Voluntary Greenhouse Gas Reporting Feasibility Study

4 Greenhouse gas reporting systems in other countries

4.1 Introduction

This section provides a review of GHG reporting systems that are in place in other countries, and identifies aspects of those systems that could be considered for a VGGR system for New Zealand agriculture. This review contributes to the proposed VGGR system options outlined in Section 6.

The first part of this section contains a review of GHG reporting systems in place internationally and identifies those that are most relevant to a New Zealand VGGR system for agriculture. The second part of this section contains a more detailed review of the four systems of most relevance to New Zealand and identifies the key aspects and outcomes of each system. The final part of this section provides recommendations, based on this review, for a VGGR system in New Zealand.

4.2 Overview of GHG reporting systems

Table 4-1 below contains a list of GHG reporting systems that exist in other countries. Systems included were identified via an internet search, consultation with MAF and consultation with a GHG inventory specialist.

Table 4-1 indicates whether each system is voluntary or mandatory, the system purpose, the sponsor (e.g. Government), the target audience, the level at which the system is operated (e.g. national or State) and whether the system allows for agriculture emissions to be included.

The systems that are most relevant to this study are those that allow for voluntary reporting, are operated at a national (or state) level and include (or intend to include) agricultural emissions. These systems are highlighted in the table below and reviewed in more detail in Section 4.3.

Table 4-1 Overview of GHG reporting systems

System Voluntary or mandatory? Purpose Sponsor Target Operational level? Non CO2 emissions from agriculture included? Reference
Greenhouse Challenge Plus (Aus) Voluntary Enable organisations to understand and reduce emissions and advertise their participation. Government All entities National Not yet http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/challenge/
Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (US) Voluntary Enable organisations and individuals who have reduced their emissions to record their accomplishments. Government All entities National Yes http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/frntvrgg.html
California Climate Action Registry (US) Voluntary Enable organisations and individuals who have reduced their emissions to record their accomplishments.


 Government All entities State Yes http://www.climateregistry.org/
GHG Challenge Registry (Canada) Voluntary Provide the information organisations need to limit their net greenhouse gas emissions. Government All entities National Yes http://www.ghgregistries.ca/challenge/index_e.cfm
Climate Leaders (US) Voluntary Help companies to set GHG reduction goals and inventory their emissions to measure progress. Industry/Government partnership Large industry National No http://www.epa.gov/climateleaders/
Eastern Climate Registry (US) Voluntary Provide a platform for state voluntary and mandatory GHG reporting programs and to standardise methodologies. Government All entities Multi State Unknown, registry still in development http://www.easternclimateregistry.org/
World Economic Forum GHG Register Voluntary Create a globally consistent platform for disclosure of GHG emissions inventories and targets. Organisational Industry International Yes http://www.pewclimate.org/we_forum.cfm
Emissions Trading Registry (UK) Voluntary Track GHG emissions allowance holdings and transfers. Government Large industry National No participation to date http://etr.defra.gov.uk
Mandatory greenhouse gas reporting system (Canada) Mandatory Improve accuracy of emissions reporting, provide information for future policy and lay the foundation for a future emissions trading system Government Large industry National No http://www.statcan.ca/english/survey/business/greenhouse/greenhouse.htm
Chicago Climate Exchange Voluntary Provide emission registry, reduction and trading system, volunteers agree to meet reduction targets. NGO Large industry State No http://www.chicagoclimatex.com/

4.3 Review of four relevant GHG systems

Table 4-1 indicates that those systems currently in place that are most relevant to a VGGR for agriculture in New Zealand are the Greenhouse Challenge Plus Programme in Australia, The Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (1605b) Programme in the US, the California Climate Action Registry, and the Canadian GHG Challenge Registry. Each of these systems allow for voluntary reporting, are operated at a national (or state) level and include (or intend to include) agricultural emissions. Each of these systems is described in more detail below.

