Upload
others
View
7
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
GHG Report for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Multimodal transport on the Magdalena River by Impala Terminals
Report Version 3, 23 August 2019
1.1. Relevance ............................................................................................................ 2 1.2. Completeness ...................................................................................................... 2 1.3. Consistency ......................................................................................................... 2 1.4. Accuracy ............................................................................................................. 2 1.5. Transparency ....................................................................................................... 3 1.6. Conservativeness................................................................................................. 3
2. Project Description ...................................................................................................... 3
2.1. Project title .......................................................................................................... 3 2.2. The project’s purpose(s) and objective(s) are: .................................................... 3 2.3. Expected lifetime of the project .......................................................................... 4 2.4. Type of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal project......................... 4 2.5. Legal land description of the project or the unique latitude and longitude ........ 4 2.6. Conditions prior to project initiation................................................................... 7 2.7. Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission reductions or removal enhancements .................................................................................................... 8 2.8. Project technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity ....... 8 2.9. Total GHG emission reductions and removal enhancements, stated in tonnes of CO2 e, likely to occur from the GHG project (GHG Assertion) ................................... 13 2.10. Identification of risks ........................................................................................ 14 2.11. Roles and Responsibilities ................................................................................ 14 2.12. Any information relevant for the eligibility of the GHG project under a GHG program and quantification of emission reductions ...................................................... 15 2.13. Summary environmental impact assessment .................................................... 21 2.14. Relevant outcomes from stakeholder consultations and mechanisms for on-going communication.................................................................................................... 22 2.15. Detailed chronological plan .............................................................................. 23
3. Selection and Justification of the Baseline Scenario ................................................. 24 4. Inventory of sources, sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) for the project and baseline ...... 27 5. Quantification and calculation of GHG emissions/removals .................................... 29 6. Monitoring the Data information management system and data controls ................. 34 7. Reporting and verification details .............................................................................. 47
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
2
1.1. Relevance
The selected methodology was the Clean Development Mechanism AM0090 - Modal
shift in transportation of cargo from road transportation to water or rail transportation.
Version 01.1.0, supplemented with the Clean Development Mechanism Tool03 – Tool to
calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion. Version 03.0.
and with the Clean Development Mechanism Tool05 – Baseline, Project and/or leakage
emissions from electricity consumption and monitoring of electricity generation. Version
03.0.
These fit the type of project and are in line with the requirements of Colombian
regulations. (See 2.12 Any information relevant for the eligibility of the GHG project
under a GHG program and quantification of emission reductions). As for the
applicability, see Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6.
Similarly, some deviations to the methodology and tools were presented, they can be seen
in more detail in section 7.3 Methodology deviations.
The sources for this project were selected according to the methodology applied and
deviations from it, and they are the CO2 emissions avoided by the decrease in fuel use for
the transportation of liquid cargo from the production fields to the ocean port and vice
versa. For further details, refer to section 4 Inventory of sources, sinks and Reservoirs
(SSRs) for the project and baseline.
1.2. Completeness
This document quantifies the different sources controlled and affected by project
activities. All sources of emissions identified by the methodology are considered and no
further relevant sources were identified. For further details, refer to section 4 Inventory of
sources, sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) for the project and baseline.
1.3. Consistency
The baseline definition demonstrates consistency with the baseline guidelines for sectoral
GHG mitigation projects in Resolution 1447 of 2018, Article 35. In addition, the
calculations are shown to be in line with the CDM methodology for energy efficiency
projects for cargo transport. It also demonstrated that the service level of the baseline is
equivalent to the service level of the project scenario.
1.4. Accuracy
The measurement methods used to obtain information related to fuel consumption,
transported cargo and distance traveled are traceable and reliable, reducing the
propagation of uncertainty in the calculation. Country-specific fuel emission factors were
applied, which also reduces uncertainty.
However, some of the variables used are not measured, but are estimated, which
increases the uncertainty of the data. This is offset by conservative assumptions that
avoid overestimating reductions.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
3
1.5. Transparency
An example calculation is provided in this report (See numeral 5.5). Further detail of the
calculations for the years in which the project has been operated is reported in an Excel
document available to verifiers, with the description of the sources of the emission
factors, the project operational data and the formulas used. In addition, the assumptions
applied are described.
The information contained in this report is of public status.
1.6. Conservativeness
In the calculations of the baseline and the project scenario, data, default factors and
assumptions are applied with a conservative attitude, for example, as to the performance
of transport vehicles on complementary routes, information was collected from different
sources in order to capture the variability associated with the different operating
conditions and a performance assumption was applied so it would not lead to
overestimating emission reduction.
2. Project Description
2.1. Project title
Multimodal transport on the Magdalena River by Impala Terminals
2.2. The project’s purpose(s) and objective(s) are:
Impala Terminals Barrancabermeja S.A. and Impala Terminals Colombia SAS ("Impala
Terminals") are two companies operating in Colombia, subsidiaries of the multinational
Trafigura. Impala Terminals' business is the transfer and transport of cargo, mainly from
the oil industry.
The purpose of the project developed by Impala Terminals is the implementation of a
single integral and efficient multimodal system that connects the inland industry with
ocean ports in a regular and reliable way and that drives the development of riverside
municipalities. In addition, the project aims to make transport more efficient, which
allows more cargo to be transported with lower fuel consumption, thus reducing
greenhouse gas emissions per unit of cargo transported.
The project involves transporting the liquid cargo by tanker trucks only from the wells to
the new river port terminal in Barrancabermeja, so that from this point it is transported on
the barges driven by tugboats along the Magdalena River to the ocean ports. As of
December 2017, 18 tugs and about 60 barges were in operation for the transport of liquid
cargo.
The project's emission reduction accreditation period provides for 10 years of operation
and a total reduction of 943,375 tCO2 is estimated in that period.
In addition to the benefits of GHG mitigation, the project has positive effects in a number
of areas, for example, contributes to the development of local industry, promotes the
formation of small and medium-sized enterprises, gives training to adults and, on the
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
4
subject of regional management, professionalizes jobs and has agreements with the
National Learning Service (SENA).
Impala seeks to verify the emission reductions of its project Multimodal transport on the
Magdalena River by Impala Terminals and to use the reductions to become carbon-
neutral against the national carbon tax. Any GHG emission reduction unit that applies to
the non-causation of the national carbon tax will not be used in another context as a
compensation for GHG emissions, which will be evidenced by proof that they are
previously cancelled within the certification program or source carbon standard.
2.3. Expected lifetime of the project
The total emission reduction accreditation period is 10 years, starting on June 19 of 2015
and ending on June 18 of 2025.
The total accreditation period of the project is less than the service life (20 years) of the
river equipment of Impala Terminals. The service life of the river terminal is 30 years,
evidenced by the port concession for usufruct of a public good.
2.4. Type of greenhouse gas emission reduction or removal project
The project pertains to sectoral scope 7 (Transport).
2.5. Legal land description of the project or the unique latitude and longitude
2.5.1. Project location
- Port terminal in Barrancabermeja, ITBSA on maps presented after coordinate tables.
Latitude Longitude
7,098653 -73,892951
- Port Society Puerto Bahia, Cartagena.
Latitude Longitude
10,286578 -75,52845
- River route: Magdalena River route from Barrancabermeja to Calamar and Canal del Dique route from Calamar to Cartagena.
- Extraction fields.
