Verification Report - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power · PDF fileTel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301...

Tetra Tech Canada Inc.Riverbend Atrium One, 115, 200 Rivercrest Drive SE

Calgary, AB T2C 2X5 CANADA

Tel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301

PRESENTED TO

Verdant Energy Ltd.

Verification ReportDapp Power Electric Generation Facility(October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016)

FEBRUARY 3, 2017

ISSUED FOR USE

FILE: ENV.CENV03197-01.002

Verification Report - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power.docx

This page intentionally left blank.

VERIFICATION REPORT FOR 2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY

FILE: ENV.CENV03197-01.002 | FEBRUARY 3, 2017 | ISSUED FOR USE

i


PROJECT SUMMARY

Project Title Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility

Project Description Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility (the Project) involvesthe creation of offset credits due to the avoidance of methane emissions (CHR4R) thatwould have otherwise taken place from the anaerobic decomposition of wood wastein a landfill, and the generation of electricity from non-fossil fuel sources.

Project Location The Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility is located northwest of the Town ofWestlock, Alberta. The coordinates of the facility are latitude 54°24'54.28"N andlongitude 114°10'38.75"W.

The Bio-Fuel wood recycling depot is located at the Northland Sand and GravelLandfill in Edmonton, Alberta. The Bio-Fuel depot processes and supplies thewood waste to the Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility. The coordinates of thelandfill are latitude 53°32'46.98"N and longitude 113°43'6.46"W.

Project Start Date September 2005

Credit Start Date January 1, 2006

Credit Duration Period Initial Project credit duration period: January 1, 2006 – December 31, 2013

Credit extension period: January 1, 2014 – December 31, 2018

Expected Lifetime of

the ProjectThe Project is expected to last 20 years

Actual Emissions

Reductions /Removals

Achieved

25,257 tonnes COR2Re (October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016).

Other Environmental

AttributesNone

Project Registration This Project is only registered once and in one offset system – the Alberta OffsetRegistry.

Ownership The Project is registered as Verdant Energy Ltd- Dapp Power Electric Generationfacility. Dapp Power LP is the owner and transacting party for the offset creditsgenerated by the Project.

Quantification Protocol Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of BiomassWaste (Version 2.0, April 2014).

Verification Period This verification covers the period from October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016.



ii



Project Activity The Project involves the creation of offset credits due to the avoidance of CHR4R thatwould have otherwise taken place from the anaerobic decomposition of wood wastein a landfill, and the generation of electricity from non-fossil fuel sources.

The Project meets the requirements for offset eligibility as outlined in Section 3.1 ofthe Technical Guidance for Offset Project Developers (Version 4.0, February 2013).In particular:

1. The Project occurs in Alberta as outlined above.

2. The Project results from actions not otherwise required by law and beyondbusiness as usual and sector common practices.

3. The Project results from actions taken on or after January 1, 2002, as outlinedabove.

4. Emissions reductions occur after January 1, 2002.

5. The Project reductions/removals are real, demonstrable, quantifiable andverifiable. The emission reductions are demonstrable, quantifiable and verifiableas outlined in the Project Developer’s Project plan.

6. The Project has clearly established ownership. Dapp Power LP is the owner andtransacting party for the offset credits generated by the Project.

7. The Project will be counted once for compliance purposes: The Project creditswill be registered with the Alberta Emissions Offset Registry (AEOR) whichtracks the creation, sale and retirement of credits. Credits created from thespecified reduction activity have not been, and will not be, created, recorded orregistered in more than one trading registry for the same time period.

8. The Project is verified by a qualified third party, Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

Project Proponent Grant Noll

Vice-President, Operations and Business Development

Verdant Energy Ltd.

Suite 100 525-11th Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2R 0C9

Tel: 403.261.9754

Email: [email protected]



iii


PROJECT VERIFICATION SUMMARY


Objective Reasonable assurance on Emission Reductions contained in the greenhouse gas(GHG) Assertion.

Summary Based on our review, it is our opinion to a reasonable level of assurance that theGHG emission reductions contained in the GHG assertion are materially correctand presented fairly in accordance with the related criteria.

Verifier Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

115, 200 Rivercrest Drive SE, Calgary, AB T2C 2X5

Tel: (403) 723-1565

Email: [email protected]

Verification Team Kathleen Dunnett, P. Eng.

Nelson Lee, M.A.Sc., P.Eng.

Min Si, M.N.R.M, GHG-V

Nancy Wellhausen

Subject Matter Expert N/A

Independent Peer

ReviewerNancy Wellhausen

Designated Signing

AuthorityNelson Lee, M.A.S., P.Eng., GHG-V

Site Visits Date August 17, 2016

Report Date February 3, 2017



iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROJECT SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... I

PROJECT VERIFICATION SUMMARY ............................................................................................... III

1.0 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Objective ................................................................................................................................................1

1.2 Scope.....................................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Level of Assurance ................................................................................................................................2

1.4 Verification Criteria ................................................................................................................................3

1.5 Materiality...............................................................................................................................................3

2.0 METHODOLOGY......................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Verification Strategy...............................................................................................................................4

2.2 Procedure ..............................................................................................................................................4

2.2.1 Verification Procedures.............................................................................................................4

2.2.2 Verification Steps and Site Visit................................................................................................6

2.2.3 Risk Assessment ......................................................................................................................6

2.2.4 Verification / Sampling Plan......................................................................................................8

2.3 Team......................................................................................................................................................8

2.4 Schedule ................................................................................................................................................8

3.0 RESULTS..................................................................................................................................... 9

3.1 Assessment of Internal Data Management and Controls......................................................................9

3.2 Assessment of GHG Data and Information .........................................................................................10

3.3 Assessment Against Criteria................................................................................................................14

3.4 Evaluation of GHG Assertion...............................................................................................................14

3.5 Summary of Findings...........................................................................................................................14

4.0 VERIFICATION STATEMENT.................................................................................................... 15

5.0 CONFIRMATIONS ..................................................................................................................... 15

6.0 LIMITATIONS OF LIABILITY..................................................................................................... 16

LIST OF TABLES IN TEXT

Table 1: Verification Scope .................................................................................................................... 2

Table 2: GHG Assertion......................................................................................................................... 2

Table 3: Verification Procedures ............................................................................................................ 5

Table 4: Rating Matrix for Inherent Risk and Control Risk...................................................................... 7

Table 5: Risk Assessment for Applicable Emission Sources.................................................................. 8

Table 6: Verification Team ..................................................................................................................... 8



v


Table 7: Schedule of Verification Activities............................................................................................. 8

Table 8: Emission Sources Not Applicable to the Project....................................................................... 9

Table 9: Summary of Internal Controls................................................................................................. 10

Table 10: GHG Data and Supporting Information................................................................................. 11

Table 11: Eligibility Criteria Assessment .............................................................................................. 14

LIST OF FIGURES IN TEXT

Figure 1: Verification Steps.................................................................................................................... 6

APPENDIX SECTIONS

APPENDICES

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix E

Appendix F

Verification Plan

Statement of Qualification

Finding Log

Statement of Verification

Conflict of Interest Checklist

Tetra Tech’s General Conditions



vi


LIMITATIONS OF REPORT

This report and its contents are intended for the sole use of Verdant Energy Ltd. and their agents. Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra

Tech) does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, the analysis, or the recommendations contained or

referenced in the report when the report is used or relied upon by any Party other than Verdant Energy Ltd. or for any Project

other than the proposed development at the subject site. Any such unauthorized use of this report is at the sole risk of the user.

