Quality Assurance Quality Control QAQC Reporting and Documentation Rur
QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL
It is good practice to conduct quality control checks as outlined in Volume 1, Chapter 6, and an expert review of the emissions estimates. Additional quality control checks as outlined in Volume 1, Chapter 6, and quality assurance procedures may also be applicable, particularly if higher tier methods are used to determine emissions from this source category. Inventory compilers are encouraged to use higher tier QA/QC for key categories as identified in Volume 1, Chapter 4.
In addition to the guidance in Volume 1, specific procedures of relevance to this sub-source category are outlined below:
Comparison of emissions estimates using different approaches
Inventory compilers should compare reported plant emissions estimates against those determined using the Tier 1 default factor and production data. If only national production data are available, they should compare aggregated plant emissions to a national default estimate. If significant differences are found in the comparison, they should answer the following questions:
1. Are there inaccuracies associated with any of the individual plant estimates (e.g., an extreme outlier may be accounting for an unreasonable quantity of emissions)?
2. Are the plant-specific emission factors significantly different from one another?
3. Are the plant-specific production rates consistent with published national level production rates?
4. Is there any other explanation for a significant difference, such as the effect of controls, the manner in which production is reported or possibly undocumented assumptions?
Direct emission measurement check
• Inventory compilers should confirm that internationally recognised, standard methods were used for plant measurements. If the measurement practices fail this criterion, then the use of these emissions data should be carefully evaluated. It is also possible that, where a high standard of measurement and QA/QC is in place at sites, the uncertainty of the emissions estimates may be revised downwards.
• Each plant's QA/QC process should be evaluated to assess if the number of samples and the frequency of sample collection is appropriate given the variability in the process itself.
• Where possible, inventory compilers should verify all measured and calculated data through comparison with other systems of measurement or calculation. For example, emissions measurement within the process itself can be verified periodically with measurement of the vent stream. Inventory compilers should verify abatement system utilisation and efficiency.
• With a periodic external audit of the plant measurement techniques and results, it is also possible to compare implied emission factors across plants and account for major differences.
REPORTING AND DOCUMENTATION
It is good practice to document and archive all information required to produce the national emissions inventory estimates as outlined in Volume 1, Section 6.11.
Some examples of specific documentation and reporting relevant to this source category are provided below:
•提供完全透明的报告,emissions of HFC-23 from HCFC-22 production should be reported as a separate item, rather than included with other HFC emissions.
• Documentation should also include:
(i) Methodological description;
(ii) Number of HCFC-22 plants;
(iii) HCFC-22 production (if multiple producers);
(iv) Presence of abatement technology;
(v) Process descriptions, operating parameters; and
(vi) Related emission factors. Confidentiality
• The use of the Tiers 2 and 3 methods would mean that the plant emissions of HFC-23 are reported separately from the production of HCFC-22. By de-coupling the HFC-23 emissions and HCFC-22 production, the emission data on HFC-23 cannot be considered to be of commercial confidence as it does not reveal the levels of production of HCFC-22 without detailed and confidential knowledge of the individual manufacturing facility.
• The application of the Tier 1 method to total national production of HCFC-22 would enable this to be calculated from published emissions of HFC-23 and, if there were less than three producers, such production data could be considered confidential business information. In such cases, steps should be taken to protect confidentiality through, for example, the aggregation of all HFC emissions. For transparency reasons, whenever there is aggregation, a qualitative discussion of HCFC-22 production should be included.
• When national emissions are calculated as the sum from individual facilities and these have been calculated using different methodologies, it is not possible to recalculate the HCFC-22 production from these data alone and there should be no problems concerning confidentiality.
Continue reading here:Iron Steel And Metallurgical Coke Production
Was this article helpful?
