Road-testing of Selected
Offset Protocols and Standards
A Comparison of Offset Protocols:
Landfills, Manure, and Afforestation/Reforestation
June 2009,
SEI Working Paper US10-01 (version 1: US09-04)
Michael Lazarus,
Carrie Lee, Gordon Smith (SEI);
Kimberly Todd, Melissa Weitz
(U.S. EPA)
Protocols are the foundation of an offset program. By defining eligibility requirements and the quantification of the quantity of offsets generated, protocols will drive the development of emission reduction and sequestration projects. By assuring quality standards for offsets, protocols are also central to the credibility of offset markets. This report examines U.S. EPA Climate Leaders’ protocols for landfill methane, manure digesters, and afforestation project types, comparing them with the current versions of protocols developed for four other offset programs: the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), California Climate Action Registry (CCAR), and Chicago Climate Exchange (CCX).
We “road test” these protocols for two sample projects for each of three project types to reveal differences in amounts of offsets counted under the different protocols. These differences in offset counts arise from differences in accounting boundary definitions, baseline setting methods, measurement rules, emission factors, and discounts. Overall, the quantitative road test results underscore the importance of standardizing protocols so that at least across offset programs, and for a given project type, “a ton is a ton”. Currently, as this road test illustrates, this is not quite the case.
This work served as the basis for the EPRI Greenhouse Gas Emissions Offset Policy Dialogue, Workshop 6 – “Road-testing” of GHG Offset Protocols & Methodologies held in Washington, DC on July 30, 2009. Working paper authors presentations at the workshop can be found here.
Changes in Version 2.1
In June 2009, the authors published the first version of their road test analysis. Since that time, several offset programs have updated their protocols and have provided feedback on version 1. Version 2.0 incorporated these revised protocols (CAR’s forest project protocol and all of CCX’s project protocols), modifications to some of the sample projects, and clarifications based on reviewer comments. In April 2010, this version was further refined.