Use of this report is subject to the terms and conditions stated in Tetra Tech’s Services Agreement. Tetra Tech’s General

Conditions are provided in Appendix F of this report.



1


1.0 INTRODUCTION

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) was contracted by Verdant Energy Ltd. (Verdant), on behalf of Dapp Power LP

(Dapp), to conduct a verification for Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility offset project

(the Project) for the period of October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016. The verification was conducted in accordance

with the Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of Biomass Waste (Version 2.0,

April 2014).

The Project involves the creation of offset credits arising from the avoidance of methane emissions (CHR4R) that would

have otherwise taken place from the anaerobic decomposition of wood waste in a landfill and the generation of

electricity from non-fossil fuel sources.

Summary of Offset Project Baseline

The baseline condition for this Project is:

The equivalent amount of electricity is produced by a conventional fossil fuel power plant; and

The CHR4R from decomposition of wood waste in the landfills is released to atmosphere.

Summary of Changes to Baseline or at the Project Condition

There are no changes or modifications to the project operations.

1.1 Objective

The objective of this audit is to provide an independent assessment of the offset project to identify any material and

immaterial errors, omission or misrepresentations, and to provide our opinion on the greenhouse gas (GHG)

Assertion in the Offset Project Report.

1.2 Scope

The scope of this Project level emission reduction verification includes the project boundaries, physical

infrastructure, activities, technologies, and processes of the project, GHG sources, sinks, and/or reservoirs (SSRs),

types of GHGs, and time periods covered. The scope of the verification is listed in Table 1.



2


Table 1: Verification Scope

Item Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility

Geography The Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility is located northwest of the Town of

Westlock, Alberta. The coordinates of the facility are latitude 54°24'54.28"N and

longitude 114°10'38.75"W.

The Bio-Fuel wood recycling depot is located at the Northland Sand and Gravel Landfill

in Edmonton, Alberta. The Bio-Fuel depot processes and supplies the wood waste to

the Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility. The coordinates of the landfill are latitude

53°32'46.98"N and longitude 113°43'6.46"W.

Organization The Project is registered and operated under the name of Dapp Power LP. The Project

is 100% own by Verdant Energy Ltd.

Activities and Processes Electricity generation from biomass combustion

SSRs Baseline: Emissions from collection, transfer and transport of biomass (B1), biomass

disposal (B15) and processing (B3), facility operations (B12), displaced off-site

electricity generation (B6), displace off-site heat generation (B16), displace on-site

electricity generation (B13), displaced on site heat generation (B18), and fuel extraction

and processing (B4).

Project: Emissions from collection, transfer and transport of biomass (P1), Biomass

processing (P3), facility operations (P12), and combustion of biomass (P15), and fuel

extraction and processing (P4)

GHG Carbon dioxide (COR2R), Methane (CHR4R), Nitrous oxide (NR2RO)

Time Period October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

*included sources as specified in the Protocol.

The GHG Assertion is provided in Table 2.

Table 2: GHG Assertion

Item GHG Assertion

Baseline Emissions (t COR2Re) 27,581

Project Emissions (t COR2Re) 2,324

Reductions (t COR2Re) 25,257

Period October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

1.3 Level of Assurance

The scope and level of effort of this verification is planned to achieve a reasonable level of assurance as required

by the Specified Gas Emitter Regulation (SGER).

The level of assurance is used to determine the depth of detail that a verifier designs into their verification plan to

determine if there are any material errors, omissions, or misrepresentations.



3


Reasonable level of assurance is to evaluate whether the GHG assertion is deemed to be presented fairly and

substantiated by sufficient and appropriate evidence. As such, the verification is to provide positive, but not absolute

assurance regarding the GHG assertions

1.4 Verification Criteria

The verification assesses the Project against Alberta Offset program eligibility criteria, including:

Occur in Alberta;

Result from actions not otherwise required by laws and be beyond business as usual and sector common

practices;

Result from actions taken on or after January 1, 2002;

Occur on or after January, 2002;

Be real, demonstrable, quantifiable, and verifiable;

Have clearly established ownership; and

Be counted once for compliance purpose.

The verification assesses the Project against the following program criteria and relevant supporting documentation:

Alberta’s Climate Change and Emissions Management Act, S.A. 2003, c. C-16.7;

Alberta Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER), 2007;

Alberta SGER, Technical Guidance Document for Offset Project Developers (Version 4.0, February 2013);

Alberta SGER, Technical Guidance for Greenhouse Gas Verification at Reasonable Level Assurance (Version

1.0, January 2013);

Quantification Protocol for Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of Biomass

Waste (Version 2.0, April 2014);

Offset Project Plan for Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility; and

Offset Project Report for Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility.

1.5 Materiality

A 5% materiality threshold is set to assess errors, omissions, and misrepresentations in the GHG Assertion as

required by the SGER. Quantitative discrepancies are aggregated and assessed on the basis of net and absolute

values. Qualitative discrepancies are evaluated by professional judgement of the verification body, and determined

if the discrepancies could be deemed to be material.



4


2.0 METHODOLOGY

The verification is performed in accordance with ISO 14064-3: Specification with Guidance for the Validation and

Verification of GHG assertions.

2.1 Verification Strategy

The approach used in this verification includes a combination of substantive procedures and test of controls.

Tetra Tech uses predominantly substantive procedures during the verification process, with a focus on source data

and evidence gathered during site visits and sampling procedures. Tetra Tech has developed the following steps

to substantiate the GHG assertion:

Conducted a site visit to confirm the boundary, physical sources and sinks within the Project boundary;

Observed, interviewed personnel, and verified various processes, instrumentation and data managementprocedures during the site visit;

Conducted sampling on primary documentation to confirm the processes resulting in the GHG assertions; and

Reviewed original data sources and calculations.

Controls reliance was used in supporting the substantive approach as described above.

Procedures used in this verification include inspection, observation, inquiry, confirmation, recalculation, and

analytics tests. The detailed verification procedures are provided in the following sections.

2.2 Procedure

2.2.1 Verification Procedures

Verification procedures for the key components are provided in Table 3.



5


Table 3: Verification Procedures

Verification Component Procedures

Description of the nature, scale and

complexity of the verification activity

The verification is conducted for Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric

Generation Facility offset project for the period of October 1, 2016 – December 31,

2016.

