Views
1 year ago

DRAFT Inventory of U.S Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks

2017_complete_report

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 generation and disposal data for 2010 and 2013 using a similar methodology as the SOG surveys (EREF 2016). State-specific landfill waste generation data for the years in-between the SOG surveys and EREF report (e.g., 2001, 2003, 2005, 2007, and 2009) were either interpolated or extrapolated based on the SOG or EREF data and the U.S. Census population data. In the current Inventory methodology, the MSW generation and disposal data are no longer used to estimate CH 4 emissions for the years 2005 to 2015 because EPA’s GHGRP emissions data are now used for those years. The MSW generation and disposal data for these years are still useful for examining general trends in MSW management in the United States. Estimates of the quantity of waste landfilled from 1989 to 2004 are determined by applying an average national waste disposal factor to the total amount of waste generated (i.e., the SOG data). A waste disposal factor is determined for each year an SOG survey is published and equals the ratio of the total amount of waste landfilled in the United States to the total amount of waste generated in the United States. The waste disposal factor is interpolated or extrapolated for the years in-between the SOG surveys, as is done for the amount of waste generated for a given survey year. The IPCC methodology recommends at least 50 years of waste disposal data in order to estimate CH 4 emissions. Estimates of the annual quantity of waste landfilled for 1960 through 1988 were obtained from EPA’s Anthropogenic Methane Emissions in the United States, Estimates for 1990: Report to Congress (EPA 1993) and an extensive landfill survey by the EPA’s Office of Solid Waste in 1986 (EPA 1988). Although waste placed in landfills in the 1940s and 1950s contributes very little to current CH 4 generation, estimates for those years were included in the FOD model for completeness in accounting for CH 4 generation rates and are based on the population in those years and the per capita rate for land disposal for the 1960s. For calculations in the current Inventory, wastes landfilled prior to 1980 were broken into two groups: wastes disposed in landfills (Methane Conversion Factor, MCF, of 1) and those disposed in dumps (MCF of 0.6). All calculations after 1980 assume waste is disposed in managed, modern landfills. See Annex 3.14 for more details. Methane recovery is currently only accounted for at MSW landfills. The estimated landfill gas recovered per year (R) at MSW landfills was based on a combination of four databases and including recovery from flares and/or landfill gas-to-energy projects: EPA’s GHGRP dataset for MSW landfills (EPA 2015a); A database developed by the Energy Information Administration (EIA) for the voluntary reporting of greenhouse gases (EIA 2007); A database of LFGTE projects that is primarily based on information compiled by the EPA LMOP (EPA 2016a); and The flare vendor database (contains updated sales data collected from vendors of flaring equipment). The same landfill may be included one or more times across these four databases. To avoid double- or triplecounting CH 4 recovery, the landfills across each database were compared and duplicates identified. A hierarchy of recovery data is used based on the certainty of the data in each database. In summary, EPA’s GHGRP > EIA > LFGTE > flare vendor database. The rationale for this hierarchy is described below. EPA’s GHGRP MSW landfills database was first introduced as a data source for the 1990 to 2013 Inventory. EPA’s GHGRP MSW landfills database contains facility-reported data that undergoes rigorous verification, thus it is considered to contain the least uncertain data of the four CH 4 recovery databases. However, as mentioned earlier, this database is unique in that it only contains a portion of the landfills in the United States (although, presumably the highest emitters since only those landfills that meet a certain CH 4 generation threshold must report) and only contains data for 2010 and later. Directly reported values for CH 4 recovery to EPA’s GHGRP are available for years 2010 through 2014. In the current Inventory methodology, methane recovery for 1990 to 2004 for facilities reporting to EPA’s GHGRP has been estimated using the directly reported emissions for those facilities from 2010 to 2015, and an Excel forecasting function so that the GHGRP data source can be applied to earlier years in the time series. Directly reported net CH 4 emissions from EPA’s GHGRP are used for 2010 to 2015, and back-casted from 2009 to 2005. Prior to 2005, if a landfill in EPA’s GHGRP was also in the LFGTE or EIA databases, the landfill gas project information, specifically the project start year, from either the LFGTE or EIA databases was used as the cutoff year for the estimated CH 4 recovery in the GHGRP database. For example, if a landfill reporting under EPA’s GHGRP was also included in the LFGTE database under a project that started in 2002 that is still operational, the CH 4 recovery data in the GHGRP database for that facility was back-calculated to the year 2002 only. This method, Waste 7-7

