Port Metro Vancouver Land Side Air Emissions Inventory

Transcription

1 December 2008 Port Metro Vancouver Land Side Air Emissions Inventory Phase One: Burrard Inlet and Roberts Bank Prepared By: SENES Consultants Limited

2 Port Metro Vancouver 100 The Pointe 999 Canada Place Vancouver, British Columbia V6C 3T4 SENES Consultants Limited 1338 West Broadway, Suite 303 Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 1H2 Tel: 604/ December i - SENES Consultants Limited

3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The inventory estimates were made possible with the completion of specific, activity based questionnaires for over 50 port related facilities that are represented in this emissions assessment. In many cases, completion of a facility questionnaire was accomplished with the participation of several terminal representatives. In addition, feedback was also provided by many of these representatives during the quality assessment phase of the project. PROJECT TEAM Port Metro Vancouver: Christine Rigby, Environmental Specialist-Air Emissions Darrell J. Desjardin, Director, Environmental Programs SENES Assessment Team: Dan Hrebenyk, Project Director Bryan McEwen, Project Manager Gary Olszewski, Emissions Analyst, Software Design Jennifer Rossi, Data Management, Facility Interviews Steering Committee: Andrew Green, Environment Canada Richard Holt, Environment Canada Roger Quan, Metro Vancouver Shelina Sidi, Metro Vancouver Comments? (reporting scope, assessment methods): dhrebenyk@senes.ca December ii - SENES Consultants Limited

4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 INTRODUCTION Port Metro Vancouver Background Brief Scope: The Land side Emission Inventory General Methodology Air Contaminants Inventory Boundaries LEI Phase I Backcast and Forecast Previous Emission Assessment Studies Inventory reporting protocols Port Metro vancouver emissions model CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT Equipment populations in Emission Calculations Alternative Fuels Backcast and Forecast Emissions CHE Emissions RAIL Equipment Populations Emission Calculations Alternative Fuels Backcast and Forecast Emissions Rail Emissions TRUCKING Equipment Populations December iii - SENES Consultants Limited

5 4.1.1 Highway Trucks Facility Trucks Emission Calculations Highway Trucks Facility Trucks Alternative Fuels Backcast and Forecast Emissions Trucking Emissions LEI EMISSION SUMMARIES baseline inventory for Comparison of LEI to other Inventory Estimates Air Toxics Inventory for Backcast and Forecast EMISSION REDUCTION INITIATIVES Methods Emission Reductions FUELS USED AT PORT METRO VANCOUVER CONCLUSION REFERENCES APPENDIX A. INVENTORY QUALITY CONTROL MEASURES FOR CHE... A-1 APPENDIX B. RAIL EMISSION FACTORS... B-1 APPENDIX C. SPECIATION PROFILES AND AIR TOXICS INVENTORY FOR... C-1 APPENDIX D. DATA TABLES FOR REPORT CHARTS... D December iv - SENES Consultants Limited

6 LIST OF TABLES Page No. Table 1: Glossary of Abbreviations...viii Table 2: Port Related Facility Groups and Associated Commodities... 4 Table 3: List of Air Toxics included in the LEI... 9 Table 4: Default Growth Rates by Facility Group* Table 5: Cargo Handling Equipment Types and Groups* Table 6: Cargo Handling Equipment in Table 7: Cargo Handling Equipment by Facility Group Table 8: CHE Emissions by General Facility Group Table 9: Annual CHE Emissions by Inventory Year Table 10: Rail Activity by Locomotive Group Table 11: Locomotive Idle/Work Profiles for the LEI Table 12: Rail Emissions by General Facility Group Table 13: Annual Rail Emissions by Inventory Year Table 14: Facility Truck Activity Characteristics, Table 15: Trucking Emissions by General Facility Group Table 16: Annual Trucking Emissions by Inventory Year Table 17: LEI by Source Group Table 18: LEI by Facility Group Table 19: LEI Estimates as a Fraction of Total Fraser Valley Emissions (Canadian Portion of Valley) Table 20: Air Toxics Emissions by LEI Source Group Table 21: LEI DPM, EC, OC and Sulphates Portions of Suspended Particulate Matter Table 22: Annual LEI Emission Estimates, Table 23: Emission Reduction Initiatives Assessed for the LEI Table 24: Emissions Effect (kg reduced) of Emission Reduction Initiatives December v - SENES Consultants Limited

7 Table A.1: Equipment List for NONROAD Comparison*... A-5 Table A.2: Emission Factor Comparison for LEI and Formal NONROAD Model*...A-6 Table A.3: Reduction Initiatives Reference Values... A-8 Table B.1: EPA Baseline and Projected Locomotive Emission Rates*... B-6 Table B.2: Line Haul and Switch Locomotive Emission Rates used for the LEI*... B-7 Table C.1: Air Toxic Profiles for Locomotives and Propane/CNG Use... C-3 Table C.2: PM 2.5 Percentages for EC, OC and Sulphatte Estimates, Activity Year... C-5 Table C.3: LEI Air Toxics Inventory,... C-6 Table D.1: CHE Emissions, by Equipment Group...D-2 Table D.2: Rail Emissions, By Equipment Group... D-3 Table D.3: Trucking Emissions, By Equipment Group... D-3 Table D.4: Annual Fuel Consumption Estimates for LEI Activities, D-4 Table D.5: Rail Emissions for Select Contaminants, 1990 by Fuel Type... D-5 Table D.6: Trucking Emissions for Select Contaminants, 1990 by Fuel Type... D-5 Table D.7: CHE Emissions for Select Contaminants, 1990 by Fuel Type... D December vi - SENES Consultants Limited