The Project involves the creation of offset credits because of the avoidance of

methane emissions (CHR4R) that would have otherwise taken place from the anaerobic

decomposition of wood waste in landfills and the generation of electricity from non-

fossil fuel sources.

The quantification for the offset project is conducted in accordance with the

Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of Biomass

Waste (Version 2.0, April 2014).

As specified in the Protocol, the GHG sources include:

Baseline: Emissions from collection, transfer and transport of biomass (B1),

biomass disposal (B15) and processing (B3), facility operations (B12), displaced

offsite and on site electricity generation (B6 and B13), displaced offsite and

onsite heat generation (B16 and B18), and fuel extraction and processing (B4).

Project: Emissions from collection, transfer and transport of biomass (P1),

biomass processing (P3), facility operations (P12), combustion of biomass and

fossil fuel (P15) and fuel extraction and processing (P4).

Comparability with the baseline

Review the baseline calculations and supporting documents.

Review Project Plan and Report.

Interview facility operators.

Confidence and completeness of

the responsible party’s GHG

information and assertion

Conduct a site tour to determine GHG sources and compare with the Protocol

and calculation tool for completeness.

Check the quantification against the Protocol.

Interview personnel for completing GHG quantification.

Assessment of GHG information

system and its controls

Review data collection and transfer processes.

Interview personnel for internal control procedures.

Inquiry of data verification procedures for double entries.

Examine biomass records reconciliation.

Assessment of GHG data and

information

Compare sources and sinks inspected through site visit to the GHG identified in

the Project Report and calculator.

Review raw data, including metering data and third party records.

Review emission factors used.

Assessment against criteria Review and check against related criteria.

Conduct site visit for physical boundary.

Evaluation of the GHG assertion Recalculate GHG assertions.

Evaluate supporting documents.



6


2.2.2 Verification Steps and Site Visit

The verification follows the steps outlined in the following diagram (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Verification Steps

2.2.2.1 Site Visit

Mr. Min Si visited the Bio-Fuel facility and Dapp Power Plant on August 17, 2016. The purpose of the site visit was

to gain understanding of the offset project’s operation, equipment, and control processes for assessment of the

Project’s conformance with the Criteria. During the site visit, the emission sources, various processes, data

acquisition and onsite records handling processes were observed. The control devices that were used to collect

and monitor activity data for emission calculations were also observed.

2.2.3 Risk Assessment

As part of the verification process, a risked-based verification and sampling plan was developed that outlines:

The amount and type of evidence necessary to achieve the agreed level of assurance;

Methodologies for determining representative samples; and

Risks of potential errors, omissions, or misrepresentation.

Tetra Tech’s verification team utilizes a Risk Assessment process to develop a compliant verification and sampling

plan. The risk assessment includes considerations associated with regulatory requirements, GHG program

requirements, industry/sector specific factors, and other non-technical risks.

Planning

•Gain understanding of technical operations and processes•Gain understanding of data management

Assessment

•Risk assessment and planning analytics•Contribution analysis and Materiality analysis•Verification plan and Sampling plan

Verification

•Conduct verification procedures•Conduct site visit•Discuss findings log

Report

•Senior review and independent peer review•Issued for Review verification report• Issued for Use report



7


The risk assessment considers inherent risk, control risk and detection risk. Inherent risk is the Responsible Party’s

risk of material error, omission, or discrepancy due to the complexity of the facility or lack of capacity by staff at the

facility. Control risk is the risk that the Responsible Party’s control system will not detect and rectify a material error,

omission or discrepancy. Detection risk is the risk that the Tetra Tech verification team will not identify a material

discrepancy.

The inherent risk and control risk are rated by likelihood multiplied by consequence in accordance with the matrix

provided in Table 4.

Table 4: Rating Matrix for Inherent Risk and Control Risk

Score Likelihood Consequence Rating

5 possibility of misstatement >99% misstated GHG assertion (threshold) >or =5% Very High

4 66% < possibility of misstatement <99% 3% <misstated GHG assertion <5% High

3 33% < possibility of misstatement <66% <2% misstated GHG assertion <3% Medium

2 1% < possibility of misstatement <33% 1% < misstated GHG assertion <2% Low

1 possibility of misstatement <1% misstated GHG assertion<1% Very Low

Inherent risk is determined to be low based on the following:

Activity data for energy consumption is provided by third-party invoices;

Quantity of electricity produced at the facility is monitored and measured by an independent third party; and

The Project has successfully passed all previous verifications.

Control risk is determined to be low – medium based on the following:

Data used for emission reduction quantification consists of manually recorded data, metered data capture,

third-party invoiced data, and manual entry into the offset quantification tool; and

Verdant and Dapp completes an internal senior review in order to check both calculations and reports for

transcription errors and omissions, correctly functioning links and formulas as part of their QA/QC (low risk).

Detection risk is the risk that Tetra Tech’s procedures do not detect a misstatement in the GHG Assertion.

The overall verification risk must be low to achieve a reasonable level of assurance. As specified in the Verification

Technical Guidance, the Tetra Tech’s detection risk procedures shall be designed to achieve an overall low

verification risk.

The risk assessment for the applicable emission sources is provided in Table 5.



8


Table 5: Risk Assessment for Applicable Emission Sources

Source Category/Line Item Inherent Risk Control Risk

B6 – Offsite Electricity Generation Displaced in Project Low Low

B15 – Disposal of Biomass High Medium

P1 – Collection Transfer and Transport of Biomass Low Low

P3 – Processing of Biomass Medium Low

P4 – Extraction and Processing of Fuels Low Low

P12 – Facility Operation Low Low

P15 – Combustion of Biomass and Fossil Fuels Medium Low

2.2.4 Verification / Sampling Plan

Convenience sampling methods are used for the verification. The sample plan is developed based on the risk

assessment to achieve an overall low detection risk. The sample size is based on the Guidance Document for GHG

verification sampling by European Commission with verifier’s professional judgement. The sample size varies based

on the number of evidence records. The type and amount of evidence reviewed for each emission source is provided

in the Final (Issued for Use) Verification Plan (Appendix A).

2.3 Team

The verification team is included in Table 6 and the Statement of Qualification is provided in Appendix B.

Table 6: Verification Team

Name Role

Kathleen Dunnett, P.Eng. Verifier

Nelson Lee, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., GHG-V Designated Signing Authority

Min Si, M.N.R.M., GHG-V Lead Verifier

Nancy Wellhausen Independent Peer Reviewer

2.4 Schedule

The schedule for the verification is presented in Table 7.

Table 7: Schedule of Verification Activities

Task Date

Project Engagement July 16, 2016

Site Visit August 17, 2016

Submit “Issued for Review” Report February 2, 2017

Submit “Issued for Use” Report February 3, 2017



9


3.0 RESULTS

The included GHG emissions identified in the Protocol were observed, assessed, and evaluated. It was determined

that the following emissions are not applicable to the Project (Table 8).

Table 8: Emission Sources Not Applicable to the Project

Emission Source Rationale for Exclusion

Collection, Transfer and Transport of Biomass (B1) Biomass residues from forestry industrial were incinerated.Dapp does not claim this credit.