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 although somewhat uncertain, can be refined in future Inventory reports after further investigating the landfill gas project start years for landfills in the GHGRP database. If a landfill in EPA’s GHGRP MSW landfills database was also in the EIA, LFGTE, and/or flare vendor database, the avoided emissions were only based on EPA’s GHGRP MSW landfills database to avoid double or triple counting the recovery amounts. In other words, the recovery from the same landfill was not included in the total recovery from the EIA, LFGTE, or flare vendor databases. If a landfill in the EIA database was also in the LFGTE and/or the flare vendor database, the CH 4 recovery was based on the EIA data because landfill owners or operators directly reported the amount of CH 4 recovered using gas flow concentration and measurements, and because the reporting accounted for changes over time. However, as the EIA database only includes facility-reported data through 2006, the amount of CH 4 recovered for years 2007 and later were assumed to be the same as in 2006 for landfills that are in the EIA database, but not in the GHGRP or LFGTE databases. This quantity likely underestimates flaring because the EIA database does not have information on all flares in operation for the years after 2006. However, nearly all (93 percent) of landfills in the EIA database also report to EPA’s GHGRP, which means that only seven percent of landfills in the EIA database are counted in the total recovery. If both the flare data and LFGTE recovery data were available for any of the remaining landfills (i.e., not in the EIA or GHGRP databases), then the avoided emissions were based on the LFGTE data, which provides reported landfillspecific data on gas flow for direct use projects and project capacity (i.e., megawatts) for electricity projects. The LFGTE database is based on the most recent EPA LMOP database (published annually). The remaining portion of avoided emissions is calculated by the flare vendor database, which estimates CH 4 combusted by flares using the midpoint of a flare’s reported capacity. New flare vendor sales data were unable to be obtained for the current Inventory year. Given that each LFGTE project is likely to also have a flare, double counting reductions from flares and LFGTE projects in the LFGTE database was avoided by subtracting emission reductions associated with LFGTE projects for which a flare had not been identified from the emission reductions associated with flares (referred to as the flare correction factor). A further explanation of the methodology used to estimate the landfill gas recovered can be found in Annex 3.14. The destruction efficiencies reported through EPA’s GHGRP were applied to the landfills in the GHGRP MSW landfills database. The median value of the reported destruction efficiencies was 99 percent for all reporting years (2010 through 2015). A destruction efficiency of 99 percent was applied to CH 4 recovered to estimate CH 4 emissions avoided due to the combusting of CH 4 in destruction devices (i.e., flares) in the EIA, LFGTE, and flare vendor databases. The 99 percent destruction efficiency value selected was based on the range of efficiencies (86 to greater than 99 percent) recommended for flares in EPA’s AP-42 Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factors, Draft Section 2.4, Table 2.4-3 (EPA 2008). A typical value of 97.7 percent was presented for the non-CH 4 components (i.e., volatile organic compounds and non-methane organic compounds) in test results (EPA 2008). An arithmetic average of 98.3 percent and a median value of 99 percent are derived from the test results presented in EPA (2008). Thus, a value of 99 percent for the destruction efficiency of flares has been used in the Inventory methodology. Other data sources supporting a 99 percent destruction efficiency include those used to establish New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for landfills and in recommendations for shutdown flares used by the EPA LMOP. The amount of CH 4 oxidized by the landfill cover at both municipal and industrial waste landfills was assumed to be 10 percent of the CH 4 generated that is not recovered (IPCC 2006; Mancinelli and McKay 1985; Czepiel et al. 1996) for the years 1990 to 2004. For years 2005 to 2015, the current Inventory methodology uses directly reported net CH 4 emissions from EPA’s GHGRP, or back-casted emissions based of the directly reported data. EPA’s GHGRP data allows facilities to apply a range of oxidation factors (0.0, 0.10, 0.25, or 0.35) based on the calculated CH 4 flux at the landfill. For the years 1990 to 2004, net CH 4 emissions are calculated by subtracting the CH 4 recovered and CH 4 oxidized from CH 4 generated at municipal and industrial waste landfills. For the years 2005 and onward, the same methodology may be used, or the back-calculation approach may be used (Equation HH-8 in CFR Part 98.343, as described above). The back-calculation approach starts with the amount of CH 4 recovered and works back through the system to account for the amount of gas not collected by the landfill gas collection and control system (i.e., the collection efficiency). An oxidation factor (0.0, 0.10, 0.25, or 0.35) is applied to the amount of CH 4 recovered divided by the collection efficiency, subtracted from the amount of CH 4 recovered. 7-8 DRAFT Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2015