Origin Coordinates Origin Coordinates
Castilla 3.825833, -73.687222 Coyote 6.889451, -73.666725
Chacharo 4.409121, -72.96609 Cuerva 5.663120, -70.683960
Cohembi 0.349028, -76.493972 Curucucu 4.371697, -72.663406
Cpe-6 3.495378, -72.111866 Glauca 6.066469, -74.492128
Dorotea 5.452906, -71.026691 Iraca 3.595018, -73.663235
Llanos34 (caribayona) 4.498596, -72.752459 Itbb 7.100000, -73.891151
Moriche 4.920053, -72.017409 Jacamar 4.371388, -72.66250
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
5
Origin Coordinates Origin Coordinates
Vasconia 6.056676, -74.554962 Jacana 4.384020, -72.724213
Barrancabermeja 7.100000, -73.891151 Juglar 7.697402, -73.705278
Bullerengue 10.6367397, -74.939920 Llanos 58 3.886894, -72.642027
Corrales 5.805007, -72.865450 Los ángeles 8.080343, -73.581685
Platanillo 0.446259,-76.289844 Max 4.494457, -72.550224
Rubiales 3.786387, -71.453393 Mono araña 8.132602, -73.619489
Caramelo 8.333228, -73.672156 Paz de ariporo 5.880681, -71.893384
El difícil 9.916043, -74.11886 Pendare 3.736258, -71.860897
Fenix 7.508567, -73.380607 Pore 5.728208, -71.991893
La punta 4.813055, -72.08028 Potrillo 5.57667, -71.75129
Oso pardo 8.166004, -73.719161 Pozo bolívar 5.771134,-72.852522
Puerto umbría mirto 0.860203, -76.580530 Puertoasis 0.504902, -76.501082
Aguas blancas 6.835, -73.771944 Querubin 8.081769,-73.578859
Aguazul 5.170679, -72.550903 Quillacinga 0.261083, -76.546736
Akira 4.342604,-72.715315 Rionegro 7.267275, -73.151372
Atarraya 4.225277, -71.823055 Santana 0.592960, -76.568748
Begonia 5.78778,-71.38831 Tarotaro 4.446822, -72.610562
Bonga 9.5047, -75.069862 Tigana 4.491077, -72.714547
Cabuyaro 4.284443, -72.792399 Tilo 4.484681,-72.625993
Calona 4.531508, -72.614618 Tua 4.409323, -72.648725
Carmentea 4.575926,-72.615490 Villa garzón 1.028421, -76.617989
Carupana 5.575421, -71.749614 Yamu 5.648501,-71.737298
Chiricoca 4.492222,-72.664722 Zoe 7.8052528,-73.5912025
Chuira 8.171601, -73.544684 San martin 8.002488, -73.513075
Colon 7.700889, -73.733602
Maps of the location of the relevant places of the mitigation project are presented below.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
6
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
7
2.5.2. Ownership of the project
The new river port terminal and river fleet are owned by Impala Terminals. The cargo
generator is Trafigura, through Trafigura Energy Colombia S.A.S. and C.I. Trafigura
Petroleum Colombia S.A.S., who buy the liquid cargo products and transport them with
Impala's services, which in turn outsources the road transport services, so the road fleet of
tanker trucks is owned by third parties. The cargo generator is one of the project
participants.
2.6. Conditions prior to project initiation
The Colombian oil reserve is mainly made up of heavy crude oil, for which transportation
to ports on the Atlantic coast is a major challenge, since even the most efficient pipelines
have capacity restrictions to move such a viscous product. So, usually in the events of
high-demand in pipelines or contingencies, it is necessary to use tankers to evacuate
production and maintain the operation of the fields. This transport service has been
offered by Impala since the start of its operation in 2013. Until the first quarter of 2015,
heavy crude oil was transported from the extraction wells to the port of Barranquilla by
road in tankers trucks. On average, the routes were about 1,500 km long and took 5 days
on the one-way route. Trips were also made from Barranquilla to the wells for the
transport of naphtha, a product used as a crude oil solvent.
This transport by tanker trucks was outsourced, i.e. it was carried out by transport
companies that travel the routes established by Impala. Although at one time Impala also
had its own fleet, it did not operate as expected, so the operation was maintained with the
outsourced fleet. The average capacity of these tanker trucks is 210 barrels of crude oil
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
8
and 240 barrels of naphtha. One of the conditions of the operation is that the vehicles
could not be of models more than 10 years old.
As for the river operation, an average of 8 million barrels were transported by the river
annually between different transport companies prior to the entry of the project, but with
the start of Impala's operations the sector was boosted and this number was increased to
15 million barrels, of which Impala is responsible for transporting 44%.
2.7. Description of how the project will achieve GHG emission reductions or removal enhancements
The river route is on the order of 700 km length from Barrancabermeja to the port of
Cartagena and it takes 6 days; the route of the complementary routes, from the wells to
the port of Barrancabermeja is on the order of 750 km length and takes about 3 days. The
river route replaces about half the average distance of the land routes. While the time to
destination is longer, the load capacity is much higher in river transport, so a convoy
carries between 4 and 6 barges and each barge carries the equivalent of 33 tankers. This
allows to transport the same amount of cargo with lower fuel consumption.
In the following figures, the routes prior the project operation vs. the multimodal
transport route are schematically compared.
Figure 1 Diagram of the scenario prior to project
execution. Land routes in purple.
Figure 2 Diagram of the project scenario. Multimodal
route. Land routes in green. Note: This image
corresponds to a report prepared in 2014. In the final
design, the destination is Cartagena.
Prior to the multimodal operation, the destination of the land transport by tanker truck
was a seaport in Barranquilla. In the original design of the project, it had been envisaged
that the destination of the river transport also would be a seaport in Barranquilla, where
the mouth of the Magdalena River is located. To this end, the construction of a new
deepwater port in Barranquilla was contemplated; however, the shallow depth of the
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
9
access channel became an obstacle to the development of this port. So a capacity-use
contract was concluded with the Port Society of Puerto Bahia, Cartagena, a new seaport,
inaugurated in 2015, which is connected to the Magdalena River via the Canal del Dique,
which has a length of 115 km from Calamar to Puerto Bahia.
Figure 3 Canal del Dique. Adjusted from Catorce 6 Revista Ambiental.
2.8. Project technologies, products, services and the expected level of activity
2.8.1. Technologies implemented by the project
From March 24, 2015, the multimodal transport project began in its early stages, and
from February 1, 2018 the official commercial operation of the river port began.
The features of the river terminal built in Barrancabermeja on the Magdalena River are an
area of 500,000 m2, storage of 850 kbbl, 1,200 m of dock line and an annual capacity of
190,000 TEU (Twenty-foot Equivalent Unit, the load capacity of a 20-foot standardized
container).
Export, import and re-embarkation operations are carried out at the port through the
following transport operations: customs transit declarations, cabotage, multimodal
transport operations and combined transport. It is also suitable for liquid loading and dry
cargo operations.
The port concession has effect from 2014 to 2044, granted by the local environmental
authority, CORMAGDALENA.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
10
Figure 4 Port of Impala Terminals Barrancabermeja
This is the composition of the river fleet and its characteristics:
Equipment Amount Type
TRATANK CROATA 27 Barge
TRATANK ARGENTINA 22 Barge
MAGBIT 12 Barge
BIG PUSHER 10 Tugboat
SMALL PUSHER 6 Tugboat
GAS 3 Gas tanker
TRATANK ARGENTINA TRATANK CROATA MAGBIT
Gen
eral
cla
ssif
icat
ion
Hull Naval Steel Naval Steel Naval Steel
Length overall (m) 59,48 59,48 59,48
Beam Max (m) 16 16 16
Side depth (m) 3,66 3,65 4,6
Freeboard (m) 0,3 0,3 0,3
Useful tip (m) 2,71 2,69 3,4
Empty draft (m) 0,65 0,65 0,9
Empty Displ. (t) 572 570 624
Useful Displ. (t) 2503,6 2503 2450
Total Displ. (t) 3075,6 3073,2 3074
Ca
pa
citi
es
Conveyor (t) 2503,6 2503 2450
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
11
TRATANK ARGENTINA TRATANK CROATA MAGBIT
Towing (t) N/A 2503 2450
Cellars 5 4 4
Void space 10 10 10
Cottage 2 2 4
Small Pusher Large Pusher G
ener
al c
lass
ific
atio
n
Hull Naval Steel Naval Steel
Length overall (m) 29,5 33,7
Beam Max (m) 11,2 11,2
Side depth (m) 2,76 2,76
Freeboard (m) 0,81 0,3
Useful tip (m) 0,6 0,83
Empty draft (m) 1,35 1,63
Empty Displ. (t) 308,7 438,96
Useful Displ. (t) 193,87 310,2
Total Displ. (t) 502,57 749,16
Cap
acit
ies
Conveyor (t) 0,194 0,31
Towing (t) 10965 28755
Exploitation (t) 11158 29065
Number of propellants 2 3
Brand Propellants Caterpillar Caterpillar
Power (HP) 1700 3825
R.P.M 1800 1800
Rudder control Hidráulico Hidráulico
Height (m) 4,65 11,7
Staterooms 5 7
Cellars 3 3
Void space 14 6
Cottage 4 2
The crew of the tugboats consists of: Captain, Pilot, Helmsman, Petty Officer, Machinist,
Machine Assistant, Chef and three Sailors.