Processing of Biomass (B3) Biomass residues were not further processed in the baselinecondition.

Biomass Disposal (B15) Dapp only claims Waste Diverted from Disposal in Landfill,biomass waste disposed by incineration was not used to claimcredits.

Displace off-site heat generation (B16) No off-site heat is displaced.

Displace on-site electricity generation (B13) No on-site electricity is displaced.

Displaced on site heat generation (B18) No on-site heat is displaced.

3.1 Assessment of Internal Data Management and Controls

The Project consumes electricity, diesel, gasoline, propane and natural gas. The energy data is collected through

third-party invoices, and manually entered into an Excel spreadsheet by Dapp’s accounting. The invoices are

collected monthly.

Electricity generated is metered on site, and maintained by third-party. Hourly data is recorded and downloaded

into spreadsheet.

Biomass quantity is measured by an internal scale. Truck drivers record the net quantity of biomass delivered, and

give a hard copy to Dapp’s accountant, then the accountant manually enters into an Excel Spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet from Dapp’s accountant is transferred to Verdant, and Verdant prepared the GHG quantification.

The data used to calculate the GHG assertion of emission reduction credits includes metered, invoiced, and

referenced data. The GHG data management system and its controls are assessed through a combination of verifier

site visit activities, interviews with staff involved in the data flow and review of the data itself. These activities verify

the data flow process and information management system.

A summary of Dapp’s control is provided in Table 9.



10


Table 9: Summary of Internal Controls

Reporting Element Data Source Controls

Wood waste Truck weigh scale tickets

Moisture measurement

Scale checks for normal operation, calibration.

Reasonableness check by accountant.

Wood waste inventory is measured by third-party

survey company twice a year.

Electricity generated Hourly data

TransAlta Invoice

Electricity meters monitored and maintained by third

party specializing in energy meters. Service also

includes polling and retrieval of the meter data,

identification of anomalies, notification of any

irregularity with the meter or data and data storage.

Calculation spreadsheet prepared and reviewed by

the financial accountant.

Electricity buyer (TransAlta)’s bill is crosschecked

Meter is calibrated at a frequency prescribed by

Measurement Canada.

Electricity, natural gas, diesel,

gasoline, and propone

Invoices Reviewed by Dapp’s accountant.

Reviewed by Verdant.

GHG Calculator Custom Excel based

calculator

Quantification completed by Verdant with review by

senior personnel at Verdant.

Offset report – Reviewed by Verdant.

The internal data management and controls are assessed based on the review of the Offset Project Plan,

observations during the site visits, and interviews with key project personnel. The internal data management and

controls for the offset project are deemed to be adequate.

3.2 Assessment of GHG Data and Information

The GHG data and information provided to support the GHG assertion is deemed to be sufficient.

The information to support activity data is provided in Table 10. The emission factors used are taken from Alberta

Environment and Parks’ (AEP’s) Emission Factors Handbook 2015 and Canada’s National Inventory Report (2014)

for biomass.



11


Table 10: GHG Data and Supporting Information

Applicable Emission Sources GHG Data and Information Results

B6 – Offsite Electricity

Generation Displaced in Project

Metering data and electricity buyer

(TransAlta)’s bill

Third-party invoices were reviewed, the data and supporting information are

deemed to be sufficient and appropriate. No issues found.

B15 – Disposal of Biomass

(Waste Diverted from Disposal

in Landfill or Stockpile)

Flexibility mechanism (1) and (2) are used for

Waste diverted from disposal in the Northland

landfill and Edmonton Waste Management

Center (Cloverbar)

Waste Quantities are recorded by truck tickets

AEP methodology in the Handbook of Emissions Factors is used to estimate CHR4R

emitted.

40 years is used for the period of waste diversion.

Fraction of Degradable Organic Carbon (DOC) is calculated based on the

Handbook.

Third-party waste characterization study is used to estimate the wood waste

content in the waste deposited to the landfill.

A third-party survey was also conducted for the waste delivered from Biofuel

depot at the end of September to adjust the remaining unused biomass. The

Northland and Edmonton Waste Management Center diverted waste are stored

at Pile 3 at the Dapp Power site in the period of October 1, 2016 – December 31,

2016.

Truck tickets for waste quantity and methodology reviewed by Tetra Tech.

Supporting information for the eligibility of landfill waste diversion is reviewed by

Tetra Tech.

The data and information are deemed to be sufficient and appropriate.

P1 – Collection Transfer and

Transport of Biomass

Diesel Invoices The biomass is collected by Dapp power owned diesel trucks and third party

owned diesel trucks. The diesel usage for Dapp owned trucks is tracked by

invoices. The diesel usage for the third-party usage is tracked by truck tickets.

Third-party invoices and truck tickets were reviewed, the data and supporting

information are deemed to be sufficient and appropriate. No issues found.



12



P3 – Processing of Biomass Biofuel facility processes majority of the

biomass for Dapp power generation facility,

the fuel consumed at the Biofuel facility

includes diesel, electricity, gasoline, and

propane. The fuel consumed at the Biofuel is

recorded by fuel suppliers’ invoices.

The fuel usage at third-party biomass

processing facility is estimated based on the

quantity of biomass received. The processing

equipment at the third-party facility is similar

to the equipment at the Biofuel facility.

Invoices for Biofuel energy consumption were reviewed. It was noted that the

third party invoices are not on a calendar month basis. For example, the invoices

for Biofuel electricity usage cover from September 20 – December 19, which

shifts electricity data by 11 days. The impact of this shift is estimated to be

immaterial by Tetra Tech. See appendix C for details.

The estimate for the fuel usage at the third-party biomass processing facility is

deemed to be appropriate.

P4 – Extraction and Processing

of Fuels

Natural gas, diesel, and gasoline invoices Only fuel usage at the Dapp Power site is included in this source. In the Protocol,

Page 28, this emission source only refers to the onsite component of the Project.

Since the Biofuel facility is processing biomass off site, the fuel usage at the

Biofuel facility is not included.

Based on the description provided in the Protocol, it is Tetra Tech’s opinion that

excluding fuel usage at the Biofuel facility is deemed to be appropriate.

P12 – Facility Operation Electricity natural gas, diesel, propane, and

gasoline invoices

Fuel consumption at the Biofuel facility and Dapp Power facility is included in this

sources. Invoices were reviewed. It was noted that the invoice data is not on a

calendar month basis. The invoices for October – December 2016 cover

September 28 to December 22, 2016. The impact is deemed to be immaterial.

See Appendix C for details.

P15 – Combustion of Biomass

and Fossil Fuels

Flexibility mechanism (5) is used for the

biomass combustion

3 P

rdP party survey to adjust the closing biomass

inventory.

Natural gas is used at the Dapp Power facility for building heating and boiler

starts. The steam flow is continuously monitored, and moisture content for the

biomass waste is tested on a daily basis. The calculated steam energy does not

consider the energy from natural gas by Verdant Energy as natural gas is only

used for boiler starts and not the firing of the boiler.

