|Abstract Title:||CEMS for monitoring GHG emissions in EU Emissions Trading - Current state of application and improvements of monitoring methods|
|Session Choice:||Industrial Case Studies|
|Presenter Name:||Mr Guido Baum|
|Company/Organisation:||TÜV Rheinland Energy GmbH|
Abstract Information :
Due to the extended scope of the European Directive for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions trading in the period 2013-2020, besides CO2, additional GHGs like N2O and PFC and more emission-intensive stationary installations (e.g. for production of nitric acid or for production of basic organic chemicals) are subject to the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS).
As a result, CEMS for monitoring GHG emissions from EU ETS installations have gained considerably in importance, especially for chemical installations and power plants burning secondary fuels. In contrast to previous monitoring rules, the European Monitoring and Reporting Regulation (MRR) has put CEMS on equal footing with calculation based approaches to determine the annual emissions, so it is not necessary any more to prove that CEMS achieve lower uncertainties than the calculation methods.
Although CEMS applications in emissions trading are principally based on the same measuring techniques and on comparable quality assurance methods as CEMS for air pollutants (e.g. SO2), there are some important differences: stricter uncertainty requirements, extended quality assurance procedures and partially differing methods of emission data evaluation. These differences are described and explained in the proposed presentation.
During numerous checks of emission reports for installations using CEMS, several characteristic problems of CEMS applications for GHGs have been identified, e.g. non-compliance with the uncertainty thresholds for CEMS or incorrect emission data evaluation. These problems should be solved within the regular improvement of the monitoring methods according to the improvement principle set out in the MRR.
The presentation is dealing with suitable measurement solutions and quality assurance procedures for large GHG emitters with challenging flue gas conditions and limited space for quality assurance activities. A focus is given to a practice-oriented case study for an industrial installation subject to EU-ETS.