8 LIST OF FIGURES Page No. Figure 1: Port Metro Vancouver Operations and Emissions Inventory Boundaries... 2 Figure 2: LEI Tool Front Page... 6 Figure 3: Intermodal Zones Figure 4: LEI Development Schematic Figure 5: CHE Emissions, (CACs) Figure 6: CHE Emissions, (CACs cont'd) Figure 7: CHE Emissions, (GHGs) Figure 8: Rail Emissions, (CACs) Figure 9: Rail Emissions, (CACs, cont'd) Figure 10: Rail Emissions, (GHGs) Figure 11: Container Truck Fleet Activity Characteristics for baseline Figure 12: Trucking Emissions, (CACs) Figure 13: Trucking Emissions, (CACs, cont'd) Figure 14: Trucking Emissions, (GHGs) Figure 15: LEI Emission Estimates, (CACs) Figure 16: LEI Emission Estimates, (CACs, cont'd) Figure 17: LEI Emission Estimates, (GHGs) Figure 18: Annual Fuel Consumption Estimates for LEI Activities, Figure 19: Annual Estimated NO x, SO x Emissions (tonnes) by Fuel Type, Figure 20: Annual Estimated CO, HC Emissions (tonnes) by Fuel Type, Figure 21: Annual Estimated PM 2.5, CO 2 Emissions (tonnes) by Fuel Type, December vii - SENES Consultants Limited

9 ABI BNSF CACs CEPA CH 4 CHE CN CP CO CoS CO 2 DOC DPM EF EPA GVWR HC HDDV HDGV HDV hp kw LDDT LDGT LEI LFV MOBILE 6.2C N 2 O NO x NONROAD PM PM 10 PM 2.5 ppm rpm RTG SO 2 SOx SwRI TEU TOG TOR tpy VOCs Table 1: Glossary of Abbreviations Activity Based Inventory Burlington Northern Santa Fe (railway) common air contaminants Canadian Environmental Protection Act methane cargo handling equipment Canadian National (railway) Canadian Pacific (railway) carbon monoxide British Columbia Chamber of Shipping carbon dioxide diesel oxidation catalyst diesel particulate matter emission factor U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U. S. EPA) gross vehicle weight rating hydrocarbon heavy-duty diesel fueled vehicle heavy-duty gasoline vehicle heavy-duty vehicles horsepower kilowatt light-duty diesel truck light-duty gasoline truck Landside Emission Inventory Lower Fraser Valley U.S. EPA Vehicle Emission Modeling Software (Canadian version) nitrous oxide oxides of nitrogen U.S. EPA emissions model for off road equipment particulate matter suspended particulate matter of diameter 10 microns or less suspended particulate matter of diameter of 2.5 microns or less parts per million revolutions per minute rubber tired gantry (crane) sulphur dioxide sulfur oxides Southwest Research Institute twenty-foot equivalent unit total organic gases terms of reference tonnes per year volatile organic compounds December viii - SENES Consultants Limited

10 1.0 INTRODUCTION Port Metro Vancouver Landside Emissions Inventory Phase One Port Metro Vancouver commissioned SENES Consultants Limited (SENES) to complete a port landside emissions inventory of common air contaminants, greenhouse gases and air toxics in December of This effort may be considered complementary to the waterside BC Ocean-Going Vessel Emissions Inventory, completed in 2007 by the B.C. Chamber of Shipping 1. The landside inventory includes a baseline for the activity year, with backcast and forecast estimates in five year increments. This inventory report, Phase I, accounts for the landside activities of 51 port-related facilities within the Burrard Inlet (Vancouver Inner Harbour, Central Harbour, Port Moody and Indian Arms), and Roberts Bank only; additional landside activities on the north and south arms of the Fraser River will be accounted for separately. As shown in Figure 1, Port Metro Vancouver (the port) encompasses approximately 600 km of shoreline in the Lower Fraser Valley (LFV). A port landside emissions inventory (LEI) is informally defined as an accounting of activities and related air emissions from all cargo handling, trucking and rail movements associated with the marine transport of goods at a port, within a limited area usually defined to include the port-related marine facilities themselves and (potentially) additional areas where the trucks and rail locomotives position themselves before entering/exiting a terminal. An LEI, in combination with a marine vessel emission inventory, provides port authorities with information required to help understand their operational emissions footprint and opportunities for emissions reductions. The BC Marine Inventory provides the port with an unprecedented level of detail of commercial marine vessel movements and emissions within and surrounding the harbour areas of the LFV. The LEI was designed to capture emissions generating activity, with as much detail as possible (recognizing that a considerable amount of effort would be required from the terminal operators). The activity data collected includes description of local initiatives to reduce emissions (such as use of alternative fuels). It should be noted that the LEI includes marine facilities and related activities both on and off port property. In some cases, commodities arriving to or departing from the port may be handled over areas not directly managed by the port. These areas are adjacent to port properties and were included in the assessment scope to ensure a full representation of port related activity and emissions was generated. 1 See December SENES Consultants Limited