4.3.1 Greenhouse Challenge Plus (Australia)

Greenhouse Challenge Plus is a voluntary GHG reporting initiative applicable to all states in Australia8. The programme commenced in 1995 as the Greenhouse Challenge Programme and was re-launched as Greenhouse Challenge Plus in 2005 to incorporate several new features such as Greenhouse Friendly product certification and the Generator Efficiency Standards. The purpose of the programme is to reduce emissions, integrate greenhouse issues into decision making and provide more consistent reporting of emissions (AGO, 2005). The programme is also designed to accelerate the uptake of energy efficiency.

The programme is operated by the Australian Greenhouse Office9 (AGO) and is open to all industry sectors. Industry participants commit to measure and monitor emissions, carry out actions to abate emissions and improve energy efficiency, submit annual progress reports, allow access to data for national and state reporting purposes and agree to participate in independent verification.

The process commences with a statement of intent to participate in the programme. Organisations then work with an industry advisor to lodge (using a standardised form) a cooperative agreement containing a net emissions inventory and a tailored action plan to mitigate emissions. Non-agricultural emissions are calculated using online tools and reported in tonnes CO2 equivalent (agricultural emissions are treated differently, as explained below). Participants must then complete annual progress reports either via an online tool (OSCAR) or via submission of a manual document. Participants are required to report on gross emissions generated from the following sources: purchased electricity, stationary energy, transport energy, waste and other (e.g. industrial emissions). Participants may either calculate emissions generated using a factors and methods workbook or can go directly to OSCAR, which calculates emissions automatically as raw data is entered. Participants are also required to make annual public statements about their participation in the programme. Participants are required to include basic greenhouse gas emissions information in their annual public statement for example the type of GHG emissions created and source of those emissions. Participants can include emissions inventory information in their public statements if desired.

Currently around 10% of programme members are from the agricultural sector. Owing to the difficulty of measuring land based (non-CO2) emissions; these members are not currently required to report quantitatively on these aspects of their operations. The Australian Greenhouse Office approach focuses on reducing emissions through assisting members to benchmark their performance against best practice for managing agricultural emissions. The Australian Greenhouse Office has developed an agriculture specific reporting framework for Greenhouse Challenge Plus, which enables farmers to assess themselves against best practice, develop action plans for improving their ratings, and track progress over time. The system has been designed to be complementary to existing environmental management systems used on farms10.

Participants are expected to benefit primarily through an increased understanding of their emissions leading to opportunities for cost savings. Participants are also able to network and learn from other participating businesses, and gain recognition for their reductions through the use of Challenge plus logos and marketing material. The government provides assistance via industry advisors and online tools and guides.

Participants can choose between different participation levels. Organisations participating at the standard level are ‘members’ and are required to complete the key steps listed above (i.e. measure GHG emissions and make annual progress reports and public statements). Participants that require more time to become members can join as associate members, until they can meet the member requirements. Participants may also join as ‘leaders’. Leaders are required to publicly disclose their emissions and their achievement of abatement actions annually in a public statement. Currently only one organisation is participating in the scheme as a leader. Facilitative agreements are also available to industry organisations who wish to use their structures, memberships and networks to increase industry awareness of climate change issues, and promote emissions reduction opportunities.

While the system is voluntary, government legislation requires that companies receiving more than $3 million/annum in fuel excise credits must join the programme. The principal industry types covered by this requirement are the mining and transport industry sectors. This requirement has been successful in increasing participants by approximately 70 companies.

The government operates an independent verification process to verify cooperative agreements and progress reports. Members are selected for verification on the basis of a random sample, and once a member has been verified they will not be selected again in a 4 year cycle. Verification is carried out by independent verifiers, therefore building additional capacity amongst service providers. Greenhouse Challenge Plus has been gradually increasing the number of participants verified and aim for 5% of participants per year. In 2006 the office commissioned 40 independent verifications. Verification is paid for by the Australian Government, therefore a number of companies request independent verification.