Tugs are fueled with liquid fuel stored on barges called MAGfuel. However, at the start
of the operation, they were fueled from tanker trucks.
The volume of cargo transported is variable and is expected to change according to
Impala's commercial operation and the oil sector activity, for example, the amount of
cargo carried is expected to rise, mainly because it is likely that crude oil production will
increase in 2018. Since 2017 Impala transports Fuel Oil to the coast, which also
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
12
contributes. In addition, since June 2018, the import of crude for refining began in
Colombia, which would increase the cargo transported on return trips.
The Port Society of Puerto Bahia is located in Cartagena, of which Trafigura is a
shareholder. Impala has a buoy inside the port where they have a platform that allows
mooring of the barges. The process of loading ships is jointly between Trafigura and the
Port.
The complementary routes shown schematically in Figure 2 are contracted with third
parties, using the command model, in which a contract is signed between the transporters
and Trafigura, but the one who defines the conditions of the operation is Impala. As
noted, complementary routes go only from the extraction fields and there are no
complementary routes at the destination.
For complementary routes, the vehicles used in the operation are two- and three-axle
tractor-trailers, mostly Kenworth brand. Taking a sample of 1109 vehicles used during
Impala's operation in July 2018, it is found that the fleet used corresponds to models
between 2007 and 2017, of which 67% of the fleet used corresponds to models from 2012
and 2013 years, as shown in the following table:
Model N° Tanker truck
2007 47
2008 89
2009 28
2010 30
2011 99
2012 542
2013 201
2014 34
2015 35
2016 2
2017 2
TOTAL 1109
The capacities of these vehicles range from 9,000 to 13,000 gallons, where most of the
units used are in the range of 11,000 to 12,000 gallons, i.e. between 260 to 285 barrels of
capacity.
Capacity (gal) N° Tanker truck
9000-10000 47
10000-11000 436
11000-12000 621
12000-13000 5
Total 1109
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
13
As for the classification according to the number of axles, there is a sample of 684 units
mobilized in the month of June 2018, of which 56% correspond to 3-axle tractor-trailers
and 44% of 2 axles, showing that both types of vehicles have an important stake in the
operation.
The expected level of activity for the years to come from the project is presented in
Figure 5.
Figure 5 Projection of volumes to be transported until 2023. Taken from the file “Proyección Volumenes Proyecto
Bonos.xlsx”
2.9. Total GHG emission reductions and removal enhancements, stated in tonnes of CO2 e, likely to occur from the GHG project (GHG Assertion)
The following table shows the estimated reductions, based on the 2015 to May 2018
operation and an estimate of each parameter (based on the activity projections to 2023
and the ratio of the parameter to the cargo of 2017), as shown in the following formula.
The information was used for 2017 only, because this is the year of commercial operation
in which the activity was already stabilized and the relationship between each parameter
and the transported cargo is expected to behave similarly.
𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟𝑦 =𝑃𝑎𝑟𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑒𝑟2017
𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑜2017∗ 𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑔𝑜𝑦
Table 1 Project emissions reductions
Year Estimated net GHG emission reductions or removals (tCO2)
19/06/2015-31/12/2015 1,351
2016 19,675
2017 45,340
-
5.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
2019 2020 2021 2022 2023
MB
bl
Transport projection
Crudo, Fuel oil Nafta, Light Crude
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
14
2018 46,758
2019 58,959
2020 72,190
2021 113,171
2022 154,753
2023 174,802
2024 174,802
01/01/2025-18/06/2025 81,574
Total 943,375
2.10. Identification of risks
The main risks of the operation are the conditions of navigability of the river, as there are
certain restrictions for the operation, such as radius of curvatures, depths and widths of
the channel that have led to stop the operation, causing routes that in optimal conditions
take 6 days, take up to 10 days. This risk would be mitigated by the project, which is the
responsibility of the national government, related to the river navigability that includes,
among others, the dredging of the river.
2.11. Roles and Responsibilities
Organization name Impala Terminals Group (Impala Terminals Colombia SAS y
Impala Terminals Barrancabermeja S.A.)
Role in the project Project Manager
Owner of the river fleet and river port infrastructure
Contact person Alexander Higuera
Title Chief Operating Officer
Address Carrera 55 No. 100 – 51 Piso 8, Barranquilla, Colombia
Telephone +57 5 3850537
Email [email protected]
Organization name Trafigura (Trafigura Energy Colombia S.A.S. y C.I. Trafigura
Petroleum Colombia S.A.S.)
Role in the project Cargo owner
Contact person Susana Dennis
Title Lawyer
Address Carrera 11 No. 82 – 01 Piso 7, Bogotá, Colombia
Telephone +57 1 7420910
Email [email protected]
Organization name CAIA Ingeniería SAS
Role in the project Document preparation, reduction assertion and review of the GHG
Report.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
15
Contact person Alexander Valencia Cruz /Jessica Wade-Murphy de Jiménez
Title Consultants
Address Calle 67 7-94 Of. 404, Bogotá, Colombia
Telephone +57 300 216 2406 / +57 310 782 7017
Email [email protected] / [email protected]
2.12. Any information relevant for the eligibility of the GHG project under a GHG program and quantification of emission reductions
Compliance with the requirements of the GHG CleanProjects Registry
The project complies with the requirements of the GHG CleanProjects Registry and
demonstrates compliance with ISO 14064-2, as described in sections 1.1 to 1.6 and
throughout this report. The validation and verification report that accompanies the current
report will demonstrate further the conformity of the project with the requirements of the
GHG CleanProjects registry.
Context of the mitigation project
The Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) of Colombia, presented in 2015,
envisages a unilateral and unconditional goal of mitigation of 20% of GHG emissions
from the business-as-usual (BAU) scenario in 2030. The goal was defined against the
BAU scenario that was projected based on the national GHG Inventory of 2010, applying
economic and other assumptions. In this way, the year 2010 was defined as the "baseline
year" of the country, therefore, any activity that was implemented in previous years and
reduced emissions, is already embodied in the baseline and cannot be considered as
"mitigation" action for verification. This situation is confirmed in decree 926 of 2017,
Chapter 2, article 2.2.11.2.1, paragraph 1, "Only reductions of GHG emissions and
removals generated from 1 January 2010 may be submitted.".
Measures by sector have been prioritized from the Ministry of Environment and
Sustainable Development to contribute to the national commitment made in the NDC.
Among the goals defined for the Ministry of Transport is the "Navigability of the
Magdalena and the Intermodal Strategic Plan". In this line is the Plan of Action 2018-
2020, of CORMAGDALENA (Regional Autonomous Corporation of the Great River of
Magdalena), which contemplates the Strategic Navigation Plan, which aims to recover
the navigability of the Magdalena River up to 908 km upstream responding to the
country's need to establish intermodality, as set out in Resolution 0000164 of 5 February
2015 of the Ministry of Transport. In this sense, this project is aligned with national
priorities for mitigation in the transport sector.
Resolution 1447 of 2018 of the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development
(MADS) also defines the additionality criteria for sectoral GHG mitigation projects in
article 37. Particularly:
Table 2 Compliance Analysis: Requirements of resolution 1447 of 2018
Criterion of 2018 resolution 1447 article 37 Project Compliance
GHG emissions reductions or removals are Section 3 Selection and
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
16
Criterion of 2018 resolution 1447 article 37 Project Compliance
considered additional when the head of the
sectoral mitigation project demonstrates that
they would not have occurred in the absence of
the GHG Mitigation initiative and which
generate a net benefit to the atmosphere with
respect to their baseline.
Justification of the Baseline
Scenario presents the choice and
justification of baseline, which is
different from the activity of the
initiative, and section
5Quantification and calculation of
GHG emissions/removals
evidences the net benefit to the
atmosphere generated compared to
the baseline.
Likewise, GHG removals are considered to be
additional when they result from the
implementation of forestry GHG removal
activities, which are developed in areas other
than natural forest and that demonstrate the
positive net change of carbon deposits in the
area of development of the activity and other
criteria of additionality defined by the Ministry
of Environment and Sustainable development.
Not applicable
Reductions in emissions or removals of GHG
resulting from compensation activities of the
biotic component resulting from the impacts of
projects, works or activities within the
framework of environmental licenses,
concessions, applications for single-use permits
of forest resources for land use change, and the
application for definitive extractions of national
and regional forest reserves, are not considered
additional.