The Environment Canada National Inventory Report (EC, NIR 2014) is the source

of the biomass combustion emission factors in kg CHR4R and NR2RO/ kg of biomass

combusted for biomass with HHV 10.47 MJ/kg at 50% moisture content.

Dapp Power does not have historical steam temperature and pressure data. The

set point for the steam supply is 1,250 psi and 950 F.



13



The methodology in the Protocol Flexibility mechanism (5) is not followed by

Dapp Power because there is no steam temperature and pressure data, so steam

energy can’t be calculated. Operating knowledge and engineering estimates are

used to estimate the steam energy, then used to calculate the biomass quantities

combusted in tonnes. The biomass consumption for December, 2016 is adjusted

by a third-party survey to estimate remaining biomass on site.

A sensitivity test was conducted by Tetra Tech using steam set point temperature

and pressure to estimate energy enthalpy. The P15 emissions are 793 tonnes

COR2Re using Tetra Tech’s method. The P15 emissions reported by Dapp Power is

729 tonnes COR2Re. The discrepancy is 0.3% of the net reduction.

It is Tetra Tech’s opinion that using the third-party survey to adjust biomass

inventory is an acceptable method to estimate actual biomass combusted. The

method used by Dapp Power is deemed to be appropriate.



14


3.3 Assessment Against Criteria

The results of assessment against program eligibility criteria is provided in Table 11.

Table 11: Eligibility Criteria Assessment

Offset Eligibility Criteria Assessment of Eligibility Criteria

Occurs in Alberta Site visit confirmed the Project’s physical location.

Results from actions not required by LawCombustion of biomass waste is not required by law for

energy generation.

Results from actions taken on or after January 1, 2002 and

occur on or after January 1, 2002Project started commercial operations January 1, 2006.

Real and demonstrable Site visit confirmed the existence of the Project.

Quantifiable and measurableActivity data is measured and emissions are quantified

using the approved protocol.

Have clearly established ownership Dapp Power LP owns and transacts the Offsets.

Counted once for compliance purposesThe offset credits will be serialized on the CSA Carbon

Registry.

Implemented according to a government approved protocol

(for offset projects)Approved Protocol is used.

Verified by a qualified person meeting the requirements

under Section 18 of SGER.Verifier meets the requirement under Section 18 of SGER.

Registered on the Alberta Emission Offset RegistryProject registered under CSA Carbon Registry –

Alberta Emission Offset Registry.

3.4 Evaluation of GHG Assertion

The verification opinion is that the GHG Assertion meets the requirements of the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation.The GHG data and supporting documents are deemed to be sufficient and appropriate. The GHG assertion iscalculated in accordance with the approved quantification protocol.

It is our opinion that 25,257 t COR2Re of the emission reductions meet the materiality requirements and the reasonablelevel assurance.

3.5 Summary of Findings

A detailed findings log is provided in Appendix C. There are no unresolved material discrepancies.



15


4.0 VERIFICATION STATEMENT

Based on our review, it is our opinion that the Emission Reductions of 25,257 t COR2Re contained in the GHG Assertion

generated from the Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility offset project in the period of

October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016 are materially correct and presented fairly in accordance with the relevant

criteria.

The Statement of Verification is provided in Appendix D.

5.0 CONFIRMATIONS

As required by AEP, the verifier has confirmed the following information:

Consistency of offset project information across offset project documentation;

Offset project location;

Methodology document/Project Report exists;

Offset project contact and the amount of GHG emission reductions; and

Completeness and accuracy of process and data flow diagram.




APPENDIX A

VERIFICATION PLAN



Tel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301

February 3, 2017 ISSUED FOR USEFILE: ENV.CENV03197.002

Verdant Energy Ltd. Via Email: [email protected],525 -11 Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2R 0C9

Attention: Mr. Grant NollVice Present, Operation

Subject: Verification PlanVerdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility Offset ProjectOctober 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

1.0 INTRODUCTION



(the Project) for the period of October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016.

Dapp transacts the Emission Reduction Credits (ERCs) on behalf of Bio-Fuels Inc. (a subsidiary of Dapp) and

Verdant Energy Ltd. (its parent company). The Project Proponent and Project Developer is Dapp.

1.1 Objective


immaterial errors, omission or misrepresentations and to provide our opinion on the greenhouse gas (GHG)

Assertion in the Offset Project Report.

1.2 Assurance

The scope and level of effort of this verification is planned to achieve a reasonable level of assurance as required

by the Specified Gas Emitter Regulation (SGER).

The level of assurance is used to determine the depth of detail that a verifier designs into their verification plan to

determine if there are any material errors, omissions, or misrepresentations.

Reasonable level of assurance is to evaluate whether the GHG assertion is deemed to be presented fairly and

substantiated by sufficient and appropriate evidence. As such, the verification is to provide positive, but not absolute

assurance regarding the GHG assertions

1.3 Scope

The scope of this project level emission reduction verification includes the project boundaries, physical

infrastructure, activities, technologies, and processes of the project, GHG sources, sinks, and/or reservoirs (SSRs),

types of GHGs, and time periods covered. The scope of the verification is listed in Table 1.

VERIFICATION PLAN FOR 2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY

FILE: ENV.CENV03197.002 | FEBRUARY 3, 2017 | ISSUED FOR USE

2

Verification Plan - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power.docx

Table 1: Verification Scope

Item Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility

Geography The Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility is located northwest of the Town of

Westlock, Alberta. The coordinates of the facility are latitude 54°24'54.28"N and longitude

114°10'38.75"W.

The Bio-Fuels wood recycling depot is located at the Northland Sand and Gravel Landfill

in Edmonton, Alberta. The coordinates of the landfill are latitude 53°32'46.98"N and

longitude 113°43'6.46"W.

Organization The project is registered and operated under the name of Dapp Power LP. Dapp Power

LP owns and transacts the Offsets.

Activities and Processes Electricity generation from biomass combustion

SSRs Baseline: Emissions from collection, transfer and transport of biomass (B1), biomass

disposal (B15) and processing (B3), facility operations (B12), displaced off-site electricity

generation (B6), displace off-site heat generation (B16), displace on-site electricity

generation (B13), displaced on site heat generation (B18), and fuel extraction and

processing (B4).

Project: Emissions from collection, transfer and transport of biomass (P1) Biomass

processing (P3), facility operations (P12), and combustion of biomass (P15), and fuel

extraction and processing (P4).

GHG Carbon dioxide (CO2), Methane (CH4), Nitrous oxide (N2O)

GHG Assertion Baseline Emissions: 27,581 t CO2e

Project Emissions: 2,324 t CO2e

Net Reduction: 25,257 t CO2e

Time Period October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

1.4 Verification Standards

The verification is performed according to ISO 14064-3: Specification with Guidance for the Validation andVerification of GHG Assertions.