At December 2006, the Greenhouse Challenge Plus programme included over 750 members. The Greenhouse Challenge Plus website11 contains a number of endorsements of the programme from participating industry organisations and multi-national corporations. Endorsement statements comment on the value of the tools and assistance that are available through the programme, the value of the programme in enabling organisations to build on and develop existing programmes and the opportunity the programme provides for organisations to demonstrate their credentials. Sector groups can agree for the information they provide to the programme to be used to feed into Australia’s national GHG inventory, as a method of cross checking government level estimates.

Participation levels have steadily increased since commencement in 1995. The Prime Minister set recruitment targets for the programme for 2000 and 2005, leading to a recruitment drive which was successful in increasing participation.

The Greenhouse Challenge office has also targeted iconic companies in Australia for recruitment, which has in turn encouraged additional participation by other companies. Participation continues to increase as companies identify the benefits of capacity building.

The Greenhouse Challenge Plus Director, Jean-Bernard Carrasco, notes that a key benefit of the programme is the development of a partnership between industry and government to build capacity with regard to measuring and mitigating greenhouse gases. The programme is projected to contribute approximately 15 million tonnes of emissions reduction each year in 2008-2012. The cost to government to date is AUS $ 24 million over four years12.

4.3.2 Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (US)

The Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (1605b) Programme13 is a voluntary GHG reporting initiative open to all states in the US. The programme commenced in 1992 and has recently been revised. The purpose of the programme is to set up a system to enable organisations and individuals who have reduced their emissions to record their accomplishments.

The programme is operated by the United States Government (Department of Energy (DOE)) and is open to individuals, households, industry or industry organisations, including agriculture.

Reporting entities are able to report on annual emissions of greenhouse gases and/or specific projects to reduce emissions. The programme allows entities to select the level of detail and scope for their reports. An entity wishing to demonstrate a higher level of accountability to the public is expected to provide a higher level of detail in their reporting. Participants are able to report on all six main GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6).

For emissions reporting, entities are encouraged to report baseline emissions for a baseline period of 1987-1990 and to report for subsequent calendar years on an annual basis. The programme provides general guidelines and specific guidance for agricultural emission sources. The agricultural sector guidelines note that entities may report on emissions by either estimating emissions only (from fuel use, fertilizer use, manure lagoons, etc.) or by accounting for carbon flows to and from the atmosphere (capture of carbon, perhaps offsetting some portion of emissions to arrive at net amounts of emissions). Entities may develop a comprehensive emissions report or report on one or more of; carbon emissions from fuel use, CO2 from electricity use, methane emissions from manure, N2O emissions from fertilizer and nitrogen use or adjustments to CO2 emissions from carbon flows.

Entities may report for an entire organisation or for a specific part of the organisation. Both direct and indirect emissions may be reported.

For project reporting, the government provides broad guidelines on calculations but entities select their own method. Every project must establish a baseline estimate (reference case) against which the project reductions are measured. Reporting can occur in long form (detailed account of emissions, emission reductions, sequestration) or in short form (brief synopsis of emissions reduction achieved). Entities may report by paper, electronically via email or via the internet.

The government provides written forms, instructions and technical guidance for entities to report. The information is made available via a public use database (including individual responses). The programme requires an entity to certify that the information contained in the report is correct but no independent or government verification occurs (DOE/EIA 2005).

The United States Department of Agriculture supports and operates the Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases-Carbon Management Evaluation Tool (COMET-VR). COMET-VR is a decision support tool for agricultural producers, land managers, soil scientists and other agricultural interests. COMET-VR provides an interface to a database containing land use data from the Carbon Sequestration Rural Appraisal (CSRA) and calculates in real time the annual carbon flux using a dynamic Century model simulation. Century is a generalized biogeochemical ecosystem model which simulates carbon (i.e., biomass), nitrogen and other nutrient dynamics. The model simulates cropland, grassland, forest and savanna ecosystems and land use changes between these different systems. Users of COMET-VR specify a history of agricultural management practices on one or more parcels of land. The results are presented as ten year averages of soil carbon sequestration or emissions with associated statistical uncertainty values. Estimates can be used to construct a soil carbon inventory for the Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (1605b) Programme. The tool does not produce N2O emission estimates. The tool provides comprehensive emission factors for a wide variety of emission sources from dairy, sheep, and animal farms and other pastoral and crop based agricultural production activities.