11 Figure 1: Port Metro Vancouver Operations and Emissions Inventory Boundaries December SENES Consultants Limited

12 The port LEI was constructed to follow current best-practices in North America, where all emission estimates (to the degree possible) directly relate to engine or vehicle activity levels. In addition to general emission inventory development practices, the following criteria were part of the project terms of reference: Prepare backcast and forecast inventories from in five year increments, from the baseline year of Account for emissions in many different activity modes (for example, truck idling time at facility gates) Account for emissions (and emission reductions) related to use of alternative fuels, engine retrofits and hybrid energy systems Account for any emission reduction initiatives that have occurred at the marine facilities prior to Account for any emission reduction initiatives that have occurred since or are planned for the future The forecast timeframe was subsequently changed from 2030 to, since substantive commodity forecast information (expected throughput at the port by year) was only available through. An electronic activity questionnaire was developed and sent to the port-related facilities for the collection of operations data. The questionnaire addressed both fleet information (number, age and size of equipment) and operational details such as hours of use and fuel consumption. In addition, a database was developed to import the questionnaires, identify conflicting information and develop emission summaries effectively. Questionnaire submissions were subjected to reality checks so that activity and emission estimates were ultimately consistent with total fuel consumption amounts at the facilities. The LEI database was developed to provide a dynamic linking between terminal activities and emission calculations. This linking allows specific emission reduction initiatives to be assessed simply by changing the activity data (equipment characteristics or usage patterns) for a particular terminal or facility. The emission reduction initiatives that have recently been implemented by LFV port related facilities were assessed in this manner. The future, planned emission reduction initiatives were assessed by comparing the business as usual forecast with a forecast that includes the actions identified by the facility managers in the questionnaires. The port LEI was made possible due to a wealth of information that was provided by the port facility operators in the Lower Fraser Valley of British Columbia. A number of emission summaries are presented in this report, by source grouping, general commodity type and inventory year December SENES Consultants Limited

13 1.1 PORT METRO VANCOUVER BACKGROUND BRIEF Port Metro Vancouver is the largest port in Canada and the most diversified port in North America with 28 deep-sea marine cargo terminals, 2 international cruise terminals and several domestic intermodal short sea shipping terminals. The port s jurisdiction covers nearly 600 kilometres of shoreline and extends from Roberts Bank at the Canada/U.S. border through Burrard Inlet to Port Moody and Indian Arm, and from the mouth of the Fraser River, eastward to the Fraser Valley, and north along the Pitt River to Pitt Lake, and includes the north and middle arms of the Fraser River. The port borders on sixteen municipalities, and works with elected officials, city staff, residents and businesses to balance the needs of the shipping and tourism industries, and local communities. Port Metro Vancouver is committed to sustainable operations and development, mindful of economic, social and environmental impacts. This includes a commitment to continuous improvement in terms of reducing emissions from port-related operations that contribute to air quality and climate change. Through the Air Action Program, Port Metro Vancouver is collaborating with other ports, industry and government agencies to develop a data baseline, promote efficiency, implement technologies and support regulatory changes to reduce air emissions. Reducing emissions from port-related activities including ships, trucks, trains and terminal equipment, as well as industrial processes are a key component of sustainable port operations. Port Metro Vancouver led the development of the terms of reference (TOR) for the LEI, with input from Environment Canada and Metro Vancouver as part of the project steering committee. Table 2 shows how potential port related operations are categorized by facility group. Location is also indicated. Facility Group Table 2: Port Related Facility Groups and Associated Commodities Number of Facilities Break Bulk 2 Container 7 Dry Bulk 12 Liquid Bulk 10 Location Vancouver Harbour, Central Harbour Central Harbour, Roberts Bank Vancouver Harbour, Central Harbour, Port Moody, Roberts Bank Vancouver Harbour, Central Harbour, Port Moody Commodities/Services Logs, Lumber, Steel, Paper, Plywood, Wood Pulp, Sugar, General Cargo. Container (which may include many different products). Grains, Aggregate, Minerals, Wood Chips, Sulphur, Coal, Potash, Fertilizer, Sea Salt, Agri Product. Petroleum Products, Ethylene Glycol, Ethylene Dichloride, Canola Oil, Styrene Passenger 2 Central Harbour Cruise Terminal Services Other 18 Vancouver Harbour, Central Harbour, Port Moody Autos, Fish Processing, Ship Repair, Heliport, Float Plane, Rail Yard, Tallow, Animal Oils, Special Use December SENES Consultants Limited