1.5 Verification Criteria


Occur in Alberta;

Result from actions not otherwise required by laws and be beyond business as usual and sector commonpractices;

Result from actions taken on or after January 1, 2002;

Occur on or after January, 2002;




3






Alberta Specified Gas Emitters Regulation, 2007;



1.0, January 2013);





1.6 Materiality

A 5% materiality threshold is set to assess errors, omissions, and misrepresentations in the GHG assertion as

required by the SGER. Quantitative discrepancies are aggregated and assessed on the basis of net and absolute

values. Qualitative discrepancies are evaluated by professional judgement of the verification body, and determined

if the discrepancies could be deemed to be material errors.

2.0 DATA MANAGEMENT AND CONTROLS

The project consumes electricity, diesel, gasoline, propane and natural gas. The energy data is collected through

third party invoices, and manually entered into Excel spreadsheet by Dapp’s accounting. The invoices are collected

monthly.

Electricity generated is metered on site, and maintained by third party. Hourly data is recorded and downloaded

into spreadsheet.

Biomass quantity is measured by an internal scale. Truck drivers record the net quantity of biomass delivered, and

give a hard copy to Dapp’s accountant, then the accountant manually entered into Excel Spreadsheet.

The spreadsheet from Dapp’s accountant is transferred to Verdant, and Verdant conducted the GHG quantification

The data used to calculate the GHG assertion of emission reduction credits include metered, invoiced, and

referenced data. The GHG data management system and its controls are assessed through a combination of verifier

site visit activities, interviews with staff involved in the data flow and review of the data itself. These activities verify

the data flow process and information management system.

A summary of Dapp’s control is provided in Table 2.



4


Table 2: Summary of Internal Controls

Reporting Element Data Source Controls

Wood waste Truck weigh scale tickets

Moisture measurement

Scale checks for normal operation, calibration.

Reasonableness check by accountant.

Wood inventory is measured by third party survey

company twice a year.

Electricity generated Hourly data

TransAlta Invoice

Electricity meters monitored and maintained by third

party specializing in energy meters. Service also

includes polling and retrieval of the meter data,

identification of anomalies, notification of any

irregularity with the meter or data and data storage.

Calculation spreadsheet prepared and reviewed by

the financial accountant.

Electricity buyer (TransAlta)’s bill is crosschecked

Meter is calibrated every two years.

Electricity, natural gas,

diesel, gasoline, and

propone

Invoices Reviewed by accountant.

GHG Calculator Custom Excel based

calculator

Quantification completed by Verdant with review by

senior personnel at Verdant.

Offset report – Reviewed by Verdant.

3.0 TEAM

The verification team is presented in Table 3.


Name Role


Nelson Lee, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., GHG-V Designated Signing Authority





5


4.0 SCHEDULE

The schedule for the verification is presented in Table 4.

Table 4: Schedule of Verification Activities

Task Date

Project Engagement July 16, 2016

Site Visit August 17, 2016

Submit “Issued for Review” Report February 2, 2017

Submit “Issued for Use” Report February 3, 2017

5.0 RISK ASSESSMENT

A summary of risk assessment for the applicable emission source categories/line item is provided in Table 5.

Table 5: Risk Assessment for Source Category/Line Item

Source Category/Line Item Inherent Risk Control Risk

B6 – Offsite Electricity Generation Displaced in Project Low Low

B15 – Disposal of Biomass High Medium

P1 – Collection Transfer and Transport of Biomass Low Low

P3 – Processing of Biomass Medium Low

P4 – Extraction and Processing of Fuels Low Low

P12 – Facility Operation Low Low

P15 – Combustion of Biomass and Fossil Fuels Medium Low



6


6.0 SAMPLING PLAN

The type and amount of evidence reviewed during the verification are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6. Type of Evidence

Reporting Element Type of Evidence Amount of Evidence Reviewed

Dapp Electricity Generated Invoices 3 months

Dapp Electricity Purchased Invoices 3 months

Biofuels Electricity Purchased Invoices 3 months

Dapp Wood Consumed Daily and Month Reports 3 months

Northland/Biofuel wood waste quantity Daily and Month Reports 3 months

Dapp Steam Instrumentation 3 months

Dapp Moisture Lab test results 3 months

Dapp Natural Gas Invoices 3 months

Dapp Gasoline Invoices 3 months

Biofuels Gasoline Invoices 3 months

Biofuels Propane Invoices 3 months

Dapp Site Diesel Invoices 3 months

Biofuels Diesel Invoices 3 months

Dapp Truck Diesel Invoices 3 months

Third Party Transport Diesel Invoices 3 months

Third Party Supplier Diesel Invoices 3 months



7


7.0 CLOSURE

We trust this report meets your present requirements. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Min Si

(403.723.1565, [email protected]).

Issued in Calgary, AB, February 3, 2017.

Respectfully submitted,

Tetra Tech Canada Inc.

Prepared by: Reviewed by:

Min Si, M.N.R.M., GHG-V Nelson Lee, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., GHG-V

Lead Verifier Designated Signing Authority




APPENDIX B

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICATION



Tel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301

February 3, 2017 ISSUED FOR USEFILE: ENV.CENV03197-01.002

Verdant Energy Ltd. Via Email: [email protected],525 -11 Avenue SWCalgary, AB T2R 0C9

Attention: Grant NollVice Present, Operation

Subject: Statement of QualificationVerdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility Offset ProjectOctober 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

1.0 INTRODUCTION



(the Project) for the period of October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016. Dapp Power L.P. transacts the Emission

Reduction Credits (ERCs) on behalf of Bio-Fuels Inc. (a subsidiary of Dapp Power L.P.) and Verdant Energy Ltd.

(its parent company). The Project Proponent and Project Developer is Dapp Power L.P.

Table 1 lists the verification team members and their roles.


Name Role


Nelson Lee, M.A.Sc.,P.Eng., GHG-V Designated Signing Authority



Mr. Nelson Lee is a professional engineer registered by the Association of Professional Engineers and

Geoscientists of Alberta. Mr. Lee is the Designated Signing Authority for the report and satisfies the requirements

of Section 18 (1)(ii)(A) of the Specified Gas Emitter Regulation (SGER). Each team member has the required

technical knowledge of greenhouse gas (GHG) emission quantification methodologies and has experience in

completing third-party GHG verifications. The team members satisfy the requirement of technical knowledge under

Section 18(b)(i-iii) under the SGER.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICAITON FOR 2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY


2

\Statement of Qualifications - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power.docx

2.0 VERIFICATION TEAM QUALIFICATIONS

The verification team meets the requirements under SGER and contains the required knowledge of GHG emission

quantification methodologies. They have experience in completing third party reviews and audits related to emission

inventories, including verifications in Alberta. The verification member received training under ISO 14064 Part 3

from CSA group.

Ms. Kathleen Dunnett, P.Eng., was a Verifier for this verification.

