedures

applied:

n/a

Any comment: -

Data Unit / Parameter: Volume of one kg-mole of an ideal gas at

standard temperature and pressure: 23.6449

Data unit: m3

Description: Physical property / Constant

Source of data: General Chemistry book, 9th Edition, Ebbing &

Gammon

Justification of choice of data or description

of measurement methods and procedures

applied:

n/a


22/33


v3.0 22

Any comment: -

Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factors for fuel extraction and

processing (EFFuel i, GHG)

Data unit: kg (CO2, CH4, N2O) per L, m3 or other of each

type of fuel used


extraction and processing of fuel combusted.




procedures applied:

Reference values may be obtained from national

and international GHG inventories. In the

absence of local or regional data, reference

values may be obtained from the most recent

version of the IPCC guidelines for National

Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

Any comment: Review of best practice guidance and accepted

standards. Reference values are generally

available.

9.2 Data and Parameters Monitored

The following data parameters will be monitored during the project.

Data Unit / Parameter: Mass of precast products produced (MassPrecast)

Data unit: Tonne

Description: The mass of finished precast concrete products

Source of data: Measurement

Description of measurement methods and

procedures to be applied:

Direct measurement of the mass of the finished

product.

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Each product

QA/QC procedures to be applied: General guidance on QA/QC procedures for this

parameter is provided in Section 9.3 Description

of the Monitoring Plan.

Any comment: Measurement is standard practice.

Data Unit / Parameter: Ratio of Portland cement in finished product

(%PC)

Data unit: Unitless

Description: The ratio of Portland cement in the finished


23/33


v3.0 23

product

Source of data: Estimated



This percentage represent the amount of

Portland cement actually contained within the

finished product (in the baseline) compared to

other components such as aggregate, water.

(unitless value)

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Per product.




Any comment: The use of manufacturers specifications provides

a method for establishing functional equivalence

between the product used in the baseline

condition and the product used in the project

condition.

Data Unit / Parameter: Volume of each type of fuel combusted during the

project for sulphur degassing, aggregate heating

and additional sulphur heating (VolFuel i)

Data unit: L, m3or other

Description: The volume of fuel used




The project proponent may measure the volume

of fuel consumed in one of two ways:

1. Direct metering or reconciliation of volumes

received and in storage;

2. Reconciliation of volume of fuel purchased

within a given time period.

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Monthly

QA/QC procedures to be applied: Cross-checking of metered volumes vs.

theoretical fuel use, analysis of data trends.

Any comment: -

Data Unit / Parameter: Volume of degassing vent gas incinerated

(Volvent gas)

Data unit: m3

Description: The volume of vent gas incinerated


24/33


v3.0 24




Direct metering of vent gas to the incinerator

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Continuous metering with monthly reconciliation




Any comment: -

Data Unit / Parameter: Molar fraction of carbon dioxide in incinerated

vent gas (MFCO2)

Data unit: %

Description: Molar fraction of carbon dioxide in incinerated

vent gas




Direct metering of vent gas to the incinerator

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Monthly




Any comment:

Data Unit / Parameter: Mass distance of sulphur transported to the

concrete facility (Mass Distance)

Data unit: Tonne.km

Description: Product of the mass of sulphur used and the

distance shipped from sulphur manufacturing

facility to precast manufacturing facility.




Direct measurement of mass of sulphur received

and distance traveled based on manifests or

supplier invoices.Frequency of monitoring/recording: Each shipment

QA/QC procedures to be applied: Retention of trucking manifests, copies of truck

logs, or invoices from the supplier.

Any comment: -


25/33


v3.0 25

Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factor for truck transportation

(EFTransport)

Data unit: kg CO2E per tonne.km

Description: Emissions factor describing transportation

emissions.Source of data: Measurement



Actual measured or local data is to be used. If

not available, regional data should be used and,

in its absence, IPCC defaults can be used from

the most recent version of IPCC Guidelines for

National Greenhouse Gas Inventories.

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Per shipment if actual fuel consumption is used,

or annual adjustment of a calculated emissions

factor.