14 1.2 SCOPE: THE LAND SIDE EMISSION INVENTORY The LEI scope includes a defined set of air contaminants, a geographical extent to establish included activities and a temporal structure with which to allocate emissions by month of year and shorter time periods of interest. The baseline () inventory uses monthly throughput data to achieve emission estimates by month, and day-of-week and hour-of-day activity profiles provided by each facility to achieve emission estimates by day and hour. No temporal allocation was used for the backcast and forecast inventories GENERAL METHODOLOGY The LEI was developed in a database environment with a direct linkage between activity data, emission rates and port statistics. Activity data collection for the inventory was conducted by use of MS Excel spreadsheet questionnaires that were sent out to each port related facility and completed with a collaborative effort between one or more facility representatives and SENES. A consistent quality control procedure was used for all responses, as outlined in Appendix A. The completed LEI has all data relationships fully developed such that a full inventory update is quickly produced with any change or addition to a facility questionnaire. The database model interface is shown in Figure 2. The information fields requested from the facility representatives match those required to fully complete emission calculations for each source group in the LEI. The general emission estimation methodologies used can be defined as follows: Cargo Handling Equipment (CHE): Use of the EPA NONROAD emissions model (disaggregated emission rate outputs) and reported hours of equipment use at the facilities; Rail: Use of published energy based emission factors from the Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) and other sources, with hours of locomotive activity reported by facility (activity on facility grounds) and developed from rail activity modelling (additional activity within three identified intermodal zones); and, Trucking: Use of the EPA MOBILE 6.2C emissions model and reported fuel consumption (Facility Trucking) or number of truck trips to a facility (Highway Trucking). To maximize flexibility in emissions reporting, engine idle activity was compiled separately from engine work activity. This approach allowed the authors to maintain a sufficient level of detail in the LEI to fully support assessment of emission reduction initiatives a particular port related facility may have enacted in the past, or may have planned for the future December SENES Consultants Limited

15 Figure 2: LEI Tool Front Page AIR CONTAMINANTS The following exhaust emissions were included in the LEI estimates: Common Air Contaminants (CACs) 2, including: o nitrogen oxides (NO x ) o sulphur oxides (SO x ) o carbon monoxide (CO) o total hydrocarbons (HC) o suspended particulate matter of diameter 10 microns or less (PM 10 ) o suspended particulate matter of diameter 2.5 microns or less (PM 2.5 ) o ammonia (NH 3 ) 2 Ammonia (NH 3 ) is not always included within the common air contaminants group. It was included in the LEI for the sake of completeness December SENES Consultants Limited

16 Greenhouse Gases (GHGs), including: o carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) o methane (CH 4 ) o nitrous oxide (N 2 O) Fuel type was carried through all emission equations so that PM 10 emissions due to the combustion of diesel fuel (diesel particulate matter DPM) could be expressed. In addition, all PM estimates were broken down into elemental, organic and total sulphate components. Finally, air toxic emission estimates were included in the LEI to the degree possible. The term air toxics is used in the LEI to represent those toxic substances that are released to the atmosphere through the combustion of fuel, and not the entire list of substances in Schedule I of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act Air toxics make up a fraction of the total PM and HC emissions accounted for in the list of CACs above. Within a large scale inventory such as the LEI, air toxic emissions are commonly estimated by the application of air toxic profiles. An air toxic profile usually contains a list of fractions so that HC or PM emission estimates can be allocated to their expected constituents. Some of the published air toxic profiles may contain an expansive list of 50 or more toxic compounds, whereas other available profiles may include a smaller number of identified compounds. The National Mobile Inventory Model (NMIM) was developed by the U.S. EPA (EPA) to support the development of national or state/county level emissions inventories. NMIM can additionally be used to estimate emissions of air toxics. The model contains speciation profiles representative of 13 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), 16 polycyclic aromatic compounds (PAHs), 17 dioxin/furan congeners (Dioxins/Furans) and 4 metals. The list of NMIM air toxics is provided in Table 3. The NMIM air toxic profiles were chosen for the LEI since they are consistent with the base EPA emission models used and are well referenced 4. The NMIM model does not include representation of locomotives or use of propane (LPG) or compressed natural gas (CNG) for any type of engines. Additional air toxic profiles were developed for these sources and fuels, based upon recent emissions tests in the literature. Further discussion of air toxics is provided in Appendix C INVENTORY BOUNDARIES The spatial boundaries for the LEI were established from previous land-side emission inventories conducted in Canada and the U.S. and a recent report prepared for the EPA on the subject (ICF, 2006). Boundaries are important to consider for both trucking and rail activity since transportation of marine goods occurs over extensive distances in some cases. The EPA guidance suggests that a manageable boundary for trucking and rail activity should include at least the first intermodal point so that queuing or waiting periods at facility gates or distribution centers can be included. This 3 Environment Canada maintains an information portal at 4 Additional information can be found from the EPA website, December SENES Consultants Limited

17 would support analysis of mitigation opportunities due to logistics improvements or any actions that affect vehicle idling periods. Due to the considerable spatial extent of the port related facilities included in the LEI (see Figure 1), facility gates were used as the local boundary for the smaller, or more isolated operations. Many of the facilities included in the LEI extend along the north and south shore of Vancouver Harbour and Central Harbour. In these areas, there is a great deal of additional truck and rail activity that is directly connected to port operations. Although this activity may not occur on port lands (or port managed lands), it is concentrated within two small areas and can be accounted for reasonably accurately. A third expanded area was used for the facilities at Roberts Bank in Delta. Although most of this area is open to the public, virtually all traffic that uses the corridor is associated with the Roberts Bank terminals. These three intermodal zones for the LEI are shown in Figure December SENES Consultants Limited

