Calculation tools greenhouse gas protocol 5 gases emitted from the exhaust pipe


Emissions from leased facilities and vehicles (leased assets) may be classified as Scope 1, Scope 2, or Scope 3, depending on the source of emissions, which approach a company uses to establish its organizational boundary, and which type of leasing arrangement is in place. Leased assets that fall within a company’s organizational boundary should be classified as Scope 1 or 2 (depending on whether they are direct emissions or indirect emissions from electricity), while those that do not fall within a company’s organizational boundary should be classified as Scope 3.

If a company is using the equity share or financial control approach to establish its organizational boundary, then leased gasbuddy touch assets would fall within a company’s organizational boundary if they are considered gas exchange in the lungs is facilitated by wholly owned assets in financial accounting and are recorded as such on the balance sheet. This would be the case with finance or capital leases, which by definition “transfer substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership to the lessee”. (Guidance document of the new Purchased Electricity Heat and Steam Tool)

Due to the biogenic differences between fossil fuels and biomass, they are categorized differently in national inventories. Emissions of CO2 from the combustion of biomass are reported for informational purposes, but not included in national totals. This is because any net additions of CO2 to the atmosphere resulting from biomass combustion should be captured by analyzing land-use, land-use change activities and their associated effects on terrestrial biomass carbon electricity experiments for high school stocks. In other words, the “emissions” are counted when the trees are cut, not when they are burned.

When reporting corporate-level greenhouse gas inventories, the accounting of terrestrial carbon stock changes associated with harvesting and combustion of biomass may fall within the organizational boundaries of different companies, i.e., the wood being burned is not cut on land owned by the company. Recognizing this situation, and considering the national inventory practices, the Corporate Standard requires that CO2 emissions from biomass combustion be reported separately from the other scopes in a memo item.

When calculating emissions from the burning of biomass by electricity providers, the amount of CO2 emissions would reflect the amount of biomass they use, i.e., if they burn only biomass, their emission factor would be zero. Unlike CO2 emissions, the combustion of biomass gas problem in babies does in all cases result in net additions of CH4 and N2O to the atmosphere, and therefore emissions of these two greenhouse gases as a result of biomass combustion should be accounted for in emission inventories under Scope 1.

It may be impossible to separate out Scope 2 and 3 emissions when the emission factors for purchased electricity come from a life cycle analysis. If a company is not participating in a specific initiative that requires separating these two for reporting purposes, it may be sufficient to clearly report that the emission factors being used include sources that would normally be categorized in Scope 2 and Scope 3. However, the disadvantage of this approach is that it would then be difficult for stakeholders to compare the Scope 2 and/or Scope 3 of different companies if one company uses an emission factor that comes from a life cycle analysis ogasco abu dhabi. Depending on the situation, therefore, it may be more straightforward to find an emission factor that does not consider lifecycle impacts.

For large companies who have a direct supply and transmission contract with a specific electricity supplier, the best place to look would be the electricity supplier itself. They would likely be able to provide an emission factor based on the specific fuel type and transmission technology used. When available, this emission factor is likely to be the most accurate.

If site-specific data are not available, companies should seek a regional or power pool emission factor from a government agency in the host country of the electricity provider. Since electricity grids rarely follow state borders, regional gas national average 2009 or power pool emission factors are likely to be more accurate than those calculated by state organizations. For companies in the United States, the USEPA’s eGRID ( provides aggregate data for regions and sub-regions in the US. In Canada, the Canadian GHG Challenge Registry ( publishes provincial grid emission factors.

A materiality threshold establishes an acceptable percentage (or absolute quantity) difference between the company’s emissions inventory and the verifier’s belief of what the company’s emissions would be if all omitted sources were accounted for. For example, if a company does not include a certain set of sources that the verifier thinks gas utility should be included, and those sources are estimated to emit more than the materiality threshold, this gas in oil car would be material discrepancy and emissions from at least some of those sources would need to be inventoried.

The GHG Protocol was designed to help companies meet multiple reporting objectives. It was therefore inappropriate for the GHG Protocol to set a “one size fits all” materiality threshold. A materiality threshold is best set by a GHG program/initiative. If however a company is reporting outside a GHG program, this does not preclude a company from determining its own threshold in collaboration with a third party verifier, consistent with the nature of its sources and reporting objectives.