  • Page 1 and 2:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 EP

  • Page 3 and 4:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 5 and 6:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 7 and 8:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 9 and 10:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 11 and 12:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 13 and 14:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 15 and 16:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 17 and 18:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 19 and 20:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 21 and 22:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 23 and 24:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Box 6-2:

  • Page 25 and 26:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 27 and 28:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 29 and 30:

    Residential 338.3 357.8 325.5 282.5

  • Page 31 and 32:

    e LULUCF C Stock Change is the net

  • Page 33 and 34:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 35 and 36:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 37 and 38:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 39 and 40:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 irreversible accumulati

  • Page 41 and 42:

    Substitution of Ozone Depleting Sub

  • Page 43 and 44:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 45 and 46:

    Forest Land Remaining Forest Land:

  • Page 47 and 48:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 49 and 50:

    1 2 3 Figure ES-15: U.S. Greenhouse

  • Page 51 and 52:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 53 and 54:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 55 and 56:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 57 and 58:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 59 and 60:

    1 2 3 4 5 only days to weeks, their

  • Page 61 and 62:

    1 2 3 4 informational purposes, emi

  • Page 63 and 64:

    1 Figure 1-1: National Inventory Ar

  • Page 65 and 66:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 67 and 68:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 69 and 70:

    N2O Emissions from Adipic Acid Prod

  • Page 71 and 72:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 73 and 74:

    a Emission estimates reported in th

  • Page 75 and 76:

    1 3.10. Methodology for Estimating

  • Page 77 and 78:

    1 2 Figure 2-2: Annual Percent Chan

  • Page 79 and 80:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 gas for electricity

  • Page 81 and 82:

    a Emissions from Wood Biomass and E

  • Page 83 and 84:

    Electrical Transmission and Distrib

  • Page 85 and 86:

    Wetlands (4.0) (5.3) (4.1) (4.2) (4

  • Page 87 and 88:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 89 and 90:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 91 and 92:

    CH4 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 Pet

  • Page 93 and 94:

    1 Table 2-7: Emissions from Agricul

  • Page 95 and 96:

    1 2 Table 2-8: U.S. Greenhouse Gas

  • Page 97 and 98:

    1 2 3 4 Overall, in 2015, waste act

  • Page 99 and 100:

    Cement Production 33.3 45.9 32.0 35

  • Page 101 and 102:

    Total 1,862.5 2,441.6 2,197.3 2,059

  • Page 103 and 104:

    Total Emissions 6,366.7 7,315.6 6,7

  • Page 105 and 106:

    N2O 1.0 1.2 1.1 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 Oth

  • Page 107 and 108:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 109 and 110:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 atmospheric sink fo

  • Page 111 and 112:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 113 and 114:

    International Bunker Fuels a 0.2 0.

  • Page 115 and 116:

    1 Table 3-4: CO2, CH4, and N2O Emis

  • Page 117 and 118:

    1 Figure 3-3: 2015 U.S. Energy Cons

  • Page 119 and 120:

    1 2 Figure 3-6: Annual Deviations f

  • Page 121 and 122:

    U.S. Territories a 28.0 50.1 41.7 4

  • Page 123 and 124:

    Fuel Oil 27.2 45.6 36.7 37.6 37.1 3

  • Page 125 and 126:

    1 Figure 3-9: Electricity Generatio

  • Page 127 and 128:

    1 Figure 3-11: Industrial Productio

  • Page 129 and 130:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 131 and 132:

    1 Figure 3-13: Sales of New Passeng

  • Page 133 and 134:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 135 and 136:

    Medium- and Heavy-Duty 0.5 0.9 0.7

  • Page 137 and 138:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 139 and 140:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 141 and 142:

    1 2 Figure 3-15: U.S. Energy Consum

  • Page 143 and 144:

    Coal b 1,653.7 1,596.3 1,809.1 -3%

  • Page 145 and 146:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 147 and 148:

    1 2 Table 3-17: Approach 2 Quantita

  • Page 149 and 150:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 151 and 152:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 153 and 154:

    1 Table 3-20: Adjusted Consumption

  • Page 155 and 156:

    1 2 3 4 percent above the 2014 emis

  • Page 157 and 158:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 159 and 160:

    Gas/Waste Product 1990 2005 2011 20

  • Page 161 and 162:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 waste

  • Page 163 and 164:

    1 2 3 4 5 due to the higher CH 4 co

  • Page 165 and 166:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 167 and 168:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 169 and 170:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 171 and 172:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 173 and 174:

    Activity 1990 2005 2011 2012 2013 2

  • Page 175 and 176:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 177 and 178:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 approach over the t

  • Page 179 and 180:

    Previous Estimated Emissions from S

  • Page 181 and 182:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 183 and 184:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 185 and 186:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 187 and 188:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 189 and 190:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 191 and 192:

    Emissions (w/o Plunger) (MT) 372,28

  • Page 193 and 194:

    Reciprocating Compressors 64,413 64

  • Page 195 and 196:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 197 and 198:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 199 and 200:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 201 and 202:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 203 and 204:

    1 Table 3-72: Woody Biomass Consump

  • Page 205 and 206:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 207 and 208:

    CO2 206.8 189.9 172.9 169.6 171.5 1

  • Page 209 and 210:

    SF6 1 1 + + + + + Electrical Transm

  • Page 211 and 212:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 213 and 214:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 215 and 216:

    2012 13.8 13,785 2013 14.0 14,028 2

  • Page 217 and 218:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 219 and 220:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 221 and 222:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 223 and 224:

    1 2 3 MMT CO 2 Eq. (10,828 kt) (see

  • Page 225 and 226:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 consumed

  • Page 227 and 228:

    1 Table 4-19: CO2 Emissions from Am

  • Page 229 and 230:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 231 and 232:

    1 Table 4-24: Urea Production, Urea

  • Page 233 and 234:

    2012 10.5 35 2013 10.7 36 2014 10.9

  • Page 235 and 236:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 237 and 238:

    2015 4.3 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

  • Page 239 and 240:

    1 2 Table 4-31: Approach 2 Quantita

  • Page 241 and 242:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Production data f

  • Page 243 and 244:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 245 and 246:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 247 and 248:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The activity data

  • Page 249 and 250:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 251 and 252:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 253 and 254:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 The results of th

  • Page 255 and 256:

    2013 4.1 0.3 2014 5.0 0.3 1 2 3 4 5

  • Page 257 and 258:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 discussion of CO 2

  • Page 259 and 260:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 261 and 262:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 263 and 264:

    1 2 Table 4-56: Approach 2 Quantita

  • Page 265 and 266:

    1 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1

  • Page 267 and 268:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 (i.e.

  • Page 269 and 270:

    1 Table 4-67: Material Carbon Conte

  • Page 271 and 272:

    1 2 Table 4-70: Production and Cons

  • Page 273 and 274:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 275 and 276:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 277 and 278:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 279 and 280:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 281 and 282:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 283 and 284:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 285 and 286:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 287 and 288:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 289 and 290:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 291 and 292:

    1 Table 4-89: CO2 Emissions from Zi

  • Page 293 and 294:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 295 and 296:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 297 and 298:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 299 and 300:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 301 and 302:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 303 and 304:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 305 and 306:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 4.23 Substi

  • Page 307 and 308:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 309 and 310:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 311 and 312:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 313 and 314:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 315 and 316:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 317 and 318:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 319 and 320:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 321 and 322:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 323 and 324:

    Graphic Arts + 0 0 0 0 0 0 Non-Indu

  • Page 325 and 326:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 5. Agriculture Ag

  • Page 327 and 328:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 329 and 330:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 331 and 332:

    Note that the relative uncertainty

  • Page 333 and 334:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 335 and 336:

    2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1

  • Page 337 and 338:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 339 and 340:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 341 and 342:

    + Does not exceed 0.05 MMT CO2 Eq.

  • Page 343 and 344:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 345 and 346:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 subsequently conv

  • Page 347 and 348:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Agricultural soil

  • Page 349 and 350:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 low in many parts

  • Page 351 and 352:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 353 and 354:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 355 and 356:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 357 and 358:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 methodology te

  • Page 359 and 360:

    1 Table 5-21: Emissions from Liming

  • Page 361 and 362:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 363 and 364:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 365 and 366:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 367 and 368:

    1 2 Table 5-32: Key Assumptions for

  • Page 369 and 370:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 371 and 372:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 373 and 374:

    Land Converted to Forest Land (92.0

  • Page 375 and 376:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 from LUL

  • Page 377 and 378:

    1 2 Table 6-7: Land Use and Land-Us

  • Page 379 and 380:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 381 and 382:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 383 and 384:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 385 and 386:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 387 and 388:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 389 and 390:

    1 2 Harvested wood products (HWP)

  • Page 391 and 392:

    1 2 Figure 6-2: Changes in Forest A

  • Page 393 and 394:

    Note: Forest C stocks do not includ

  • Page 395 and 396:

    1 2 3 4 in Table 6-13 include all m

  • Page 397 and 398:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 399 and 400:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 401 and 402:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 403 and 404:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 405 and 406:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 407 and 408:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 409 and 410:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 411 and 412:

    1 2 3 Total Aboveground Biomass Flu

  • Page 413 and 414:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Ap

  • Page 415 and 416:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 417 and 418:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 419 and 420:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 421 and 422:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 423 and 424:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 425 and 426:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 C) from drainage and cu

  • Page 427 and 428:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 429 and 430:

    Belowground Live Biomass 2.3 2.0 2.