18 NMIM Substance ID Table 3: List of Air Toxics included in the LEI Name CAS Number Group 15 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin Dioxin/Furans 21 Octachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin Dioxin/Furans 22 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin Dioxin/Furans 23 Octachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 24 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin Dioxin/Furans 25 1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin Dioxin/Furans 28 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 31 1,2,3,4,7,8,9-Heptachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 33 2,3,4,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 34 1,2,3,7,8-Pentachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 35 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 36 1,2,3,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin Dioxin/Furans 37 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-Dioxin Dioxin/Furans 38 2,3,4,6,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 39 1,2,3,4,6,7,8-Heptachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 40 1,2,3,4,7,8-Hexachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 42 1,2,3,7,8,9-Hexachlorodibenzofuran Dioxin/Furans 1 Ethyl Benzene HAP 2 Styrene HAP 3 1,3-Butadiene HAP 4 Acrolein HAP 5 Toluene HAP 6 Hexane HAP 8 Propionaldehyde HAP 10 Xylene HAP 11 MTBE HAP 26 Formaldehyde HAP 30 2,2,4-Trimethylpentane HAP 41 Benzene HAP 48 Acetaldehyde HAP 12 Chromium (Cr6+) Metals 43 Manganese Metals 45 Nickel Metals 47 Chromium (Cr3+) Metals 7 Anthracene PAH 9 Pyrene PAH 13 Benzo(g,h,i)perylene PAH 14 Indeno(1,2,3,c,d)pyrene PAH 16 Benzo(b)fluoranthene PAH 17 Fluoranthene PAH 18 Benzo(k)fluoranthene PAH 19 Acenaphthylene PAH 20 Chrysene PAH 27 Benzo(a)pyrene PAH 29 Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene PAH 32 Benz(a)anthracene PAH 49 Acenaphthene PAH 50 Phenanthrene PAH 51 Fluorene PAH 52 Naphthalene PAH December SENES Consultants Limited

19 Figure 3: Intermodal Zones December SENES Consultants Limited

20 1.2.4 LEI PHASE I BACKCAST AND FORECAST Backcast and forecast inventories were completed for the years (backcast) and (forecast), in five year increments. These years were selected to determine the expected past and future trends in activity/emissions, subject to data availability. Backcast activity levels were established by facility data records (e.g., annual CHE fuel consumption) where possible and by use of port commodity statistics where not. Throughput levels by specific facility were available for the 1995 and 2000 inventory years. Growth rates by facility group were also determined and used when necessary; these rates were determined from port projections and are shown in Table 4. All forecast activity levels were determined from the growth rates. Separate growth rates were established for container terminals (as indicated) since Roberts Bank container activity is expected to grow at a higher rate compared to activity in the inner harbour 5. The growth rates developed for the backcast and forecast inventory years apply to the commodity throughput or actual fuel consumption at a facility and directly scale the appropriate CHE, trucking or rail activity. The scaled activity is then applied to suitable emission factors for the particular inventory year so that the backcast and forecast inventories capture both expected activity levels and emission rates. The development of the inventory through detailed facility surveys allowed the forecasting and backcasting to relate landside activity levels to commodity throughput. The connection between commodity and activity within the inventories provides a reasonable method for estimating past and future year emissions. Table 4: Default Growth Rates by Facility Group* General Facility Group Break Bulk Container-Roberts Bank Container-Vancouver and Central Harbours Dry Bulk Liquid Bulk Passenger Other *Aggregate activity levels for an individual facility and year are achieved by multiplying the activity by the growth rates. For all relatively large terminals, the growth rates for 1995 and 2000 were replaced with facility-specific growth factors based on detailed port records for these years. 5 The Deltaport Third Berth Expansion Project and the Terminal 2 Expansion Project will occur at Roberts Bank and will more than double the container capacity by December SENES Consultants Limited