QA/QC procedures to be applied: General guidance on QA/QC procedures for thisparameter is provided in Section 9.3 Description


Any comment: -

Data Unit / Parameter: Mass of modifier used in sulphur cement

(MModifier)

Data unit: Tonne

Description: Mass of modifier used in sulphur cement

Source of data: MeasurementDescription of measurement methods and


Direct measurement

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Per shipment of modifier

QA/QC procedures to be applied: Comparison to historical values and analysis of

trends

Any comment: -

Data Unit / Parameter: Emissions factor for modifier production

(EFModifier)

Data unit: kg CO2E/ tonne of modifier

Description: Emission factor describing emissions due to

production of modifier

Source of data: Estimated



Value provided by the modifier manufacturer

based on fuel and electricity consumed.


26/33


v3.0 26

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Per shipment of modifier, to be updated annually

by manufacturer of modifier

QA/QC procedures to be applied: Comparison to historical values and analysis of

trends

Any comment: -

Data Unit / Parameter: Mass distance of modifier transported to the

concrete facility (Mass Distance)

Data unit: Tonne.km

Description: Product of the mass of modifier used and the

distance shipped from modifier manufacturing

facility to sulphur cement manufacturing facility.




Direct measurement of mass of modifier received

and distance traveled based on manifests or

supplier invoices.

Frequency of monitoring/recording: Each shipment

QA/QC procedures to be applied: Retention of trucking manifests, copies of truck

logs, or invoices from the supplier.

Any comment: -

9.3 Descrip tion of the Monitor ing Plan

The project proponent must develop a monitoring plan detailing the procedures for data capture,measurement and reporting of the data parameters listed in Section 9.2. In general, data qualitymanagement must include sufficient data capture such that the mass and energy balances may be easilyperformed with the need for minimal assumptions and use of contingency procedures. The data shouldbe of sufficient quality to fulfill the quantification requirement and be substantiated by company records forthe purpose of verification.

The project proponent shall establish and apply quality management procedures to manage data andinformation. Written procedures should be established for each measurement task outlining responsibility,timing and record location requirements. The greater the rigour of the management system for the data,the more easily an audit will be conducted for the project.

Record keeping practices shall be established that include:

Electronic recording of values of logged primary parameters for each measurement interval;

Printing of monthly back-up hard copies of all logged data;

Written logs of operations and maintenance of the project system including notation of all shut-downs, start-ups and process adjustments;

Retention of copies of logs and all logged data for a period of 7 years; and

Keeping all records available for review by a verification body.


27/33


v3.0 27

The project proponent must also develop a QA/QC plan to add confidence that all measurements andcalculations have been made correctly. QA/QC measures that may be implemented include, but are notlimited to:

Protecting monitoring equipment (sealed meters and data loggers);

Protecting records of monitored data (hard copy and electronic storage);

Checking data integrity on a regular and periodic basis (manual assessment, comparingredundant metered data, and detection of outstanding data/records);

Comparing current estimates with previous estimates as a reality check;

Provide sufficient training to operators to perform maintenance and calibration of monitoringdevices;

Establish minimum experience and requirements for operators in charge of project andmonitoring; and

Performing recalculations to make sure no mathematical errors have been made.

9.4 Uncertainty Assessment

In general, measurement inaccuracies are inherently addressed in this methodology because the inputs

into concrete production are metered to ensure mix specifications are met. Therefore, there is a highdegree of certainty in the measurements of associated with sulphur, aggregate, modifier, and volumes offuel employed. However, project proponents should address uncertainties in measured values byensuring that meters are appropriately calibrated as prescribed by the manufacturer.

Project proponents must assess each assumption, parameter or procedure for uncertainties and describehow the uncertainties will be addressed. Where applicable, project proponents must provide a means toestimate a 90 or 95 percent confidence interval for estimated values.

As a measure for addressing uncertainty while estimating a 90 or 95 percent confidence interval forestimated values, project proponents must apply appropriate confidence deductions if:

90 percent confidence intervals have been applied and the width of the confidence intervalexceeds 20% of the estimated value; or

95 percent confidence intervals have been applied and the width of the confidence intervalexceeds 30% of the estimated value

Methods used by the project proponents for estimating uncertainty should be based on recognizedstatistical approaches such as those described in the IPCC Good Practice Guidance and UncertaintyManagement in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. Where applicable, confidence deductions appliedshould use conservative factors such as those specified in the CDM Meth Panel guidance on addressinguncertainty in its Thirty Second Meeting Report, Annex 14.

