Guidance for the Reducing Enteric Methane Emissions from Beef Cattle federal offset protocol
Introduction
The Reducing Enteric Methane Emissions from Beef Cattle federal offset protocol (the Protocol) was published under the Canadian Greenhouse Gas Offset Credit Regulations (the Regulations), which establish Canada’s Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Offset Credit System (the Offset System).
The Protocol incentivizes projects that reduce enteric methane (CH4) emissions in confined beef cattle feeding operations (such as backgrounding and finishing operations) to generate GHG emission reductions. Federal offset credits may be issued for these reductions provided all requirements under the Regulations and the Protocol are met.
This guidance is primarily intended for proponents implementing projects following the Protocol. It is also intended for related stakeholders, such as:
- livestock producers
- industry experts
- qualified professionals
- consultants
- verification bodies
This guidance provides clarification, explanation, and/or justification regarding some of the provisions in the Protocol in order to help proponents understand requirements and facilitate project implementation and compliance. This guidance is neither an overview of the Protocol nor a free-standing document. It is meant to be used along with the Protocol and the Regulations.
It is important to note that the information contained within this guidance is not legal advice and does not provide an interpretation of the Protocol or the Regulations. In the event of any conflict or discrepancy between the information in this guidance and the Protocol or the Regulations, the Protocol or the Regulations shall prevail. Proponents are advised to become familiar with the Protocol and the Regulations to ensure a full understanding of legal obligations.
In addition to this guidance, other resources provide additional supporting information for proponents interested in implementing projects following the Protocol These are available through the Protocol main webpage.
Protocol scope and use
Protocol applicability
A project may be registered in the Offset System if it is located in a province or territory where the Protocol applies. The Protocol does not apply in a province or territory with a compliance-based offset system that has an active offset protocol covering the same activities as those set out in the Protocol. A list of the provinces and territories where the Protocol applies can be found in Canada’s GHG Offset Credit System: Protocols, in the Published Federal Offset Protocols table.
Proponents
A proponent implementing a project following the Protocol may be the owner of the project site or the farm business responsible for animal management decisions at the project site. Alternatively, the proponent may be an offset project developer acting on behalf of, and in partnership with, the owner or the farm business associated with the project site.
Aggregation
Projects implemented following the Protocol can be aggregated to pool GHG emission reduction potential and reduce costs related to project implementation, reporting and verification. Aggregation may be beneficial for smaller individual projects with fewer animals.
Multiple individual projects (each occurring at a distinct project site) can be grouped to form an aggregation of projects provided that all projects are located within the same province or territory and the other requirements are met. Multiple project activities carried out at one project site form a single project and cannot form an aggregation of projects.
For an aggregation of projects, the proponent must quantify GHG emission reductions for each project separately. This includes the quantification of the baseline scenario GHG emission intensity which must be determined using historical reference data derived from animals and management activities carried out at each individual project site. Stratification cannot occur across projects in the aggregation.
Additional requirements for the aggregation of projects implemented following the Protocol are set out in the Regulations.
Related sections in the Protocol: 3.2, 8.1 and 8.2
Authorization and exclusive entitlement
If the proponent is not the owner of the farm business and / or project site where the project takes place, they must have the necessary authorizations from the owner to carry out the project activities. Furthermore, the proponent must have documents that demonstrate those authorizations. An example could include a contract or written agreement between the proponent and the owner of the farm business.
In addition, the proponent must also ensure they have exclusive entitlement to claim the federal offset credits issued for the GHG emission reductions generated by the project and have documents that demonstrate that exclusive entitlement. This could be through the contracts or written agreements mentioned above for the authorizations to carry out the project activities, or separate documents specific for entitlement.
Additional information on the requirements related to having exclusive entitlement to claim offset credits is available in the Regulations Overview. The Overview also provides additional details on the necessary authorizations to carry out project activities and direct financial incentives.
Eligibility
Baseline and project conditions
For a project to be eligible under this protocol animals (beef cattle) must have been present on the project site for at least three years prior to the project start date. Project sites without three years of animal presence at the project site would be unable to meet the requirements to determine the baseline scenario using at least three years of historical management data.
