EMISSIONS ACCOUNTING REPORT 2023
-
Climate footprint at a glance
.. 92
Introduction
.................................
93
Restatements
.......................
93
External assurances
............
93
Non GHG air emissions
....
94
Organisation chart
.............
94
Decarbonization
.........................
94
Carbon Emissions
.......................
95
Scope 1 and Scope 2
.........
95
Scope 3
.................................
96
Key figures
GHG emissions
....................
98
Energy
...................................
101
Energy consumption
.........
102
Methodology
.............................
104
Sources
................................
105
Abbreviations
....................
106
Index
ANNUAL REPORT 2023
| 104
Sustainability
Reporting
Contact Information
Corporate Governance
Statement
This is Tekna
CEO letter
Board and
Management
Financial Statements
Auditors report
Shareholder
information
Board of Directors
’
report 2023
Methodology
(CEMASYS reporting system)
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol initiative (GHG Protocol)
was developed by the World Resources Institute (WRI)
and World Business Council for Sustainable Develop-
ment (WBCSD). This analysis is done according to A
Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard Revised
edition, currently one of four GHG Protocol accounting
standards on calculating and reporting GHG emissions.
The reporting considers the following greenhouse gas-
es, all converted into CO2-equivalents: CO2, CH4
(methane), N2O (laughing gas), SF6, HFCs, PFCs and
NF3.
For corporate reporting, two distinct approaches can be
used to consolidate GHG emissions: the equity share
approach and the control approach. The most common
consolidation approach is the control approach, which
can be defined in either financial or operational terms.
The carbon inventory is divided into three main scopes
of direct and indirect emissions.
Scope 1 includes all direct emission sources. This in-
cludes all use of fossil fuels for stationary combustion or
transportation, in owned and, depending on the consol-
idation approach selected, leased, or rented assets. It
also includes any process emissions, from e.g. chemical
processes, industrial gases, direct methane emissions
etc.
Scope 2 includes indirect emissions related to pur-
chased energy; electricity and heating/cooling where
the organisation has operational control. The electricity
emission factors used in Cemasys are based on national
gross electricity production mixes from the International
Energy Agency
’
s statistics (IEA Stat).
Emission factors per fuel type are based on assumptions
-emissions. These emissions are reflected in the location
-based emission factor.
The market-based method: The choice of emission fac-
tors when using this method is determined by whether
the business acquires GoOs/RECs or not. When selling
GoOs or RECs, the supplier certifies that the electricity is
produced exclusively by renewable sources, which has
an emission factor of 0 grams CO2e per kWh. However,
for electricity without the GoO or REC, the emission fac-
tor is based on the remaining electricity production after
all GoOs and RECs for renewable energy are sold. This
is called a residual mix, which is normally substantially
higher than the location-based factor. As an example,
the market-based Norwegian residual mix factor is ap-
proximately 7 times higher than the location-based
Nordic mix factor. The reason for this high factor is due
to Norway
’
s large export of GoOs/RECs to foreign con-
sumers. In a
market perspective, this implies that Norwegian hydro-
power is largely substituted with an electricity mix in-
cluding fossil fuels.
Scope 3 includes indirect emissions resulting from value
chain activities. The scope 3 emissions are a result of the
company
’
s upstream and downstream activities, which
are not controlled by the company, i.e. they are indirect.
Examples are business travel, goods transportation,
waste handling, consumption of products etc.
In general, the carbon accounting should include infor-
mation that users, both internal and external to the
company, need for their decision making. An important
aspect of relevance is the selection of an appropriate
inventory boundary which reflects the substance and
economic reality of the company
’
s business relation-
ships.
in the IEA methodological framework. Factors for district
heating/cooling are either based on actual (local) pro-
duction mixes, or average IEA statistics.
In January 2015, the GHG Protocol published new
guidelines for calculating emissions from electricity con-
sumption. Primarily two methods are used to
“
allocate
”
the GHG emissions created by electricity generation to
the end consumers of a given grid. These are the loca-
tion-based and the market-based methods. The loca-
tion-based method reflects the average emission inten-
sity of the grids on which energy consumption occurs,
while the market-based method reflects emissions from
electricity that companies have purposefully chosen (or
not chosen).
Organisations who report on their GHG emissions will
now have to disclose both the location-based emissions
from the production of electricity, and the marked-
based emissions related to the potential purchase of
Guarantees of Origin (GoOs) and Renewable Energy
Certificates (RECs).
The purpose of this amendment in the reporting meth-
odology is on the one hand to show the impact of ener-
gy efficiency measures, and on the other hand to dis-
play how the acquisition of GoOs or RECs affect the
GHG emissions. Using both methods in the emission
reporting highlights the effect of all measures regarding
electricity consumption.
The location-based method: The location-based meth-
od is based on statistical emissions information and
electricity output aggregated and averaged within a
defined geographic boundary and during a defined
time period. Within this boundary, the different energy
producers utilize a mix of energy resources, where the
use of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas) result in direct GHG