The DOE releases an Annual Report (and associated Summary Report) on the programme in December of each year. For the 2005 year, the Summary Report notes that 221 entities reported in accordance with the programme, of which 97 were from the electric power sector. The 221 reporting entities in 2005 represent companies that account for approximately 13 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions (DOE/EIA 2005).

The summary report also provides an overview of numbers of entities reporting since 1994. Since 1994 only 1 report is recorded for the category ‘agricultural production: crops’. There are no other agricultural categories listed, but a catch-all category exists which has received up to 3 reports per year (but none since 2003). Agricultural reporting into the programme is therefore minimal. The specific reasons for low agricultural participation have not been reviewed, however there would seem to be little incentive for DOE to encourage agricultural organisations to participate as their emissions would be minor compared to other industrial sources. The benefits to farmers may also therefore be less, as the benefits of public recognition and capacity building would be of less value when farmers are not a major contributor to the overall GHG profile.

A testimony by the Administrator of the programme in 2000 noted that benefits of the programme included allowing organisations to estimate their emissions, providing opportunities for organisations to learn about and implement mitigation opportunities (including through their peers), creating a database of emission reductions that can be used to evaluate future policy instruments and identification of accounting issues to be addressed in future policy (Hakes 2000).

The programme has recently been revised to enhance measurement accuracy, reliability and verifiability. The revised programme creates a two tier system. Large emitters are now required to submit “entity-wide” emissions inventories. The threshold for being a “large emitter” is relatively low: annual average emissions exceeding 10,000 tons CO2 equivalent. DOE envisions that the only reporters excluded from “large emitter” status would be households, and some farms, forest operations, and small businesses.

As part of the revision, the EIA has also developed a Simplified Emissions Inventory Tool (SEIT) to enable participants to determine if they are small or large emitters and to identify de minimis emissions sources which can be excluded from inventories. The SEIT comprises a spreadsheet. Participants enter activity data and total emissions are calculated and automatically summed at the bottom of the spreadsheet.

4.3.3 California Climate Action Registry (US)

The California Climate Action Registry14 (the Registry) was established by California statute as a non-profit voluntary registry for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in October 2002.

The purpose of the Registry is to help entities establish GHG emissions baselines against which any future GHG emission reduction requirements may be applied. The registry also aims to enable companies to demonstrate environmental leadership and increase operational efficiency. Registry participants include businesses, non-profit organizations, municipalities, state agencies, and other entities.

Using any year from 1990 forward as a base year, participants can record their GHG emissions inventory. When organisations become participants, they agree to register their GHG emissions for all operations in California, and are encouraged to report nationwide. Both gross emissions and efficiency metrics are recorded. The Registry requires the inclusion of all direct GHG emissions, along with indirect GHG emissions from electricity use. The Registry requires reporting of CO2 emissions for the first three years of participation, and reporting of all six GHGs (CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) after three years of participation. The registry allows for reporting of agricultural emissions (including N2O and CH4) and uses the IPCC methodologies to estimate these.

The Registry has developed a General Protocol and additional industry-specific protocols (for cement, forestry and power/utility) which give guidance on how to inventory GHG emissions for participation in the Registry. Protocols include what to measure, how to measure, the back-up data required, and certification requirements.

The process commences with lodgement of a statement of intent. Entities then calculate their emissions using relevant protocols and the registry’s web based reporting tool CARROT (Climate Action Registry Reporting Online Tool). Entities must then hire a registry approved third party contractor to certify their emissions data, and must report certified emissions data on the registry website by December 31 annually.

Participants receive online assistance including guidelines, protocols and access to CARROT. The registry office runs seminars and workshops for participants to attend. Participants may also use specific marketing material and logos. The State of California agrees to offer participants its best efforts to ensure that participants receive appropriate consideration for early actions in the event of any future state, federal or international GHG regulatory scheme.