The protocol also specifies that animals must meet three conditions to be included in the project. These conditions are further elaborated on in Table A below to assist in providing examples of animals that may or may not meet these conditions. Animals may be present at the project site in either the baseline or project scenario which do not meet the conditions; however, they cannot be included in the project and the quantification of GHG emissions reductions.
| Condition | Description and examples |
|---|---|
| Cattle raised for beef production |
Non-cattle animals or cattle which are not used for beef production do not meet this condition. |
| Not lactating cattle involved in dairy production |
Lactating cattle that are currently or were previously lactating to produce dairy cannot be included in the baseline or project scenario. Animals with dairy genetics such as male dairy cattle sold to produce beef meet this condition. |
| Cattle fed in a confinement area and not grazed for the period of time where GHG emissions are quantified |
All cattle must be fed in confinement for the quantification period. Cattle can be grazed before entering the project site, or after leaving the project site, but not during the period where GHG emissions are quantified. For example, cattle raised on pasture then sold to a feedlot implementing a project to reduce enteric CH4 emissions from cattle fed in confinement would meet this condition. GHG emission reductions achieved for activities occurring over a winter-feeding period where cattle are fed exclusively in confinement would also meet this condition. |
Related sections in the Protocol: 3.1 and 4.1
Determining the baseline scenario
The proponent must determine the baseline scenario GHG emission intensity of historical beef cattle management prior to the project start date for each stratum. The baseline scenario GHG emission intensity of a stratum is a multi-year average which establishes the business-as-usual management of beef cattle at the project site in absence of the project.
Historical reference data meeting the requirements in Section 8.2 of the Protocol must be available to quantify the baseline scenario GHG emission intensity. Historical reference data must come from animals and management activities carried out at the project site. Historical reference data for a stratum must meet the conditions in one of the following two options:
- Option 1: The data includes at least one animal group per year from at least three continuous years starting no more than five years prior to the project start date for each stratum
- Option 2: The data includes at least one animal group from three non-continuous years from within the past five years provided that the crude protein content of the diet for each animal group did not exceed 14%
All strata in a project are not required to follow the same option. For example, one stratum could follow Option 1 using continuous years and another stratum can follow Option 2 using non-continuous years.
Related sections in the Protocol: 3.2 and 8.2
Eligible project activities
Each project is unique with different existing beef cattle management and goals. The proponent may choose to undertake one or more eligible project activities based on the specific circumstances of each project.
To be considered eligible a project activity must be derived from one of the five categories of project activities identified in Table 1 of the Protocol and generate GHG emission reductions relative to the baseline scenario quantified as per the Protocol.
Proponents need to define specific actions being carried out under one or more categories as part of the project. For example, a proponent carrying out project activities in the diet reformulation category needs to identify the specific diet reformulation action being carried out as part of the project such as reducing forage content or adding supplementing lipid.
Related section in the Protocol: 4.2
Genetic selection activities
As part of a project, the proponent can generate offset credits by carrying out genetic selection activities if they also carry out at least one eligible project activity. Only genetic selection techniques that result in animal performance improvements can generate offset credits due to the structure and emissions factors included in the quantification methodology.
Related section in the Protocol: 4.2
Anti-methanogenic feed additives and gut modifiers
The use of novel anti-methanogenic feed additives or gut modifiers to directly reduce enteric CH4 emissions is not currently an eligible project activity in the Protocol. Novel anti-methanogenic feed additives or gut modifiers, such as 3-Nitrooxypropanol (3-NOP), are products that can directly inhibit enteric CH4 emissions when fed to cattle. Although they are not explicitly excluded, they do not meet the definition of eligible project activity because the GHG emission reductions cannot be quantified using the quantification methodology in Section 8.0 of the Protocol.
The ability to generate federal offset credits from GHG emission reductions in the Protocol from activities that directly inhibit CH4 emissions is currently limited to the diet reformulation category such as through the addition of supplemented lipids.
The use of novel anti-methanogenic feed additives or gut modifiers to directly reduce enteric CH4 emissions may be incorporated into a future version of the Protocol.