Not applicable
Emissions reductions or GHG removals are not
considered to be additional when they are the
product of preservation and restoration activities
in strategic areas and ecosystems that access
payments for environmental services of GHG
reduction and capture according to what is
established in chapter 8 of title 9 of Part 2 of
Book 2 of Decree 1076 of 2015.
Not applicable
The reductions or removals of GHG generated
from the date of completion of the legal terms of
the compensations referred to in this article, or
the termination of payments for environmental
services of GHG reduction and capture, shall be
deemed to be additional.
Not applicable
The owners of sectoral GHG mitigation projects
must apply in all their actions and procedures the
The GHG CleanProjects Registry
certification program establishes
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
17
Criterion of 2018 resolution 1447 article 37 Project Compliance
additionality criteria set out in this article, in
complement to the additionality criteria
established by the GHG certification program or
carbon standard to which it is subscribed.
the use of the analysis of
alternatives and barriers to justify
the selection of the baseline
scenario. In section 3 Selection and
Justification of the Baseline
Scenario, we present the
identification and selection of
baseline, meeting the criteria
established by the GHG
certification program.
Article 221 of Law 1819 of 2016 established the national carbon tax which began validity
from 1 January 2017. According to its regulation in Sole Statutory Tax Decree 1625 of
2016, the tax is charged to the purchaser of fuel in proportion to its equivalence in tonnes
of CO2e generated from combustion. The rate is fixed per tonne of CO2e according to
the carbon content of the fossil fuel.
Since the dispatch of Decree 926 of 2017, a non-causation procedure for the national
carbon tax exists. It is possible to avoid the payment of the tax by means of the
neutralization of the GHG emissions associated with the use of the fuel, by verified GHG
emissions reductions. To avoid the payment of the tax, the purchaser of the fuel must
inter alia show the declaration of verification of the emissions reductions, issued by a
verification body accredited under the standard ISO 14065, equivalent to the quantity of
fuel in question.
The requirements described by the decree for the characteristics of the emission
reductions that are valid for the non-causation of the tax, include:
Table 3 Compliance Analysis: Requirements of decree 926 of 2017
Requirement of decree 926 of 2017 Project Compliance
The mitigation initiative must be
developed in the national territory.
The project takes place in the national
territory: Route of the Magdalena River,
between Barrancabermeja, Santander and
Calamar, and by Canal del Dique between
Calamar and Cartagena, Bolívar.
The initiative must be formulated and
implemented through a certification
program or carbon standard that has a
public registration platform.
The project is formulated through the
GHG CleanProjects Registry certification
program, which has a public registry.
Have been implemented following a
methodology, either from a certification
program or carbon standard, or from the
clean development mechanism.
The project is implemented from a clean
development mechanism methodology
(details below).
Do not come from activities that are
developed by the mandate of an
The project is a voluntary activity.
https://www.csaregistries.ca/cleanprojects/masterprojects_e.cfm
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
18
environmental authority.
Be certified by the certification program
or carbon standard and duly cancelled
within it.
The project will request certification by
GHG CleanProjects Registry and cancel
any reduction unit prior to use for non-
causation of the national carbon tax.
Impala Terminals is not subject to GHG emissions trading. There are no mandatory limits
or ceilings on their emissions level, either.
As for the methodology selected, AM0090 – Modal shift in transportation of cargo from
road transportation to water or rail transportation. Version 0.1.1.0, the following table
of applicability is presented:
Table 4 Applicability Analysis AM0090 – Modal shift in transportation of cargo from road transportation to water or
rail transportation. Version 0.1.1.0
Applicability
This methodology is applicable to project activities
that result in modal shift in transportation of a
specific cargo (excluding passengers) from road
transportation using trucks to water transportation
using barges or ships or rail transportation.
Achieved, the project consists
of the operation of a
multimodal liquid cargo
transportation system
involving a significant section
of barge transport along the
Magdalena River and the
Canal del Dique.
The methodology is applicable under the following
conditions:
a) The owner of the cargo is one of the project participants. If the entity investing in the CDM
project activity is not the owner of the cargo, it
should also be a project participant;
b) The project participants should have made at least one of the below listed new investments:
o Direct investment in new infrastructure, including facilities (new ports, handling
areas) and/or equipment (ships, barges, etc.)
for water transportation;
o Direct investment in new infrastructure, including facilities (new ports, handling
areas, railway track) and/or equipment
(trains, wagons, etc) for rail transportation;
o Refurbishment/replacement of existing water and rail transportation infrastructure
or equipment, with transport capacity
expansion.
a. Achieved, Trafigura is the cargo generator and
Impala, who is the project
owner and the cargo
transporter, is part of the
Trafigura group. Both
Impala and Trafigura
participate in the project.
b. Achieved, direct investment was made in
the construction of the
new river port and in the
purchase of barges and
tugboats.
The transport infrastructure/equipment in which
these new investments are made is at least 50%
Achieved, Impala Terminals
is a private port for public
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
19
used by the cargo transported under the project
activity, i.e. the cargo transported under the project
activity constitutes at least 50% of the cargo
transported annually by/with this
infrastructure/equipment;
use. However, there is
currently no significant
activity of other transport
companies in the port. While
the main transport is the
liquid cargo, a smaller
volume of dry cargo,
corresponding to 2.1% of the
total cargo mobilized by river
transport between 2016 and
2017, has also been
transported.
With respect to fuels, the following conditions
apply:
• In the case of gaseous fossil fuels, the methodology is applicable if it can be
demonstrated that equal or more gaseous fossil
fuels are used in the baseline scenario than in
the project activity. The methodology is not
applicable in its current form if more gaseous
fossil fuels are used in the project activity
compared to the baseline scenario;
• In the case of biofuels, the methodology is applicable if it can be demonstrated that equal
or more biofuels are used in the baseline
scenario than in the project activity. The
methodology is not applicable in its current
form if more biofuels are used in the project
activity compared to the baseline scenario.
Achieved, more biofuel is
used in the baseline than in
the project operation because
tanker trucks use a
commercial blended diesel
with 10% biodiesel, while
tugs use marine diesel
without biodiesel content.
The project transportation mode is defined in the
CDM-PDD at the validation of the project activity
and no change of transportation mode is allowed
thereafter;
Achieved, the project that is
presented corresponds only to
the change from transport by
tanker trucks to multimodal
transport by the river
The cargo is transported from the same origin (point
A) to the same destination (point B) throughout the
whole crediting period. These two points and
transportation routes are defined in the CDM-PDD
at the validation of the project activity and are fixed
along the crediting period;
Achieved, the river transport
originates in Barrancabermeja
and its destination is
Cartagena.
Under the project activity, the route from origin to
destination may combine the different
transportation modes: Trucks, ships, barges and/or
rail but a part of the route must consist of either
ships, barges or rail;
Achieved, the project consists
of multimodal transport,
combining transport by tanker
trucks and barges.
Both in the baseline and project activity, only one Achieved, the product
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
20
type of cargo, owned by the project participants, is
transported and no mix of cargo is permitted (this
condition does not apply to the return trip cargo).
The cargo type of the project activity is defined in
the CDM-PDD at the validation of the project
activity and is fixed along the crediting period;
transported corresponds to
liquid petroleum products
(e.g. heavy crude, Fuel Oil,
Nafta).
The railway infrastructure or waterway has enough
capacity to accommodate new transportation
demand under the project activity and will not
displace other existing transportation demand due to
limited capacity of infrastructure.
Achieved, the entry into
operation of the project does
not limit the capabilities for
the operation of other
transport offers. See section
2.6.
Table 5 Applicability analysis: Tool03 – Tool to calculate project or leakage CO2 emissions from fossil fuel
combustion. Version 03.0.
Scope and applicability
This tool provides procedures to calculate project
and/or leakage CO2 emissions from the combustion
of fossil fuels. It can be used in cases where CO2
emissions from fossil fuel combustion are
calculated based on the quantity of fuel combusted
and its properties. Methodologies using this tool
should specify to which combustion process j this
tool is being applied.
Achieved; the project
calculates project emissions
according to the amount of
fuel used and its properties.