21 Table 4 shows that landside activity at container terminals has greatly increased since 1990 and this rate of increase is expected to continue. In contrast, activity at break bulk facilities declined significantly prior to but is expected to increase by a small amount during future years. Landside activity is projected to increase at the liquid bulk and other facilities and remain constant at dry bulk facilities. It should be noted that the projected growth rates may not be experienced due to the current downturn in the global economy (in particular for container traffic). To account for differences in engine emission rates by inventory year, the relative engine age distributions for CHE and trucking were shifted by five year increments and applied within the NONROAD and MOBILE emissions models. For example, if 30% of highway trucks were three years old or newer in (e.g., 2003, 2004 and vintage), it was assumed that 30% of highway trucks were 1998, 1999 and 2000 vintage for the 2000 inventory year. This assumption may lead to a significant amount of uncertainty for a facility-specific backcast or forecast, but was considered reasonable for aggregated inventory amounts such as total annual emissions for all facilities combined. Backcast locomotive engine emission rates were estimated based on the age of locomotives used locally during past years. Future locomotive emission rates were estimated by assuming fleet changeover rates and EPA emission standards for locomotives (EPA 2008). 1.3 PREVIOUS EMISSION ASSESSMENT STUDIES The port LEI is the first emissions inventory that strictly addresses land-side activities related to Port Metro Vancouver operations. However, the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD), also known as Metro Vancouver (MV), has compiled emissions inventories for all sources in the Canadian and U.S. portions of the LFV since 1995 and these inventories include port-related CHE, trucking and rail within the regional estimates. Trucking and rail emissions from the MV inventories correspond to the entire LFV and therefore cannot be considered with the LEI amounts on an equivalent basis. Likewise, CHE fall under the general off-road category in the MV inventories. Methodologies used in the larger MV inventories also differ from those used in the port LEI, where the latter benefits from a much greater level of detail made possible through the participation of industry. In addition to the MV emission estimates, commercial (ocean-going) marine emission estimates in the LFV have also been developed in the BC marine inventory. The issue is discussed further in the conclusion of this report. 1.4 INVENTORY REPORTING PROTOCOLS The LEI does not follow a formal inventory reporting protocol, as a standardized method for reporting, assessing, and verifying port emissions has not been formally adopted in Canada, as might be the case for other business sectors 6. Instead, a best-practices approach was used, adhering to the general guidelines for port-related inventories suggested by the EPA where appropriate. In 6 Such as protocols established for GHG reporting in the corporate sector (for example, the Greenhouse Gas Protocol first proposed by the World Resource Institute, ) December SENES Consultants Limited

22 addition, inventory boundary issues (sources and activities to include or exclude) were determined based on discussions between the project steering committee and SENES. All CHE, rail and trucking activities associated with the marine transport of goods, occurring at facilities on land managed by the port 7 and those just off port land but with port related activity, were included in the LEI. Only direct emissions were accounted for. This means that indirect emissions that can be associated with the use of electrical power are not represented in the LEI. All exhaust GHG emissions from use of renewable fuels are included in the inventory totals, even though some accounting methods may consider the combustion of biomass carbon neutral. This issue is further explored in Chapters 5 and 6. The use of renewable fuels has no significance for the inventory but has significance for all forecast inventories (since a considerable amount of biodiesel was used at the port post ). 1.5 PORT METRO VANCOUVER EMISSIONS MODEL The LEI was developed within a Microsoft Access database environment. As an activity based inventory, the LEI was constructed to import activity questionnaires completed by individual port related facilities. Once completed, these questionnaires contained a detailed listing of facility equipment (including age, fuel type, engine retrofit (if applicable) and hours of use) and total fuel(s) consumption for the baseline year of. The activity information was ingested to the model in a disaggregated manner such that reporting functionality would be maximized. As a result, the model facilitates emissions reporting by inventory year, source group, facility group, equipment type, fuel type, or any combination of these. A representation of the methodology used to compile and manage the Port Metro Vancouver LEI is provided in Figure 4. 7 This does not include the marine facilities on the Fraser River, as previously described December SENES Consultants Limited

23 Figure 4: LEI Development Schematic Facility Representatives Quality Control Procedures Port Statistical Data Activity Questionnaires (MS Excel) LEI DB Model (MS Access) Emission Factors Technical Literature EPA MOBILE 6.2 C Model EPA NONROAD Model Emission Estimates Backcast Baseline Forecast - Reporting and Analysis 2.0 CARGO HANDLING EQUIPMENT Cargo Handling Equipment (CHE) is used to transfer goods to and from railcars, trucks and ships (including barges). Table 5 provides a list of the specific types of equipment included in the LEI activity questionnaire. Electrical equipment was not included. All CHE activities were applied to one of the specific equipment types for each terminal. As indicated, four general equipment groups (Stack/Cranes, Loaders, Off Road Trucks, and Auxilliary Equipment) were used to simplify reporting. Stack/Cranes capture the equipment that move commodities significant vertical distance, such as cranes that move 40 foot containers from a marine vessel to storage on land. Loaders capture the equipment that move commodities closer to the ground for variable distances, encompassing a large variety of equipment types tailored to the specific goods being loaded. Off Road Trucks capture trucking vehicles certified under nonroad emission regulations that are not licensed for use on public roads December SENES Consultants Limited

24 Auxilliary Equipment capture the miscellaneous equipment used for general services and maintenance operations that do not generally handle commodities directly. Table 5: Cargo Handling Equipment Types and Groups* Specific Equipment Type Top or Side Picks Rubber Tire Gantry (RTG) Cranes Reach Stackers Chassis Stackers Cranes (not RTG) Rubber-Tire Loaders Excavators (normal or adapted for logs) Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Skid Steer Loaders (small loaders) Crawler Tractor/Dozer Other Forklifts Feller/Bunchers Yard trucks (Hostler, Goats, Terminal Tractors) Off-Hwy Truck (Not registered or certified for on-road use) Sweepers/Scrubbers Aerial Lifts Generator Sets Welders Pumps Pressure Washers Air Compressors Gas Compressors AC\Refrigeration Signal Boards/Light Plants Crushers/grinders General Equipment Group Stack/Crane Stack/Crane Stack/Crane Stack/Crane Stack/Crane Loader Loader Loader Loader Loader Loader Loader Off Road Truck Off Road Truck Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Auxilliary Roller/compactors Auxilliary *Generators, welders, pumps etc are those that are mobile and used in the handling of marine cargoes December SENES Consultants Limited