10 REFERENCES AND OTHER INFORMATION

The good practice guidance and best science used to develop the quantification methodology arepresented below inTable 5.


28/33


v3.0 28

Table 5: Good Practice Guidance

Document Title Publishing Body / Date Description

General Protocol Guidance

Canadas NationalInventory Report:Greenhouse GasSources and Sinks inCanada, 1990-2010

Government of Canada

(2012)

On behalf of the Government of Canada,Environment Canada releases a nationalinventory of greenhouse gases annually inaccordance with international UNFCCC reportingstandards.

Alberta Offset SystemOffset Credit ProjectGuidance Document

Alberta Environment(February 2008)

A draft guidance document outlining how todevelop offset projects under the Alberta OffsetSystem.

ISO 14064-2International Organizationfor Standardization (2006)

Provides guidance at the project level forquantification, monitoring and reporting ofgreenhouse gas emission reductions or removal

enhancements.

ISO 14064-3International Organizationfor Standardization (2006)

Provides guidance for the validation andverification of greenhouse gas assertions.

Protocols Reviewed

ACM0015 Version 3:Consolidated baselineand monitoringmethodology forproject activities usingalternative raw

materials that do notcontain carbonates forclinker production incement kilns

Clean DevelopmentMechanism ExecutiveBoard (March 2010)

Approved baseline and monitoring methodologyfor alternative raw materials for clinkerproduction in cement kilns.

QuantificationProtocol for theSubstitution ofBitumen Binder in HotMix AsphaltProduction and Usage

Alberta Environment(October 2009)

Reference for global warming potential figures.

Draft quantificationprotocol for the use ofSulphur concrete inprecast applications

Alberta Environment(February 2010)

General guidance on selection of SSR,quantification and monitoring.

ACM0005 Version 5:ConsolidatedBaseline Methodologyfor Increasing theBlend in Cement

Clean DevelopmentMechanism ExecutiveBoard (October 2009)

Approved baseline and monitoring methodologyfor reducing the amount of clinker per tonne ofblended cement.


29/33


v3.0 29


Production

Cement ReportingProtocol

California Climate ActionRegistry

Provides guidance on accounting and reportingGHG emissions for cement companies.

CO2 Accounting andReporting Standardfor the CementIndustry

World Business Councilfor SustainableDevelopment, Version 2.0(June 2005)

Provides a methodology for calculating andreporting CO2 emissions.

DRAFT QuantificationProtocol for the Useof Fly Ash in Concreteand Other CementBased Products

Alberta Environment(October 2008)

Early technical work considering selection ofSSRs and quantification for alternatives tocement used to produce concrete and othercement based products.

Other Resources

Submission to thePrime Ministerial TaskGroup on EmissionsTrading

Cement Australia (March2007)

Comments on the Issues Paper released by thePrime Ministers Task Group on EmissionsTrading

A Sulphur ConcreteRetaining Wall

University of Alberta(2002)

An evaluation of the technical feasibility ofconstructing sizer walls using sulphur concrete.

Corrosion andChemical ResistantMasonry MaterialsHandbook, Walter

Lee Sheppard

Noyes Publications (1986)

National PollutionInventory, HydrogenSulfide:Environmental Effects

Australian GovernmentSeehttp://www.npi.gov.au/substances/hydrogen-sulfide/environmental.htmlfor further information.

A blueprint for aclimate friendlycement industry

WWF International

CO2 emissions fromcement production

ICF Incorporated / USEPA

Good Practice Guidance and UncertaintyManagement in National Greenhouse GasInventories

Sulfurcrete SulfurConcrete Technology

Cominco

Concrete Technology Third Edition, M LGambhir

Tata McGraw-Hill (2004)
http://www.npi.gov.au/substances/hydrogen-sulfide/environmental.htmlhttp://www.npi.gov.au/substances/hydrogen-sulfide/environmental.htmlhttp://www.npi.gov.au/substances/hydrogen-sulfide/environmental.htmlhttp://www.npi.gov.au/substances/hydrogen-sulfide/environmental.htmlhttp://www.npi.gov.au/substances/hydrogen-sulfide/environmental.htmlhttp://www.npi.gov.au/substances/hydrogen-sulfide/environmental.html


30/33


v3.0 30


Sulphur concrete anew constructionmaterial

PCI Journal/January-February 1974

Cement Sectorgreenhouse gasemissions reduction

The Loreti Group (2009)

Shell, Life cycleassessment ofsulphur concrete

2009 (Confidential; somerelevant results of thestudy have beenpresented to the TechnicalWorking Group)

Dutch consulting firm INTRON examined anumber of pathways to market for sulphurconcrete products, and estimated the net GHGand other environmental benefits.