Table 6 Applicability análisis: Tool05 – Tool to calculate baseline, project and/or leakage emissions from electricity
consumption and monitoring of electricity generation. Version 03.0
Applicability
If emissions are calculated for electricity
consumption, the tool is only applicable if one out
of the following three scenarios applies to the
sources of electricity consumption:
- Scenario A: Electricity consumption from the grid. The electricity is purchased from the grid
only, and either no captive power plant(s) is/are
installed at the site of electricity consumption
or, if any captive power plant exists on site, it is
either not operating or it is not physically able
to provide electricity to the electricity
consumer;
- Scenario B: Electricity consumption from (an) off-grid fossil fuel fired captive power plant(s).
One or more fossil fuel fired captive power
plants are installed at the site of the electricity
Achieved, the project
contemplates scenario A, as
the electricity consumed in
the port corresponds to
power delivered by the grid.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
21
consumer and supply the consumer with
electricity. The captive power plant(s) is/are not
connected to the electricity grid; or
- Scenario C: Electricity consumption from the grid and (a) fossil fuel fired captive power
plant(s). One or more fossil fuel fired captive
power plants operate at the site of the electricity
consumer. The captive power plant(s) can
provide electricity to the electricity consumer.
The captive power plant(s) is/are also
connected to the electricity grid. Hence, the
electricity consumer can be provided with
electricity from the captive power plant(s) and
the grid.
This tool can be referred to in methodologies to
provide procedures to monitor amount of electricity
generated in the project scenario, only if one out of
the following three project scenarios applies to the
recipient of the electricity generated:
- Scenario I: Electricity is supplied to the grid;
- Scenario II: Electricity is supplied to
consumers/electricity consuming facilities; or
- Scenario III: Electricity is supplied to the grid and
consumers/electricity consuming facilities.
Not applicable, Tool05 is
applied to calculate
emissions corresponding to
energy consumed from the
grid.
This tool is not applicable in cases where captive
renewable power generation technologies are
installed to provide electricity in the project
activity, in the baseline scenario or to sources of
leakage. The tool only accounts for CO2 emissions.
Not applicable
2.13. Summary environmental impact assessment
The environmental permits in force and relevant to the operation of the river port consist
of:
• Environmental License and Environmental Management Plan, approved by Resolution 690 of 2013 of the Regional Autonomous Corporation of Santander
(CAS).
This is the summary of the impacts and measures identified in the Environmental
Management Plan requested by the Colombian environmental authorities.
Table 7 Summary of the results of the environmental impact assessment and the measures designed for each.
Impact Measure
Soil loss and alteration Storage of organic soil removed for use in the formation
of slopes.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
22
Generation of instability and
erosion.
Training on appropriate collection and management of
surface and sub-surface water and confinement of
materials.
Generation of sterile material
and debris, alteration of water
quality, alteration of air quality
and noise, visual involvement
of the landscape.
Debris will be transported to temporary collection sites,
well located and protected, for final disposal in a place
authorized by the environmental authority.
Alteration of the
physicochemical
characteristics of water,
alteration of aquatic
ecosystems.
Treatment plant for the management of domestic
wastewater from offices.
Fat trap and API separator for water used for washing
vehicles and barges and runoff of the liquid terminal.
Sedimentation tanks for the runoff waters of the coal
terminal.
Alteration of air quality,
alteration of sound pressure
levels.
Wind barrier, water spray on the piles and carbon
conveyor belts.
Proper maintenance to equipment, ban of whistle and
sirens, location of the loudest equipment away from
human settlements.
Generation of domestic and
hazardous solid waste,
pollution of water quality and
air quality, impact of
perception and enjoyment of
the landscape and soil
pollution.
Management of domestic solid waste: Separation at the
source, gathering and collection of waste systems for
incineration, disposal in landfill or exploitation.
Hazardous waste will be handled by an authorized
external manager.
Special waste will also be taken to landfill or
incineration.
Alteration of hydrobiological
communities and alteration of
the physicochemical quality of
water.
Separation of sediments removed during dredging is
made. Reduction of movement of cables or anchors to
avoid resuspension of sediments. Environmental
education and community information actions.
Loss of plant coverage and
terrestrial habitat, alteration of
terrestrial fauna, alteration of
hydrobiological communities.
Specific to the construction process.
- Delimitation of the work fronts - Environmental awareness workshops - Rescue of plant material and mulch - Management of plant material during intervention - Compensation: Purchase of land for conservation by
the environmental authority.
Conservation of endangered
plant and fauna species.
Transfer of vulnerable plant species and planting of new
individuals.
Continuous study of vulnerable animal populations.
2.14. Relevant outcomes from stakeholder consultations and mechanisms for on-going communication.
In the phase before operation, Impala conducted a broad consultation and reporting
process to stakeholders. From March 2013, the process of socializing the project began
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
23
with four surrounding communities, the municipal government, the national government
and the fishing guilds. Then, six-monthly meetings regarding construction progress were
held. In 2018, the closing meeting of the construction stage was held.
Consultation with stakeholders in surrounding communities prior to the operation raised
an interest in employment opportunities. A policy for the recruitment of labour was
implemented, through which percentages of participation of local labour, both unskilled
and skilled, were established. The percentages were met and the goals were even
exceeded.
In addition, after demonstrations by some members of surrounding communities, in
October 2014 two commitments were established with the surrounding communities. The
first was that Impala would continue with voluntary social interventions, and the second
was that Impala established priority tendering processes for local entrepreneurs and that it
would ensure the recruitment of local labour by its contractors. To meet these
commitments, Impala has voluntarily conducted training and empowerment of local
entrepreneurs to bring them to a better standard of service and also internal management
with the procurement area to train about benefits of hiring locally.
In terms of mechanisms for permanent communication with stakeholders, there are four
mechanisms for permanent communication:
• Citizen Service Point (PAC) – office in Barrancabermeja.
• To-use care phone ("01800041769")
• Email, [email protected]
• "Request, Complaint, Claim, Suggestion" (PQRS) system, which is administered from the PAC.
Further ongoing communication actions have been undertaken with communities and
other stakeholders, such as river and road safety campaigns.
2.15. Detailed chronological plan
Table 8 Relevant project activities
Date Activity Evidence
November
2013
Construction of the terminal begins in
Barrancabermeja First intervention report.
2014
ERM assessment of the GHG
emission reduction potential of
Impala Terminals multimodal
transport in Colombia
Brochure “Multimodalismo-
Reduciendo las Emisiones de
Carbono en Colombia”
24 March 2015
Early-stage operation of the terminal
in Barrancabermeja begins, with river
transport to Barranquilla
Letter of notification to
CORMAGDALENA
19 June 2015 First river trip with Puerto Bahia
origin and start of mitigation activity
Certificate of inspection
house
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
24
1 April 2017
Starts the operation in the commercial
phase of the terminal in
Barrancabermeja.
Logs on TMS1 and TMS2 of
loading and unloading from
ITBB.
June 2017 Fuel Oil transport start Transportation guide
1 February
2018
Starts the full operation of the
terminal in Barrancabermeja
Letter of notification to
CORMAGDALENA
2018
Consulting is contracted to formulate
the project to certify the reduction of
GHG achieved
Email from Susana Dennis
3. Selection and Justification of the Baseline Scenario
Due to Colombia's national circumstances in relation to its mitigation target and national
baseline (see section 2.12) the baseline is considered to be the practices prior to the
project operation.
However, since the destination of the project operation is the port in Cartagena and not in
Barranquilla, as was the case in the ground operation in the years prior to the project, the
baseline was defined based on the information of the trips made by tanker truck to
Barranquilla (number of trips and volumes transported), but each trip was assigned a
distance in km according to its respective origin with destination Cartagena.
In the operation before the project, the transport of liquid petroleum products was done
by tanker trucks. Crude oil was the liquid petroleum product most transported. Fuel Oil is
also transported in the project. Even though this service was not previously provided by
Impala, it is important to highlight the incidence of several factors:
a) Crude oil production, and consequently its transportation, showed sharp fluctuations in the first years of operation of the project, due to international price variability,
which prompted Impala to look for other liquid petroleum products for transport.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
25
Figure 6 Historic crude oil production in Colombia.1 Thousands of barrels per calendar day (KBDC)
b) A process was opened to contract the transport of Fuel Oil by Ecopetrol. Even if the multi-modal transport project had not existed, Impala would also have made an offer
in the process, offering transportation by tanker trucks.