25 2.1 EQUIPMENT POPULATIONS IN A listing of the CHE used at the port related facilities in is provided in Table 6. The equipment populations are additionally reported by general facility group in Table 7. The CHE information helps show how significant each type of equipment is to the overall cargo handling activity levels. For example, a reasonable indicator of relative energy use (and fuel consumption) can be gained by considering the product of Average Power and Average hours of use (this yields hp-hour, which is a unit of energy). Equipment Type Table 6: Cargo Handling Equipment in Number in LEI Average Year Oldest Year Newest Year Min Power (hp) Max Power (hp) Min Hours of use (year) Max Hours of use (year) Aerial Lifts Air Compressors Cranes (not RTG) Crawler Tractor/Dozer Excavators Generator sets Off-Hwy Trucks Forklifts Pressure Washers Pumps Reach Stackers RTG Cranes Rubber-Tire Loaders Skid Steer Loaders Sweepers/Scrubbers Top or Side Picks Tractor/Loader/Backhoe Welders Yard Trucks Note: The equipment flagged as 2006 was actually purchased by a facility in. Some types of CHE at the facilities tend to be relatively old, such as the rubber tire loaders, whereas other types tend to be newer. The reach stackers are relatively new pieces of equipment that are entirely associated with container terminals. Due to a significant increase in the movement of December SENES Consultants Limited

26 containers through the port from 1995 to, all of the current reach stackers were purchased during or after 1997, with the majority after A similar CHE characteristic exists in the forecast years due to additional expansion of container facilities expected at the port. Table 7 provides some insight regarding the level of equipment use that is typically required to handle goods at the different facilities included in the LEI. In particular, very little CHE use is required for liquid bulk facilities, whereas a considerable amount of CHE activity is associated with handling of containers. Facility Group Table 7: Cargo Handling Equipment by Facility Group Equipment Group Number in Port Average Year Oldest Year Newest year Minimum hours of use (year) Maximum hours of use (year) Aux Break Bulk Loader Stack/Crane Aux Container Loader Stack/Crane Off Road Truck Aux Dry Bulk Loader Stack/Crane Off Road Truck Liquid Bulk Loader Aux Other Loader Stack/Crane Passenger Loader EMISSION CALCULATIONS All CAC (exception NH 3 ) and CO 2 emission factors used for CHE were developed using the EPA NONROAD model calculation methodology. Fuel consumption rates from NONROAD were also used. Fuel based emission factors for methane (CH 4 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O) were obtained from Environment Canada s GHG Inventory and ammonia (NH 3 ) from the EPA 1999 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) documentation. In most cases, the available equipment types characterized within NONROAD matched those in use at the LFV terminals. However, Chassis Stackers, Reach Stackers, and Top/Side Picks were represented by the Other Industrial Equipment December SENES Consultants Limited

27 category and Rubber Tire Gantries (RTGs) by the Other Material Handling Equipment category in NONROAD, consistent with recommendations made to the EPA from ICF (ICF 2006). In the NONROAD model, emissions from nonroad equipment are calculated by equipment type, engine power rating and model year according to the following equation: Where: E = Annual Emissions (g) E = A* P * LF * EF (1) A = Activity (hours of use per year) P = Maximum Rated Power (hp) LF = Engine Load factor EF = Emission factor (g/hp-hr) The NONROAD model attributes default activity levels (hours of use per year) and engine load factors (fraction of maximum rated engine power) to the various pieces of equipment. To achieve maximum flexibility in applying the NONROAD emission calculation methodology within the LEI, the base NONROAD equipment/emission rate tables were directly used in the LEI database model, adhering to the NONROAD User s Guide (EPA ). A complete accounting of the NONROAD emissions routines and the quality checks used to ensure consistency with the EPA model are provided in Appendix A. The NONROAD calculation method determines both a baseline emission factor (representative of new conditions) and a deterioration rate to the emission factor based on historical hours of use. This approach yields an effective emission factor applicable for a specific inventory year. As terminal managers could not provide an estimate of engine load factor, the NONROAD default load factors were assumed to apply in all cases. Actual activity levels (hours of engine use) were taken directly from the facility questionnaires and not from the model defaults. In effect, the LEI dynamically determines a unique emission rate for each specific piece of equipment. A final adjustment was made to the emission estimates based on the modelled NONROAD total fuel consumption and the total fuel consumption data provided by the terminal. The reported total CHE hours of use for each terminal was uniformly scaled up or down such that the modelled fuel consumption ultimately matched the reported fuel consumption. This use of the NONROAD methodology allows for appropriate determination of CAC emission rates, which are highly dependent on engine technology, while remaining consistent with the best available activity data for each facility (fuel consumption). As a rule of thumb, the total CHE activity levels reported for a marine facility were considered correct when the activity based fuel consumption estimates were within a factor of two of the fuel consumption records. The activity based fuel consumption estimates were consistently found to be higher than the fuel records and this was not un-expected. Anecdotal accounts of NONROAD use December SENES Consultants Limited