The public can view annual emissions reports for any participating entity.

The State of California provided an initial $1 million grant to develop the GHG protocols and CARROT and provides ongoing funding, although the programme has become progressively self-funded through grants and earned income. In 2005 the programme received 30% state funding with the 70% balance being made up of 46% private foundation grants and 24% earned income (CCAR 2005).

In the first reporting period (2003) the Registry had 34 members and no certified data. At 2005, the California Climate Action Registry reported 64 members of which 44 were expected to register certified data for 2000 to 2004. In 2005, the Registry expected its member reports to cover 12% of the adjusted15 total for the State of California (CCAR 2005).

Registry members at 2005 predominantly included power generation companies and government agencies and did not include any agricultural companies (CCAR 2005).

The registry completed a member survey in July 2005 and found that the principal reasons for organisations participating included learning more about their GHG emissions profile, demonstrating environmental leadership and learning the information and skills needed to be competitively positioned in the future.

The Second Biennial Report (CCAR 2005) contains a number of comments from participating organisations. Participants comment that the registry allows companies to demonstrate environmental leadership, that the registry is the de facto standard for collecting GHG information and has international credibility and that the registry provides useful assistance to companies wanting to get a handle on their emissions.

4.3.4 Canadian GHG Challenge Registry (Canada)

The Canadian GHG Challenge Registry©16 is Canada's voluntary publicly accessible national registry of greenhouse gas baselines, targets, and reductions. The Canadian GHG Challenge Registry began in 2005 as an offshoot of the Voluntary Challenge Registry (VCR), which was established in 1995 as a key element of Canada's National Action Program on Climate Change. The GHG Challenge Registry's purpose is to encourage private and public sector organizations to voluntarily limit their net greenhouse gas emissions, as a step towards meeting Canada's climate change goals.

The primary objective of this Registry is to challenge both current and potential registrants from all economic sectors and geographic regions to demonstrate meaningful actions which contribute towards the reduction of Canada's GHG emissions.

The programme operates around preparation of annual action plans, which are lodged with the registry and made publicly available. Preparation of an action plan requires development of an inventory of emissions, establishment of business as usual projections, setting targets to reduce emissions, identifying measures to reduce emissions and recording the results achieved. Participants can use any year from 1990 forward as a base year to record their GHG emissions inventory. Organisations have flexibility to delineate their organisation (e.g. whole organisation or specific site) and can report direct and indirect emissions. The programme provides an online guide which provides emissions factors for estimating emissions, alternatively participants may refer to industry association guidelines for specific processes. The guidance on emissions factors includes agricultural emissions from livestock and agricultural emissions from soils.

Once received, the Registry office verifies each action plan and awards each a bronze, silver or gold status, depending on the level of detail of reporting and actions included.

Participants can access guidelines, templates and tools online. Currently there are 286 registrants. None of these are listed as belonging to the agricultural sector. As for the US system, the specific reasons for low agricultural participation have not been reviewed, however it is likely incentives to both Government and farmers are minimal as agricultural enterprises do not contribute a significant proportion of GHG emissions to the overall national profile.

Table 4-2 Review of relevant reporting systems

System Primary Purpose Emissions Quantification Scope Start date Non CO2 emissions from agriculture included? Verification Participation
Greenhouse Challenge Plus (Aus) Public recognition Factors and methods workbook or online calculation tool 6 GHGs17
Entity level		 1995 No; agricultural specific approach in development Up to 40 projects randomly selected for third party verification annually. 700 members at December 2006, 10% agricultural sector
Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (US) Baseline protection Guidance available but participants may select methodology 6 GHGs
Entity and/or Project level		 1992 Yes No 221 members at December 2005 (representing 13% of total US GHG emissions), minimal agricultural reporting
California Climate Action Registry (US) Baseline protection

Public recognition

 General Protocol and industry-specific protocols or online calculation tool 6 GHGs
Entity level		 2002 Yes Third party certification required 64 members at December 2005 (representing 12% of total (adjusted) Californian GHG emissions), no agricultural members
GHG Challenge Registry Public recognition Guidance on emissions factors 6 GHGs
Entity or Facility level		 2005 Yes Registry office reviews reports prior to grading 286 registrants , no agricultural participants

4.4 Summary

A number of voluntary greenhouse gas reporting systems exist internationally. The purpose of each system varies, but is typically to provide emitters with protection of current reductions against future policy initiatives and/or to allow emitters to receive public recognition for their achievements.