As a baseline scenario, transport through the pipeline system is ruled out. Before the port
operation, transport was carried out by tanker trucks, because pipeline use is restricted to
the transport of products whose API is between 18 and 50 for most of the country
pipelines2. In addition, according to the magazine Energía 16, in its article of February
27, 2018, Oil infrastructure and industry in Colombia, business competition for access to
pipelines is growing, as the current infrastructure is not sufficient to cope with the recent
increase in production.
Therefore, the alternative would be the construction of a new pipeline, however, this
represents a big economic investment and would not solve the technical barriers to the
transport of products whose API is not between 18 and 50.
Similarly, multimodal transport with barges along a section of the Magdalena River also
faces barriers because there was a need to build a new river port and acquire the right
river fleet to achieve large-scale transport, which represents a large economic investment.
The operation presents challenges due to the low navigability of the Magdalena River,
which does not allow the river transport to operate at full capacity. In addition, despite
the Strategic Navigation Plan, which aims to restore the navigability of the Magdalena
River, there is uncertainty about the date of implementation of the plan. It was also
necessary to overcome the perception that Barrancabermeja is not a logistics city, to be
considered as a river transport port.
None of the above barriers affect the operation with tanker trucks transportation. The
analysis of the barriers of alternatives to the mitigation project is presented below.
1 Adapted from
http://www.upme.gov.co/generadorconsultas/Consulta_Series.aspx?idModulo=3&tipoSerie=138 2 Pipeline Conveyor Manual. Ecopetrol. (2014) https://www.ecopetrol.com.co/documentos/Manual-
Transportador-Oleoductos-Ecopetrol.pdf
750
800
850
900
950
1,000
1,050
Jan-14 Jun-14 Nov-14 Apr-15 Oct-15 Mar-16 Aug-16 Jan-17 Jul-17
KB
DC
Historic crude production
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
26
Table 9 Analysis of barriers to project alternatives
Alternative Economic
Barrier
Operational
Barrier /
Maintenance
Sociocultural
barrier
Environmental
Barrier
Barrier
Present
and future
conditions
Transport by
tanker trucks
(previous
practice)
Not
applicable Not applicable
Not
applicable Not applicable
Not
applicable
Pipeline
transport Exists
(in case of
new
pipeline)
Exists Not
applicable Exists
Not
applicable
Multimodal
transport along
the Magdalena
River
Exists Exists Exists Exists Exists
The additionality of the project is evident from the table above. Also, following the
AM0090 and in accordance with the above, the baseline scenario is selected as the M1:
Road transportation.
Consistency with Resolution 1447 of 2018, article 35
Article 35 of the resolution states that the baseline must be established according to the
reference scenario published by the MADS or approved by the Intersectoral Commission
of Climate Change. However, no such relevant reference scenario has been established.
The next option is to define the baseline pursuant to the methods of the national GHG
inventory in case there is information available at the higher methodological level
according to IPCC guidelines. For the inventory category regarding this project emission
sources, 1A3b, the Tier 2 methodologies for CO2 were applied and the source of
information is the FECOC, a database elaborated by the UPME and MADS. However,
Tier 3 methods are not applied.
In this regard, the Project's baseline should be "developed with the information available
to it ensuring compliance with the principles of the MRV System of mitigation actions,
so that the project baseline does not lead to an overestimation of the mitigation results
with respect to national information." In this sense, the baseline is determined according
to the specific information available taking into account the fuel consumption of the
vehicles for equivalent transport in the baseline scenario and it is considered that the
result does not lead to an overestimation of project mitigation results.
Equivalence in the service level
From the perspective of the liquid petroleum producer, the level of service for transport is
equal to or better in multimodal transport with a segment by river, versus tanker trucks
transport. Some of the advantages and improvements that are obtained in the service
thanks to multimodal transport are:
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
27
- Increased efficiency in evacuation by tanker trucks in the oilfields, using fewer vehicles transiting between the production field to the point of unloading and return.
This helps to have a better availability of vehicles for the evacuation of the product,
avoiding risks that affect the production of the field.
- Flexibility for producers when handling production peaks or variations in crude oil chemical conditions, as, given the high storage capacity of the Impala Terminal and
its technological level, they would not need to look for alternative unloaders,
incurring additional costs.
- Decrease in the use of solvent, avoiding the cost of dilution, since the Impala terminal receives more viscous crudes than the pipelines.
- Temporary storage as an alternative to manage production, according to customer requirements.
- Cargo consolidation on the barge, allowing partial delivery of higher volume of product. To exemplify this point, the convoy of 6 barges can carry between 42 and 60
Kbbls (depending on the levels of the river, related to the time of year), equivalent to
200-286 vehicles.
4. Inventory of sources, sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) 3 for the project and baseline
The scope of the project is the river port terminal in Barrancabermeja, all trips made on
barges transporting liquid petroleum products and road travel by complementary routes.
Table 10 Emissions sources within the scope of the project
Source Gas Included? Justification/Explanation
Bas
elin
e
Fuel consumption for cargo
transportation
CO2 Yes Main emission source
CH4 No Excluded for simplification. This is
conservative
N2O No Excluded for simplification. This is
conservative
Pro
ject
Fuel and/or electricity
consumption
for cargo transportation
CO2 Yes Main emission source
CH4 No Excluded for simplification.
N2O No Excluded for simplification.
Table 11 Controlled, affected and related emission sources within the Project boundary
3 Definitions are extracted from the ISO 14064-2 standard:
Controlled greenhouse gas source, sink or reservoir: GHG source, sink or reservoir whose operation is under the direction and influence of the greenhouse gas project proponent through financial, policy, management or other instruments
Related greenhouse gas source, sink or reservoir: GHG source, sink or reservoir that has material or energy flows into, out of, or within the project
Affected greenhouse gas source, sink or reservoir: GHG source, sink or reservoir influenced by a project activity, through changes in market demand or supply for associated products or services, or through physical displacement
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
28
Source Gas
How the GHG SSR change from the baseline
scenario to the project?
Controlled
Fuel from the river
mode of
transporting cargo CO2
With the execution of the project, more
efficient transport is made, resulting in a lower
fuel consumption to mobilize the same amount
of cargo between the same origin and
destination. Emissions are generated due to
river transport.
Electricity
consumed at the
port CO2
With the execution of the project, a new
electricity consumption of the grid is generated
by the permanent operation of the port facilities
in Barrancabermeja.
Fuel consumption
at ITBB CO2
With the execution of the project a new fuel
consumption is generated for the permanent
operation of the port facilities in
Barrancabermeja.
Affected
Fuel from the
ground transport
mode of
transporting the
cargo
CO2
With the implementation of the project, a modal
change is made to a more efficient way of
transport, resulting in lower fuel consumptions
of the road transportation offered by contracted
operators.
Related Not relevant.
N/A There are no related sources that are relevant to
the development of the project.
These are the flowcharts for the baseline scenario and the project scenario.
Figure 7 Baseline flowchart
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
29
Figure 8 Project flowchart
5. Quantification and calculation of GHG emissions/removals
5.1. Baseline emissions calculation
Baseline emissions are generated according to equation 2 of the AM0090 methodology.
𝐵𝐸𝑦 = 𝑇𝑦 ∗ 𝐴𝐷 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐵𝐿 ∗ 10−6
Where:
𝑇𝑦 = Amount of cargo transported by the project transportation mode in year y (tonne)
𝐴𝐷 = Distance of the baseline trip route (km) 𝐸𝐹𝐵𝐿 = Baseline emission factor for transportation of cargo (g CO2/ tonne.km)
To determine the emission factor, it is determined that the type of cargo transported is
liquid petroleum products and would fall into the category Solid mineral fuels and
petroleum products in Table 2 of the AM0090, from which the default factor CO2/
ton.km is taken.
However, as in Colombia commercial Diesel (B10) corresponds to a mixture of 90%
Diesel fossil and 10% palm biodiesel by volume, this factor is corrected as follows,
according to the AM0090 page 7:
𝐸𝐹𝐵𝐿 = 76𝑔𝐶𝑂2
𝑡𝑜𝑛. 𝑘𝑚∗
𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑓𝑜𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑙
𝐸𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑦 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑛𝑡𝐵10 = 68.99
𝑔𝐶𝑂2𝑡𝑜𝑛. 𝑘𝑚
5.2. Project emissions calculation
Project emissions are calculated according to the AM0090 equation 5.