Shell productinformation on Shell

Thiocrete

See www.shell.com forfurther information.

Shell Thiocrete is a modified sulphur binderspecifically designed to replace Portland cementin the production of concrete products, such aspaving stones and curbs.

General Chemistry,9

thEdition, Ebbing &

Gammon

Brooks Cole; 9 edition,January 16, 2008

General chemistry background reference

Cement IndustryEnergy and CO2Performance Gettingthe Numbers Right

World Business Councilfor SustainableDevelopment

This report provides carbon dioxide and energyperformance information based on emissionsdata from individual cement plants, and it wasused as a reference for the information in

Appendix A and description of Emission Factorfor the production of Portland cement.

.


31/33


v3.0 31

APPENDIX A

Emission Factors for the Produc tion of Port land Cement

EFPortland Cement Production - Specific DisplacementThe mass of sulphur cement produced by the project may displace Portland cement from a specificPortland cement production facility. Provided project proponents can demonstrate and justify specificdisplacement, site specific factors for kiln emission intensity and clinker to cement ratio should be usedbased on facility feedstock and fuel records.

Uncertainty related to the source of displaced Portland cement should be low and must be characterizedby reviewing regional cement supply. Proponents should demonstrate that thedistance/economics/logistics/etc. of secondary supplies of Portland cement would have not been viable.

EFPortland Cement Production - Regional DisplacementThe mass of sulphur cement produced by the project may displace Portland cement on a regional basis,

meaning multiple Portland cement production facilities would contribute to the general cement supply in aregion. In the absence of evidence for a specific displacement, project proponents should demonstrateand justify regional estimates for kiln emission intensities and clinker to cement ratios. Project proponentsshould demonstrate that the factors used are conservative.

Regional factors may be determined by project proponents and must be justified by citing records /studies / etc. specific to the region relevant to the project. In the absence of actual regional factors, aninternational report is cited below with reference to international regional kiln emission intensities andclinker to cement ratios.

The World Business Council for Sustainable Development launched The Cement Sustainability Initiativewith a report, Cement Industry Energy and CO2Performance Getting the Numbers Right. The reportprovides carbon dioxide and energy performance information based on emissions data from individualcement plants. The report aims to develop representative statistical information on the CO2 and energyperformance of clinker and cement production worldwide (WBCSD, 2009).

The report offers essential information needed to derive a regional emission factor for cement production;the emission factor for clinker production (Table A1) and the ratio of clinker in Portland cement (Table A2)on a regional basis. The factors in Table A1 include emissions from the chemical process of calcinationand emissions from fuel combustion, and consider those facilities that combust a wide range of carbonintensive and biogenic fuel sources.

Table A1: CO2 Emissions per tonne of cli nker per kiln type (Global Average)

Kiln Type kg CO2/tonne clinker

(EFClinker)

Dry with preheater and precalciner 842Dry with preheater and without precalciner 861

Dry without preheater 955

Semi wet/Semi dry 896

Wet 1043


32/33


v3.0 32

Table A2: Ratio of Clinker to Cement on a Regional Basis

Region Clinker to Cement Ratio (%)

Africa and Middle East 79

Asia excluding China, India, CIS and Japan 84China and India 74

CIS 80

Europe 76

Japan, Australia and New Zealand 83

Latin America 74

North America 84

World 78

Project proponents may justify the above factors are conservative to determine the emission factor forproduction of Portland cement in the absence of justification of site specific or region specific factors. Thisensures uncertainty in the estimates is accounted conservatively.


33/33


APPENDIX B

Specified Gases and Global Warming Potential

Table B 1: Specified Gases and Their Global Warming Potentials

Specified Gas Chemical Formula Global Warming Potential (100 year time

horizon)

Carbon dioxide CO2 1

Methane CH4 21

Nitrous oxide N2O 310

quantification methodology for the use of sulphur concrete in precast applications (first assessment...

Documents