For each system, participation levels are low but are increasing. For the systems reviewed participation rates appear to represent approximately 10-15% of total emissions for that State/Country.

While most systems allow for reporting of non CO2 emissions from agriculture, participation by agricultural emitters has been minimal. The specific reasons for low agricultural participation in each system have not been reviewed. There would seem to be little incentive for scheme sponsors to encourage agricultural organisations to participate in voluntary systems in the relevant countries (Australia, US, Canada) as their emissions would be minor compared to other industrial sources and the benefits of public recognition and capacity building would be less valuable. The design of those systems reviewed has not been focussed on maximising participation by agricultural enterprises.

A key benefit to participants results from the opportunity to use system resources to calculate emissions and understand mitigation opportunities. This allows participants to prepare for future policy provisions via capacity building and to report their achievements to the public. The international systems reviewed provided this information through a variety of methods including provision of manuals/protocols or online tools to estimate emissions, provision of information online or in publications on mitigation opportunities, creating opportunities for participants to learn from others (e.g. through seminars or publications of case studies on best practice) and/or by allowing participants access to technical advisors.

The four voluntary systems reviewed provide a range of opportunities for participants to receive recognition from the public for their achievements. This may occur through the use of logos and branding (e.g. Greenhouse Challenge Plus), by enabling participants to report on participation or achievements (e.g. in annual reports) and/or by requiring participants to report on their emissions, mitigation actions and resulting reductions. The opportunity to advertise participation and achievements appears to be a key driver for participants.

Two programmes (Greenhouse Challenge Plus and California Climate Action Registry) include online calculation and reporting tools. Online tools simplify the reporting process for participants, provide opportunities for participants to quickly and accurately view their results (i.e. total emissions), and provide opportunities to improve integrity and security of inputs and results.

4.5 Recommendations

This review highlights GHG reporting system aspects that could be considered for inclusion in a voluntary GHG reporting system in New Zealand. These are summarised below:

• Capacity building is a key benefit of international systems reviewed. If capacity building is a desired outcome of a NZ VGGR, the system should enable participants to understand the source of their emissions, mitigation methods and effects and be accompanied by adequate training and tools.

• Public recognition is also a key benefit to participants. If public recognition is a desired outcome of a NZ VGGR, the system should enable participants to report their participation to the public. Public reporting can include marketing and branding, participant statements, award schemes, and/or public access to reports.

• Inclusion of an online calculation and reporting tool may provide benefits to participants; however this would need to be assessed against the specific requirements of the New Zealand farming community.

• Review of the published GHG emission factors (in the US, Australia, Canada and the Netherlands) for agricultural emissions sources and types may be useful in identifying a methodology for a VGGR in New Zealand.

• None of the systems investigated have a high participation rate from small to medium enterprises and in particular from agricultural businesses. A NZ VGGR system would need to consider carefully how to attract or incentivise farmers or their agents to participate.

8 http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/challenge/

9 Australian Government, Department of Environment and Heritage

10 Telephone conversation, Anthony Macgregor, AGO, March 2007

11 http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/challenge/members/endorsements.html

12 Telephone conversation, Jean Bernard Carrasco, AGO, March 2007

13 http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/1605/frntvrgg.html

14 http://www.climateregistry.org

15 Adjusted to exclude those portions for which the Registry is not gathering data.

16 http://www.ghgregistries.ca

17 6 GHGs refers to CO2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6

Contact for Enquiries

Sustainable Land Management and Climate Change
MAF
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526, Wellington
Tel: 0800 CLIMATE (254 628)
Contact this person