𝑃𝐸𝑦 = (𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑦 + 𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦) ∗ 𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 + 𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,𝑦
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
30
Where:
𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑦 = Project emissions from fossil fuel combustion in the project activity in year y (tCO2)
𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦 = Project emissions from electricity consumption in the project activity in year y (tCO2)
𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 = The factor to account for non-empty return trips in the project scenario in year y (%)
𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,𝑦 = Project emissions from transportation of cargo in complementary routes in trucks in year y (tCO2)
The factor 𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑦 is equivalent to the term 𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 of Tool03 and is quantified according
to Equation 1 of Tool03:
𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 = ∑ 𝐹𝐶𝑖,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ 𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦𝑖
Where:
FCi,j,y = Quantity of fuel type i combusted in process j during the year y (Nm3)
COEFi,y = CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i in yeary (tCO2 /Nm3)
The CO2 emission coefficient of the fuel is calculated according to option B based on
calorific value and an emission factor, according to Tool03 equation 4:
𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦 = 𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦
Where:
𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in year y (GJ/ Nm3)
𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)
This applies to the following processes j: Fuel of the tugs of the river route,
corresponding to Marine Diesel, and fuel consumption for the operation of ITBB, which
corresponds to both commercial Diesel, 90% ACPM and 10% palm biodiesel, as well as
gasoline (E10). Therefore, since this is a mitigation project, adjustments are made to the
reported emission factors, so that the percentage of biodiesel or ethanol present in the
mixture has a contribution of zero (0) tCO2/GJ.
To determine the factor 𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦 is quantified according to equation 1 of Tool05:
𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,𝑦 = ∑ 𝐸𝐶𝑃𝑗,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐸𝐹,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ (1 + 𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦)
𝑗
Where:
𝐸𝐶𝑃𝑗,𝑗,𝑦 = Quantity of electricity consumed by the project electricity consumption source j in year y (MWh/año)
𝐸𝐹𝐸𝐹,𝑗,𝑦 = Emission factor for electricity generation for source j in year y (tCO2/GJ)
𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦 = Average technical transmission and distribution losses for providing electricity to source j in year y (%)
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
31
To determine the term 𝐸𝐹𝐸𝐹,𝑗,𝑦 scenario A, option A1 of the Tool05 is selected. The
values of the marginal greenhouse gas emission factor for the National Interconnected
System (SIN) are taken from those reported by the Energy-Mining Planning Unit
(UPME). For the term 𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦 the value recommended by the Tool05 in Table 3 of 20% is
used.
The term 𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 is calculated according to equation 6 of AM0090:
𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,𝑦 =𝑇𝑦
𝑇𝑦 + 𝑇𝑅𝑇,𝑦
Where:
𝑇𝑦 = Amount of cargo transported by the project transportation mode in year y (tonne)
𝑇𝑅𝑇,𝑦 = Amount of cargo transported by the project transportation mode in the return trips in year y (tonne)
The term 𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,𝑦 is calculated according to the Tool03 and is equivalent to the term
𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 of Tool03. This is quantified according to equation 1 of the tool.
𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶,𝑗,𝑦 = 𝐹𝐶𝑖,𝑗,𝑦 ∗ 𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦
Where:
FCi,j,y = Quantity of fuel type i combusted in process j during the year y (Nm3)
COEFi,y = CO2 emission coefficient of fuel type i in year y (tCO2 /Nm3)
In this case, process (j) corresponds to the fuel consumption by the trucks on the
complementary routes. The amount of fuel is reconstructed from (i) the number of trips
made on each of the complementary routes, recorded by Impala; (ii) the distance of each
route, as determined by the Impala Land Transport team, and (iii) the average efficiency
of the vehicles, applying a conservative assumption based on the performance reported
by three route operators. To obtain the volume of fuel, we multiply the number of trips on
the route by the kilometers of the route; the results of all routes are summed; and
multiplied by vehicle efficiency in terms of consumption of gallons per kilometer.
The CO2 emission coefficient of the fuel is calculated according to option B based on
calorific value and an emission factor, according to Tool03 equation 4:
𝐶𝑂𝐸𝐹𝑖,𝑦 = 𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦
Where:
𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in year y (GJ/ Nm3)
𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑦 = Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in year y (tCO2/GJ)
The specific values for the commercial mixture with which the tanker trucks are fueled
are adjusted 90% ACPM and 10% palm biodiesel.
5.3. Leakage
According to the methodology, these emissions are negligible and are counted as zero.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
32
5.4. Net emission reductions calculation
The project's emission reduction is calculated in accordance with AM0090, equation 1:
𝐸𝑅𝑦 = 𝐵𝐸𝑦 − 𝑃𝐸𝑦
Where:
ERy = Emission reductions in year y, tCO2
5.5. Example of calculation
I. Baseline emissions
Baseline emissions, road transportation
Description Parameter Units 2016
Amount of cargo transported by the project in year
y Ty Ton 578,204.95
Distance of the baseline trip route AD km 1,557.87
Baseline emission factor for transportation of cargo EFBL gCO2/Ton.km 68.99
𝐵𝐸2016 = 578,204.95 Ton ∗ 1,557.87km ∗ 68.99gCO2
Ton. km∗ 10−6 = 62,143 tCO2
II. Project emissions
Fuel consumption by project activity, i.e. river transport on barges and ITBB operation.
Project emissions, fuel consumption at ITBB
Description Parameter Units 2016
Quantity of fuel type i (Commercial gasoline) combusted
in process j during the year y FCgasoline,ITBB,y m3 3.79
Quantity of fuel type i (Commercial Diesel) combusted in
process j during the year y FCdiesel,ITBB,y m3 558.44
Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i
(Commercial gasoline) in year y NCVgasoline,y GJ/m3 32.0550
Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i
(Commercial Diesel) in year y NCVdiesel,y GJ/m3 35.9592
Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i
(Commercial gasoline) in year y EFCO2,gasoline,ITBB,y tCO2/GJ 0.0653
Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i
(Commercial Diesel) in year y EFCO2,diesel,ITBB,y tCO2/GJ 0.0680
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
33
𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶_𝐼𝑇𝐵𝐵,2016 = 3.79𝑚3 ∗ 32.0550
𝐺𝐽
𝑚3∗ 0.0653
𝑡𝐶𝑂2
𝐺𝐽+ 558.44𝑚3 ∗ 35.9592
𝐺𝐽
𝑚3
∗ 0.0680𝑡𝐶𝑂2
𝐺𝐽= 1,372.69 𝑡𝐶𝑂2
Project emissions, fuel consumption, river transport
Description Parameter Units 2016
Quantity of fuel type i (marine diesel) combusted in
process j during the year y Fcmarino,river,y m3 12,966
Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i
(marine diesel) in year y NCVmarino,y GJ/m3 35.91
Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i
(marine diesel) in year y EFCO2,marino,river,y tCO2/GJ 0.0652
𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶_𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟,2016 = 12,966𝑚3 ∗ 35.91
𝐺𝐽
𝑚3∗ 0.0652
𝑡𝐶𝑂2
𝐺𝐽= 30,358.96 𝑡𝐶𝑂2
𝑃𝐸𝐹𝐶 , 2016 = 1,372.69 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 + 30,358.96 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 = 31,731.64 𝑡𝐶𝑂2
Fuel consumption emissions from tankers that travel through complementary routes.
Project emissions, fuel consumption complementary routes
Description Parameter Units 2016
Quantity of fuel type i (Commercial Diesel)
combusted by trucks in the year x FCBL,CR,x m3 8,701.8
Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel
type i (Commercial Diesel) combusted by trucks in
the year x
NCVi,x GJ/m3 35.9592
Weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type
i (Commercial Diesel) in year y EFCO2,i,CR,x tCO2/GJ 0.0680
𝑃𝐸𝐶𝑅,2016 = 8,701.8𝑚3 ∗ 35.9592
𝐺𝐽
𝑚3∗ 0.0680
𝑡𝐶𝑂2
𝐺𝐽= 21,265.93 𝑡𝐶𝑂2
Emissions from electricity consumption at ITBB.