28 for port CHE equipment in the U.S. have generally supported that the model over-estimates fuel consumption due to its inherent engine load assumptions. Even when considering a marine facility in Metro Vancouver with a very high level of data quality for its CHE fleet, NONROAD was found to over-estimate total fuel consumption by a factor of approximately 1.6 to ALTERNATIVE FUELS Nonroad diesel, propane and gasoline were used to power CHE at Port Metro Vancouver in. No alternative fuels (alternative to these three commonly used fuels) were used for CHE during the baseline year, with the exception of onroad diesel. Typically, nonroad diesel (which has higher sulphur content than onroad diesel) is used at port facilities in Canada since it is less costly, is readily available and is the (minimum) fuel quality required by law in nonroad applications such as CHE. Onroad diesel is sometimes referred to as ultra low sulphur diesel since it has a lower sulphur content than the fuel normally used. Several facilities reported use of onroad diesel in in their nonroad CHE. Use of the onroad diesel was accounted for by specifying a lower sulphur content of fuel in the emission calculations, which effectively lowers the SOx and PM emission rates (while other rates remain the same). There will be no practical difference between onroad and nonroad diesel beginning in 8, due to Environment Canada Sulphur in Diesel Fuel Regulations. This effectively means that the only alternative fuel to consider for the future inventory years (at this time) is biodiesel (or a blend of diesel and biodiesel). Engine emission rates for use of biodiesel fuel were estimated based on several studies completed on the subject (US EPA, 2002, ERMD, 2006, SAE, 2004). The results of these studies provide percentages for each specific air contaminant that can be used to adjust the engine emission rates for diesel consumption. Adjustment percentages were applied based on the ratio of biodiesel used in a particular biodiesel blend and the type of equipment BACKCAST AND FORECAST EMISSIONS Backcast and forecast emission factors were determined by assuming each facility had or will have the same distribution of CHE by type, size and relative age as their reported fleet. This led to different activity-based emission factors for each inventory year for each port facility. Backcast and forecast activity rates were determined by recorded and expected differences in activity levels respectively (see Table 4). Many facilities were able to provide total fuel consumption amounts for the 1990, 1995 and 2000 inventory years. The fuel consumption data were used to adjust the backcast activity rates (hours of equipment use) such that the NONROAD modelled fuel consumption estimates ultimately matched the actual fuel consumption amounts, consistent with the baseline inventory. No such corrective action could be applied to the forecast activity levels. However, the effect of the baseline adjustment was carried through in the forecasts. 8 See December SENES Consultants Limited

29 2.3 CHE EMISSIONS Port Metro Vancouver Landside Emissions Inventory Phase One CHE emissions for by facility group are shown in Table 8. Total fuel consumption in was greatest for container terminals due to significant use of stack/crane and off road trucking equipment. Conversely, total fuel consumption for liquid bulk terminals is low due to a relatively small reliance on CHE for loading and unloading activities. Table 9 provides the estimated backcast and forecast CHE emissions for the port. Total fuel consumption for CHE has increased significantly since 1990, primarily due to expansion of the port container terminals since that time. This trend is expected to continue in future years. An increasing trend is not expected for CAC emissions (exception NH 3 ) due to improvements in emission control technologies (NO x, CO, HC, PM) and fuel quality (SO x, PM). Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7 show the estimated trends in all air contaminant emissions for 1990 to, by specific air contaminant. Related data can be found in Appendix D. Emissions are shown by the general CHE equipment groups. Several important factors should be considered for the future trends: SO x emissions are expected to dramatically decline after due to Canadian sulphur in fuels regulations lowering the maximum allowable sulphur content in nonroad diesel fuels to 15 ppm. Emissions of NO x, HC, CO and PM for future years account for the expected fleet turnover. The emissions model includes appropriate rates for newer equipment (from NONROAD) and turnover accounts for current equipment age and intensity of use. GHG emissions are predicted to increase in the future, due to increased fuel consumption. However, these forecasts do not assume any improvements in fuel efficiency for CHE December SENES Consultants Limited

30 Table 8: CHE Emissions by General Facility Group Air Contaminant Emissions (tonnes) and Fuel Consumption (kilolitres) Facility Group NO x SO x CO HC PM 10 PM 2.5 NH 3 CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O Fuel Break Bulk , ,415.1 Container , ,828.1 Dry Bulk , ,028.3 Liquid Bulk Passenger , ,212.2 Other , TOTAL , ,114.9 Table 9: Annual CHE Emissions by Inventory Year Annual Air Contaminant Emissions (tonnes) and Fuel Consumption (kilolitres) Inventory Year NO x SO x CO HC PM 10 PM 2.5 NH 3 CO 2 CH 4 N 2 O Fuel , , , , , , , , , , , , , , December SENES Consultants Limited