  • Page 431 and 432:

    1 2 Table 6-34: Net CO2 Flux from S

  • Page 433 and 434:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 435 and 436:

    1 2 3 4 5 above the 2015 stock chan

  • Page 437 and 438:

    CH4 0.1 0.3 0.8 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.4 N2O

  • Page 439 and 440:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 441 and 442:

    Other Lands Converted Grassland Min

  • Page 443 and 444: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Fo
  • Page 445 and 446: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 447 and 448: On-site 70 71 60 53 50 50 49 N2O (O
  • Page 449 and 450: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 451 and 452: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 453 and 454: 1 2 Table 6-51: Net CH4 Flux from V
  • Page 455 and 456: 1 2 3 Table 6-54: Approach 1 Quanti
  • Page 457 and 458: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 459 and 460: 1 2 3 4 result in cessation of emis
  • Page 461 and 462: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 463 and 464: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 465 and 466: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 467 and 468: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 469 and 470: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 471 and 472: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 473 and 474: New Mexico 70,608 52,250 12.0 0.263
  • Page 475 and 476: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 an
  • Page 477 and 478: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 479 and 480: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 481 and 482: C Storage Factor, Proportion of Ini
  • Page 483 and 484: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 there
  • Page 485 and 486: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 487 and 488: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 489 and 490: 1 Table 7-2: Emissions from Waste (
  • Page 491 and 492: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 493: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 497 and 498: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 499 and 500: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 501 and 502: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 503 and 504: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Table 7-6 pres
  • Page 505 and 506: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 507 and 508: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 509 and 510: 2013 321 10,536 2014 323 10,613 201
  • Page 511 and 512: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 %Plants a %Plants
  • Page 513 and 514: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 515 and 516: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 517 and 518: 1 2 Table 7-16: Approach 2 Quantita
  • Page 519 and 520: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 521 and 522: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 EF i = emissio
  • Page 523 and 524: a Miscellaneous includes TSDFs (Tre
  • Page 525 and 526: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 527 and 528: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 529 and 530: Enteric Fermentation NC NC + NC + (
  • Page 531 and 532: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 533 and 534: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 535 and 536: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 537 and 538: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 539 and 540: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 541 and 542: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 543 and 544: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
  • Page 545 and 546:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 547 and 548:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 549 and 550:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 551 and 552:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 553 and 554:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 555 and 556:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 557 and 558:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 559 and 560:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 561 and 562:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 563 and 564:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 565 and 566:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 567 and 568:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 569 and 570:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 571 and 572:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 573 and 574:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 575 and 576:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 577 and 578:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 579 and 580:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 581 and 582:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 583 and 584:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 585 and 586:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 587 and 588:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 589 and 590:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 591 and 592:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 593 and 594:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 595 and 596:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 597 and 598:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 599 and 600:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 601 and 602:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 603 and 604:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

  • Page 605 and 606:

    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Heavy-Duty Trucks
Quality manual for the greenhouse gas inventory. Version 1.
Building trust in greenhouse gas inventories from the United ... - WWF
D - Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions - Abengoa
2009 Corporate Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory - the Town of ...
Use of Models and Facility-Level Data in Greenhouse Gas Inventories
City of Richmond 2008 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
Expert Meeting on Uncertainty and Validation of Emission Inventories
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Agriculture and Forestry: A ...
Inventory of New York City Greenhouse Gas Emissions - NYC.gov
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Report - Cal Poly Pomona
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory for Chapel Hill Street Lights ...
County of San Diego 2005/2006 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
international maritime transport and greenhouse gas emissions - IMO
Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions - Center for Climate and ...
GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS - The Sallan Foundation
Aspen-Pitkin County Airport Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory ...
Transportation's Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Transportation - Center for ...
LEVErAging nATurAL gAS To rEduCE grEEnhouSE gAS EmiSSionS
Greenhouse Gas Emissions from U.S. Transportation - Center for ...
Greenhouse Gas Emission Policies Is There a Way ... - Castalia
Greenhouse Gas Inventory Municipal Government - City of Clearwater
Evaluation of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Septic ... - Geoflow
RE-CALCULATING THE GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ... - Inra
Greenhouse gas emissions from production of imported and ... - Inra
Transportation's Role in Reducing U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...