Project emissions, electricity consumption at ITBB
Description Parameter Units 2016
Quantity of electricity consumed by the project
electricity consumption source j in year y ECPj,ITBB,y MWh 3,846.26
Average technical transmission and distribution losses TDLj,y % 20
Emission factor for electricity generation for source j in
year y EFEF,j,y
tCO2/
MWh 0.401
𝑃𝐸𝐸𝐶,2016 = 3,846.26 𝑀𝑊ℎ ∗ 0.401𝑡𝐶𝑂2
𝑀𝑊ℎ ∗ (1 + 20%) = 1,850.82 𝑡𝐶𝑂2
Factor for accounting for non-empty return trips.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
34
Project emissions, return trips factor
Description Parameter Units 2016
Amount of cargo transported by the project in year y Ty Ton 578,205.0
Amount of cargo transported by the project in the return trips in
year y TRT,y Ton 337,624.5
The factor to account for non-empty return trips in the project
scenario in year y FRT,PJ,y % 63%
𝐹𝑅𝑇,𝑃𝐽,2016 =578,205.0 𝑇𝑜𝑛
578,205.0 𝑇𝑜𝑛 + 337,624.5 𝑇𝑜𝑛= 63%
The project's emissions are:
𝑃𝐸𝑦 = ( 31,731.64 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 + 1,850.82 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 ) ∗ 63% + 21,265.93 𝑡𝐶𝑂2 = 42,468 𝑡𝐶𝑂2
Emission reductions are:
ER2016 = 62,143 tCO2 − 42,468 tCO2 = 19,675 tCO2
6. Monitoring the Data information management system and data controls
6.1. Data and parameters available in validation
Data / Parameter: 𝐴𝐷
Data unit: km
Description: Distance of the baseline trip route
Source of data:
Measurements from Ground Transport, Impala Terminals
of the land routes that would have been used in the
absence of the project.
Value applied: 1,557.87
Justification of choice of
data or description of
measurement methods and
procedures applied:
Weighted average of the distances of the baseline routes
from the year before the start of the project, but with
Cartagena as the destination. Weighting is done by the
cargo carried by each route.
Purpose of Data: Baseline emission calculation
Comments:
Data / Parameter: 𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖,𝑦
Data unit: GJ/m3
Description: Weighted average net calorific value of the fuel type i in
year y
Source of data: All fuels except for ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission
Factors – FECOC 2016 (UPME)
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
35
ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission Factors – FECOC 2015
(UPME)
Value applied:
Process j Fuel i 𝑵𝑪𝑽
ITBB operation Commercial gasoline 32.0550
ITBB operation Commercial Blended Diesel 35.9592
Tugboats Diesel Marino 35.91
Complementary
routes Commercial Blended Diesel 35.9592
The same value is taken for all years of the project.
Justification of choice of
data or description of
measurement methods and
procedures applied:
Official data of national validity.
Weighting is made by volumetric biofuel percentages
(%𝑏𝑐𝑖), this requires considering density (𝜌𝑖) and calorific value per unit of mass (𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑚𝑖).
𝑁𝐶𝑉𝑖 = 𝜌1 ∗ 𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑚1 ∗ %𝑏𝑐1 + 𝜌2 ∗ 𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑚2 ∗ %𝑏𝑐2 The volumetric percentages are:
- Commercial gasoline (E10): 90% Gasoline Motor, 10% Ethanol
- Commercial blended Diesel: 90% ACPM, 10% Palm Biodiesel
Purpose of Data: Calculation of project emissions
Comments:
Data / Parameter: 𝐸𝐹𝐶𝑂2,𝑖,𝑗,𝑦
Data unit: tCO2/GJ
Description: weighted average CO2 emission factor of fuel type i in
year y
Source of data:
All fuels except for ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission
Factors – FECOC 2016 (UPME)
ACPM: Colombian Fuel Emission Factors – FECOC 2015
(UPME)
Value applied:
Process j Fuel i 𝑬𝑭𝑪𝑶𝟐
ITBB operation Commercial gasoline 0.0653
ITBB operation Commercial Blended Diesel 0.0680
Tugboats Diesel Marino 0.0652
Complementary
routes
Commercial Blended Diesel 0.0680
The same value is taken for all years of the project.
Justification of choice of Official data of national validity.
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
36
data or description of
measurement methods and
procedures applied:
A volume emission factor is calculated (𝐸𝐹𝑣𝑖) from density (𝜌𝑖), low heating value (𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑖) emission factor per unit of mass (𝐸𝐹𝑚𝑖).
𝐿𝐻𝑉𝑖 ∗ 𝜌𝑖 ∗ 𝐸𝐹𝑚𝑖 = 𝐸𝐹𝑣𝑖 The corresponding volumetric percentages are applied to
this factor, considering that the contribution of biofuels is
zero as it is a mitigation project:
- Commercial gasoline (E10): 90% Gasoline Motor, 10% Ethanol
- Commercial blended Diesel: 90% ACPM, 10% Palm Biodiesel
Subsequently, it is returned to an energy base, as indicated
by the methodology.
Purpose of Data: Calculation of project emissions
Comments:
Data / Parameter: 𝑇𝐷𝐿𝑗,𝑦
Data unit: %
Description: Average technical transmission and distribution losses for
providing electricity to source j in year y
Source of data: AM-Tool05- v3.0 – Clean Development Mechanism
Value applied: 20%
Justification of choice of
data or description of
measurement methods and
procedures applied:
Selecting Scenario A, option A1 of the tool. No up-to-date
country data are available.
Purpose of Data: Calculation of project emissions
Comments:
6.2. Monitored data and parameters
Data / Parameter: 𝐹𝐶𝑔𝑎𝑠𝑜𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒,𝐼𝑇𝐵𝐵,𝑦
Data unit: m3
Description: Quantity of fuel type i = gasoline, combusted in the
ITBB operation during the year y
Source of data Gasoline purchase invoices.
Values applied:
Year Fuel i (m3)
Gasoline (E10)
19/06/2015-31/12/2015 4.14
2016 3.79
2017 5.22
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
37
2018 5.43
2019 8.58
2020 11.13
2021 15.42
2022 20.53
2023 23.22
2024 23.22
01/01/2025-18/06/2025 10.83
Measurement methods and
procedures:
Tankers delivering fuel have a meter that records the
value in gallons. They issue a strip with which the
purchase order is generated. The fuel seller oversees
the tanker trucks.
Evidence is in Navitrans software and invoices, stored
in the “Accounts payable” area.
Monitoring frequency: Every time a purchase is made.
QA/QC procedures:
In the accounting area, a review of the consistency of
the value is made, to detect gaps in the fuel
measurement process.
Purpose of Data: Calculation of project emissions
Any comment:
This data is considered to be of low uncertainty, being
measured directly by the fuel seller and being part of
the company's accounting management.
Data / Parameter: 𝐹𝐶𝑑𝑖𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑙,𝐼𝑇𝐵𝐵,𝑦
Data unit: m3
Description: Quantity of fuel type i = diesel, combusted in the ITBB
operation during the year y
Source of data: Diesel purchase invoices.
Values applied:
Year
Fuel i (m3)
ACPM (Commercial
blended Diesel)
19/06/2015-31/12/2015 147.92
2016 558.44
2017 519.60
2018 541.03
2019 854.34
2020 1107.97
2021 1534.87
2022 2044.44
2023 2311.65
2024 2311.65
01/01/2025-18/06/2025 1078.77
Measurement methods and
procedures:
Tankers delivering fuel have a meter that records the
value in gallons. They issue a strip with which the
GHG Report Template for CSA Standards GHG CleanProjects® Registry
Version 1.0 – September 2009
38
purchase order is generated. The fuel seller oversees
the tanker trucks.
Monitoring frequency Evidence is shown in Navitrans software and invoices
stored in the "Accounts Payable" area.
QA/QC procedures: Every time a purchase is made.
Purpose of Data
In the accounting area, a review of the consistency of
the value is made, to detect gaps in the fuel
measurement process.
Any comment: Calculation of project emissions
Data / Parameter: 𝐹𝐶𝑚𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑜,𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟,𝑦
Data unit: m3
Description: Quantity of fuel type i = marine diesel, combusted in
the river operation during the year y
Source of data: Fuel purchase invoices by tanker trucks and barges
(MAGfuel)
Values applied:
Year Fuel i (m3)
Marine Diesel
19/06/2015-31/12/2015 5,650.51
2016 12,966.11
2017 14,489.24
2018 15,086.85
2019 23,823.78
2020 30,896.52
2021 42,800.71
2022 57,010.38
2023 64,461.81
2024 64,461.81
01/01/2025-18/06/2025 30,082.18
Measurement methods and
procedures:
When the purchase is made in tankers trucks, the fuel
seller is in charge of the measureme