Ms. Dunnett is a Professional Engineer in the Province of Alberta with a degree in Chemical and Petroleum

Engineering. She is an Environmental Manager and Auditor with over 20 years of regulatory compliance and

environmental management systems experience. Ms. Dunnett has been a verifier for nine GHG projects in Alberta

in the forest products, agricultural, pulp & paper, and oil & gas sectors.

Mr. Nelson Lee, M.A.Sc., P.Eng., GHG-V, was the Designated Signing Authority for this verification.

Mr. Lee has a B.Sc. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Alberta, and a M.A.Sc. in Environmental

Engineering from the University of British Columbia. He has over eight years of experience with Alberta’s SGER

system, and has completed over 100 GHG verifications in Alberta and British Columbia. Mr. Lee completed ISO

14064 – 3 training, and is a CSA certified GHG verifier, and a California Air Resources Board (ARB) registered

offset project Lead Verifier.

Mr. Lee is a member of the CSA Technical Committee on Climate Change which is also a harmonized mirror

committee that represents Canada’s interest in the development of international standards through the ISO

Technical Committee 207 / Subcommittee 7 on GHG Management and Related Activities. This harmonized

committee represents Canada’s interest in the development of international standards through the ISO (TC 207 /

Subcommittee 7: Greenhouse gas management and related activities). The committee also develops new

standards and adopts existing international standards at the Canadian national level.

Mr. Min Si, M.N.R.M., GHG-V, was the Lead Verifier for this verification.

Mr. Si is an Environmental Scientist with Tetra Tech in Calgary. He has worked on GHG verification and

quantification projects for a wide range of sectors, including oil and gas, pulp and paper, agriculture, manufacturing,

etc. His emission experience includes GHG life cycle assessment, GHG quantification and verification for carbon

offset projects, compliance report verification, National Pollution Registry Inventory (NPRI) and corporate

GHG reporting. Mr. Si has completed ISO 14064 Part 3 training.

Ms. Nancy Wellhausen, was the Peer Reviewer for this verification.

Ms. Wellhausen is a senior GHG Lead Verifier and air quality and inventory specialist with over 20 years of

experience. She has served in the role of Independent Peer Reviewer for over 30 GHG report verifications in

British Columbia and Alberta. She is registered with the California Air Resources Board as a GHG Lead Verifier.

STATEMENT OF QUALIFICAITON FOR 2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY


3

Statement of Qualifications - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power.docx

3.0 CLOSURE

If there are any questions or clarifications regarding the team’s qualifications or roles, please contact Min Si

(403.723.1565, [email protected]).

Respectfully submitted,








APPENDIX C

FINDING LOG

2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY FILE: ENV.CENV03197-01.002 | FEBRUARY 3, 2017 | ISSUED FOR USE

Findings Log

Item Description of the Findings Summary of Information Exchanged Conclusion

16-01 Calculator, tab B12 P12, Dapp Electricity Purchase, in the EPCOR invoice, Oct usage covers 30 days, Nov statement ends Nov 23, so Nov invoices covers from Oct 31 to Nov 23, Dec invoice ends Dec 22, 2016, it covers Nov 24 to Dec 22, 2016. please advise if Dec 23 to Dec 31 electricity usage is included.

Our convention has been to record utility purchases with the billing period and as shown on their statement (example attached) rather than calendar usage. This creates a time shift but has an immaterial impact on fossil fuel consumed during the entire verification period.

Nine days electricity usage is missing, the discrepancy is estimated to be 0.023 t CO2e. The data used by Verdant is deemed to be acceptable.

16-02 Biofuel electricity invoice from EPCOR, it appears that Oct 1 - Oct 19 is 2526, Oct 20 - 31 is 1520 kwh, the total for Oct is 4046 kwh, Nov 1 -19 is 2185 and 20 - 30 is 1934 kwh, total for Nov is 4119, and Dec 1 - 19 is 5429. missing Dec 20 - 31 data. The electricity data does not match the offset calculator, please explain, and provide Dec 20 -31 data

Our convention has been to record utility purchases with the billing period and as shown on their statement (example attached) rather than calendar usage. This creates a time shift but has an immaterial impact on fossil fuel consumed during the entire verification period.

Eleven days from Sept 2016 is included in Q4 electricity usage, the shift is deemed to be immaterial

16-03 offset calculator, tab input summary, column G, Dapp wood consumed for Oct is less than total Northland Biofuels. It is our understanding that the max. Biofuel to claim landfill diversion must be equal to or less than total Dapp wood consumed. Please provide further explanation. By looking at Oct wood delivery spreadsheet, it appears that wood from other sources are also delivered in Oct

Dapp took its major annual outage in October and therefore both electrical production and associated fuel consumption is low. Wood fuel continued to be delivered to the plant during this time and is a normal part of our operation. Wood fuel deliveries only match plant production over the course of a calendar year.

Landfill quantity is adjusted based on the actual biomass consumed

16-04 It is our understanding that Biofuel waste is stored at Pile 2 and 7 on site. In the year end survey spreadsheet, the pile 2 and pile 7 has waste remaining. Should the remaining Biofuel waste be deducted from the offset credit claims, the remaining waste is not consumed yet.

Our convention has been that once the wood waste arrives at site it has been landfill diverted for that period. Any inventory at period end is a standard working level that fluctuates up and down.


16-05 Please advise which pile Cloverbar waste is stored at ? Should this quantity in the offset calculator be adjusted by the year end inventory?

Cloverbar is stored with other landfill avoided waste i.e. with Biofuels. All forestry waste is mixed together and managed through inventory accordingly. Only the dry wood (mostly landfill avoided) is kept separate for operating reasons as we mix it into the boiler fuel in different proportions based on supply and seasonality in order to optimize boiler steam production. Same answer as above.


16-06 Please explain how propane is used. The propane is used for heating the office/lunchroom building. Typically the propane bottle is filled once per season.

The propane usage should be categorized in P12 facility operations, as propane is only used for heating, not processing biomass. Qualitative misstatement.




APPENDIX D

STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION



Tel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301


Alberta Environment and Parks12th Floor, Baker Centre10025 – 106 StreetEdmonton, AB T5J 1G4

Attention: Director Climate Change Secretariat

Subject: Statement of VerificationVerdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility Offset ProjectOctober 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) has reviewed the greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction presented by

Verdant Energy Ltd. (Verdant) for the Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility Offset Project

for the period of October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016.

The Project involves the creation of offset credits due to the avoidance of methane emissions (CH4) that would have

otherwise taken place from the anaerobic decomposition of wood waste in landfills, and offset credits from the

generation of electricity from non-fossil fuel sources.

1.1 Objective


immaterial errors, omission or misrepresentations and to provide our opinion on the GHG Assertion in the Offset

Project Report.

1.2 GHG Assertion

The GHG Assertion is presented in Table 1.

