Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 13
13
2.2.1 Traditional Criteria Pollutant
Purpose of the Inventory Inventory Boundaries
Most airport inventories that exclusively address criteria
Identification of the Ownership and Control Boundaries pollutants reflect emissions of sources within the airport
fenceline (exceptions occur for inventories prepared under
Identification of Sources and Pollutants Chapter 2 NEPA or state NEPA equivalents where a project affecting
emissions outside the fenceline typically quantifies the emis-
sions outside the fenceline), except for aircraft, which are lim-
Ownership and Influence Categorizations
ited to the operations in the landing and takeoff cycle (LTO,
generally operations under 3,000 ft). Emissions are typically
Geographic Boundaries reported by pollutant and match the source categories listed
in the FAA's Aviation Environmental Design Tool (AEDT)/
Data Availability Emissions and Dispersion Modeling System (EDMS) (FAAa
2007), as follows:
Reporting Units for Pollutants
· Aircraft (in the landing and takeoff cycle) and APU,
· Ground support equipment (GSE),
Calculate Emissions · Stationary sources,
· Parking facilities and roadways (also called ground access
Chapter 3
vehicles or GAV)
Calculate CO2 Equivalencies
· Training fires, and
· Construction activities.
Figure 2-1. Overall inventory development procedure.
In preparing traditional criteria pollutant inventories, little
consideration is given to who owns the sources or controls
these emissions.
ficial environmental cost of the action. Therefore, only the af-
fected sources in Chapter 3 would be considered when devel- 2.2.2 Greenhouse Gas
oping inventories under these two categories. It is up to the Inventory Boundaries
inventory developer to fully identify the affected sources for
each project. During the last decade, the consideration of GHG inven-
A GHG inventory developed in anticipation of future reg- tories has evolved to contain a step that requires a clear iden-
ulation could require coverage of all sources (as with a climate tification of the boundaries of the inventory. USEPA and
action initiative) or a subset (as with the environmental man- World Resources Institute (WRI) along with World Business
agement and sustainability programs and disclosure of project/ Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) guidance
action effects). This depends on the future regulation(s) for suggest that the following be considered when establishing
which an inventory developer is preparing. Although the focus the boundaries (USEPAa 2005 and WRI 2004):
is mainly on regulations requiring mandatory reporting of
GHG inventories, this Guidebook can also be helpful for other
Whenever applicable, WRI protocols for source
types of regulations that may not explicitly state the need for
boundary and direct versus indirect emissions
GHG inventories. The methods for quantifying GHG emis- guidelines should be followed for consistency.
sions that are presented in this Guidebook should be applica-
ble to all of these regulations.
· Organizational structure--Is determined as reflected by
control through ownership, legal agreements, joint ven-
2.2 Identification of the Ownership
tures, etc. In the case of an airport, most airports are owned
and Control Boundaries
and operated by either: (1.) a city department, (2.) a county
In preparing a GHG inventory, consideration must be given department, (3.) a state office, or (4.) an authority or port dis-
to boundaries of the inventory and the sources reflected in trict. In preparing an inventory, the airport operator should
that inventory. Most often, the boundaries begin with issues consider how the inventory prepared for airport-related
of ownership and control. activities would be integrated into a broader organizational
OCR for page 14
14
inventory (i.e., the airport division's inventory of a city- · Government operations analysis considers Scope 1, 2, and
owned airport relative to other activities of a city). 3, where Scope 3 only includes emissions over which the
· Operational boundary--Once an entity has determined government exerts significant control or influence. In this
its organizational boundaries in terms of the operations case, generally only the emissions from sources owned and
that it owns and controls, it then sets its operational bound- controlled by the airport governmental entity would be re-
aries. This involves identifying the emissions associated flected. Thus, aircraft sources would be omitted, unless the
with its operations and categorizing them either as Scope 1 airport governmental entity owns and operates aircraft, as
(direct), Scope 2 (indirect), or Scope 3 (indirect and is sometimes the case of State Aviation Divisions.
optional) emissions. · Community-scale analysis also considers Scope 1, 2, and 3
Scope 1/direct emissions are from sources that are owned but seeks to reflect geopolitical boundaries. In the airport
and controlled by the reporting entity (e.g., on-airport context, this inventory could reflect the inclusion of airport
emissions from combustion in owned and controlled tenant activities that would include airline and aircraft op-
boilers, furnaces, vehicles, etc.). For an airport, the erations. In the community context, ICLEI provides guid-
Scope 1 emissions would be those associated with fuel ance for the inclusion of an airport's emissions if the air-
powering vehicles owned and operated by the airport port is not physically located within the city boundaries,
entity, as well as stationary sources owned and operated where many residents of the city use the airport.
by that entity. For instance, an airport owns snow re-
moval equipment and ground vehicles that burn fuel to The preferred method for airports recommended by this
service the airport, as well as the airport heating system Guidebook is the preparation of inventories that reflect the
or generators that may burn heating oil. community-scale analysis when preparing inventories for
Scope 2/indirect emissions are those from the genera- climate action plans. This is recommended to ensure consis-
tion of purchased electricity consumed by the entity. This tency among airports, as the inventories for some airports
would represent the electricity acquired to power air- are likely to be prepared by entities that participate in ICLEI
port facilities. Tenant-purchased electricity would not or choose to register their emissions. Alternatively, if data are
be Scope 2, but Scope 3. not available to enable the community-scale approach, the
Scope 3/indirect and optional emissions are a conse- government operations analysis could be undertaken, with
quence of the activities of the entity, but occur at sources the inventory noting the deficiencies in available data. This
owned and controlled by another party. Scope 3 would Guidebook recommends that the traditional criteria pollutant
be the largest quantity of emissions at an airport, be- format when applied to GHGs be recast using ownership and
cause they would include aircraft-related emissions, control reporting, where possible, for the NEPA-like evalua-
emissions from all tenant-related activities (including tions and sustainability projects so as to enable GHG pollutants
aircraft operations and the associated ground support and criteria pollutants to be documented using a common
activities) as well as the public's ground travel to and format. Such a reformatting would not require additional
from the airport. analysis, and would enable a direct comparison between climate
action plans and NEPA-like/sustainability project evaluations.
Indirect and direct emissions as advocated by USEPA are
similar to the Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions noted by WRI,
whereas WRI Scope 3 emissions are the emissions that If possible, an airport GHG inventory should follow
USEPA considers optional. For the remainder of this docu- ICLEI's community-scale analysis reflecting the emis-
ment, the terms Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 are used to sions by both airport- and tenant-owned sources.
simplify the discussion.
ICLEI has prepared draft guidance to international local
governments concerning the preparation of GHG inventories It should be noted that the adoption of the community-
(ICLEIb 2008). Within the ICLEI guidance, in addition to or- scale approach and the use of the Scope 1, 2, and 3 definitions
ganizational structure and operational boundary, there is a reflect, in part, a desire to stay consistent with these protocols
third element to be considered in inventories: geopolitical from ICLEI and WRI. Although the Guidebook has adopted
boundaries. The geopolitical boundaries ensure that the in- these approaches, airport inventories could potentially be
ventory reflects the accounting of emissions in a way that is developed in other ways (e.g., focusing on just the airport-
"policy relevant," meaning that the inventory is structured to owned sources, no categorization of sources, etc.). The inven-
reflect sources that can be affected through policies of the tory developer should be cognizant of these other possibilities
local government. In this way, the ICLEI guidance differenti- to properly address concerns that may be raised regarding the
ates between the following two types of inventories: approaches recommended in this Guidebook.