Table 1: GHG Assertion

Item GHG Assertion

Total Project Emissions 27,581 t CO2e

Total Baseline Emissions 2,324 t CO2e

Net Reductions 25,257 t CO2e

Materiality 5%

Period October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION FOR 2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY


2

\Statement of Verification - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power.docx

1.3 Role and Responsibilities

Verdant was responsible for the preparation and presentation of information within the Project Report and GHG

Assertion. Tetra Tech was responsible for determining whether anything has come to our attention to suggest that

the GHG emission reduction is not presented fairly in accordance with Alberta Environment and Park (AEP)

approved quantification methodology, Quantification Protocol for Energy Generation from the Combustion of

Biomass Waste (Version 2.0, April 2014), the Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER), and associated guidance

documents.

The Tetra Tech verification team, including roles and responsibilities are listed in Table 2.


Name Role Responsibilities

Kathleen Dunnett P.Eng. VerifierAssist with verification activities, including verification

planning, desktop review, and verification report.

Nelson Lee, M.A.Sc., P.Eng. Designated Signing Authority Review the verification.


Lead verification, including site visit and desktop review.

Review verification deliverables, adherence to

ISO 14064-3, regulatory compliance, and technical

soundness.

Nancy Wellhausen Independent Peer ReviewerIndependently review verification deliverables for

adherence to ISO 14064-3 and regulatory compliance.

2.0 SCOPE

2.1 Program Criteria


Occurs in Alberta;

Results from actions not otherwise required by laws and be beyond business as usual and sector common

practices;

Results from actions taken on or after January 1, 2002;

Occurs on or after January, 2002;




STATEMENT OF VERIFICATION FOR 2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY


3

Statement of Verification - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power.docx



Alberta Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER), 2007;



1.0, January 2013);





2.2 Standard

The scope and level of effort of this verification were conducted to a reasonable level of assurance in accordance

with ISO 14064-3: Specification with Guidance for the Validation and Verification of GHG Assertions.

2.3 Procedures

The verification procedures were developed based on the results of our risk assessment for the GHG data and

information as well as the Responsibility Party’s control procedures.

Tetra Tech verification team reviewed, recalculated, vouched, retraced, and confirmed GHG data and information

provided by the Responsible Party. The site visit assessed the Responsible Party’s data management system,

examined quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC) procedures, and tested controls in the data management

system. The Responsible Party’s data flow process, and risks, controls and processes documents were reviewed.

The effectiveness of the data management system’s QA/QC procedures and controls was assessed.

The detailed verification procedures are provided in the Verification Report and Verification Plan.




APPENDIX E

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECKLIST



Tel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301


Verdant Energy Ltd. Via Email: [email protected],525 -11 Ave SWCalgary, AB T2R 0C9

Attention: Grant NollVice Present, Operation

Subject: Conflict of Interest ChecklistVerdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility Offset ProjectOctober 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016

Tetra Tech Canada Inc. (Tetra Tech) was contracted by Verdant Energy Ltd. (Verdant), on behalf of Dapp

Power LP, to conduct a verification for Verdant Energy Ltd. – Dapp Power Electric Generation Facility offset project

(the Project) for the period of October 1, 2016 – December 31, 2016.

As a requirement of the Alberta Offset System, Tetra Tech conducts an internal conflict of interest assessment to

ensure the potential for conflicting interest on each verification project, on the part of the verifier and the operation

is reviewed and minimized. The following checklist is provided.

Table 1: Conflict of Interest Checklist

Respond either "True" or "False" to each of the following statements:

1. The relationship between my firm and this reporting company poses unacceptable threat to or

compromises the impartiality of my firm.

False

2. The finances and sources of income of my firm compromise the impartiality of my firm. False

3. The personnel my firm has scheduled to participate in the verification may have an actual or potential

conflict of interest.

False

4. My firm participated in some manner in the development or completion of the associated offset

submission for this reporting company.

False

5. My firm provided greenhouse gas consultancy services to this reporting company. False

6. My firm will use personnel that have, are, or will be engaged or previously employed by the reporting

company.

False

7. My firm will outsource the Statement of Verification for the associated offset submission. False

8. My firm offers products or services that pose an unacceptable risk to impartiality. False

CONFLICT OF INTEREST CHECKLIST FOR 2016 Q4 VERDANT ENERGY


2

\COI - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power.docx

Tetra Tech has found no potential for conflict of interest of this verification project as documented by our interval

review process. If you have any questions or comments, please contact Min Si (403.723.1565,

[email protected])

Sincerely,





/sy




APPENDIX F

TETRA TECH’S GENERAL CONDITIONS

1

GENERAL CONDITIONS

GEOENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

This report incorporates and is subject to these “General Conditions”.

1.1 USE OF REPORT AND OWNERSHIP

This report pertains to a specific site, a specific development, and a specific scope of work. It is not applicable to any other sites, nor should it be relied upon for types of development other than those to which it refers. Any variation from the site or proposed development would necessitate a supplementary investigation and assessment.

This report and the assessments and recommendations contained in it are intended for the sole use of TETRA TECH’s client. TETRA TECH does not accept any responsibility for the accuracy of any of the data, the analysis or the recommendations contained or referenced in the report when the report is used or relied upon by any party other than TETRA TECH’s Client unless otherwise authorized in writing by TETRA TECH. Any unauthorized use of the report is at the sole risk of the user.

This report is subject to copyright and shall not be reproduced either wholly or in part without the prior, written permission of TETRA TECH. Additional copies of the report, if required, may be obtained upon request.

1.2 ALTERNATE REPORT FORMAT

Where TETRA TECH submits both electronic file and hard copy versions of reports, drawings and other project-related documents and deliverables (collectively termed TETRA TECH’s instruments of professional service); only the signed and/or sealed versions shall be considered final and legally binding. The original signed and/or sealed version archived by TETRA TECH shall be deemed to be the original for the Project.

Both electronic file and hard copy versions of TETRA TECH’s instruments of professional service shall not, under any circumstances, no matter who owns or uses them, be altered by any party except TETRA TECH. The Client warrants that TETRA TECH’s instruments of professional service will be used only and exactly as submitted by TETRA TECH.

Electronic files submitted by TETRA TECH have been prepared and submitted using specific software and hardware systems. TETRA TECH makes no representation about the compatibility of these files with the Client’s current or future software and hardware systems.

1.1 NOTIFICATION OF AUTHORITIES

In certain instances, the discovery of hazardous substances or conditions and materials may require that regulatory agencies and other persons be informed and the client agrees that notification to such bodies or persons as required may be done by TETRA TECH in its reasonably exercised discretion.

1.2 INFORMATION PROVIDED TO TETRA TECH BY OTHERS

During the performance of the work and the preparation of the report, TETRA TECH may rely on information provided by persons other than the Client. While TETRA TECH endeavours to verify the accuracy of such information when instructed to do so by the Client, TETRA TECH accepts no responsibility for the accuracy or the reliability of such information which may affect the report.

Verification Report - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power · PDF fileTel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301...

Documents

Transcript of Verification Report - 2016 Q4 Dapp Power · PDF fileTel 403.203.3355 Fax 403.203.3301...