Related section in the Protocol: 4.2
General requirements
Crediting period length and renewal
A project implemented following the Protocol has a crediting period of 10 years which can be renewed two times if the project continues to meet all applicable requirements, for a maximum total crediting period of 30 years.
If a proponent renews the crediting period, they must update the baseline scenario and use updated historical reference data to determine the baseline scenario GHG emission intensity for each stratum as per Section 3.2 of the Protocol.
Related section in the Protocol: 3.2
Project site
The project site does not have to be a continuous area. It may include areas and buildings used to house and feed animals and store manure that occur at multiple physical locations.
The proponent must document the location and the geographic boundaries of the project site and prepare a site plan. If buildings, confinement areas and/or manure storage systems change between the baseline and project scenarios, the proponent must document these changes in the site plan. This includes any changes that may occur during the crediting period.
When defining the project’s geographic boundaries and preparing the site plan, the proponent is encouraged to carefully consider any potential changes to buildings, confinement areas and manure storage that may occur in the future to ensure they can be accommodated within the original geographic boundaries.
Related section in the Protocol: 6.2
Quantification methodology
Sources, sinks and reservoirs
GHG emissions from enteric fermentation (SSR 6) and manure storage (SSR 7) must be included in the project GHG boundary for the baseline and project scenarios for the quantification of GHG emission reductions generated by a project implemented under the Protocol. No other SSRs are included in the project GHG boundary.
Related section in the Protocol: 7.0
Stratification and animal groups
Cattle are not always uniformly managed at the project site. Instead of calculating GHG emissions for each individual animal, the Protocol allows for GHG emissions to be quantified for a set of animals with similar characteristics (called a “stratum”). The term ‘’stratification’’ refers to the process of identifying animals into strata to quantify GHG emission reductions using the methods and procedures developed by the proponent following the requirements in Section 8.1 of the Protocol.
Stratification plays an important role in the Protocol for ensuring that the GHG emission reductions generated by the project are a result of the project activities and not due to differences in animal characteristics between the baseline scenario and project scenario, such as incoming weight. A stratum in the project scenario must have a comparable and corresponding stratum in the baseline scenario to ensure the GHG emission reductions from the project activities are accurately quantified.
There are several requirements for stratification in the Protocol which the proponent must follow to help ensure baseline and project scenario strata are comparable. Beyond the listed requirements, it is up to the proponent to determine how strata are identified. For example, stratification could be based on parameters such as production system, diet, feeding system, breed, age class, gender, weight, and marketing program.
To enable project verification, the proponent must keep records pertaining to the methods, procedures and rationale for stratification decisions.
An interrelated concept to stratification in the Protocol is the concept of “animal group”. An animal group represents a sub-set of animals in a stratum that all coincide at the project site for at least one day during a production period. In other words, an animal group represents a cohort of animals moving through the project site for a given stratum. Several requirements, especially those related to tracking animal inventories, feed delivered and dietary information are applicable to the animal group rather than the stratum. This is because different animal groups are likely to be fed and managed differently from year to year based on several different factors. Common factors that change from animal groups on the project site in different years are feed prices and availability.
Animal groups are an especially important concept in establishing the average baseline scenario GHG emission intensity of each stratum. For each stratum in the baseline scenario, an average GHG emission intensity must be established using data from at least three different animal groups of the stratum and entering and exiting the facility over multiple years. In the project scenario, GHG emissions are not averaged over multiple years, so a stratum simply represents a single animal group.
Since each stratum in the project scenario is made of a single animal group, each new cohort of animals moving through the project site throughout the crediting period is considered a new stratum. As a result, the number of strata in the project scenario is not likely to match the number of strata in the baseline scenario. More than one stratum in the project scenario can reference the same stratum in the baseline scenario.
Related sections in the Protocol: 3.2, 8.1, 8.2, 8.3, 10.5
Median date of animal exit
The proponent must quantify the baseline and project scenario GHG emissions for each full or partial calendar year during the reporting period. This is used to support issuance of the offset credits by calendar year.
Due to the nature of livestock production, it is likely that animals within an animal group enter or exit the project site on different dates. These dates may overlap between two calendar years or reporting periods. This is permissible; however, to support the issuance of offset credit by calendar year, GHG emission reductions for an animal group in the project scenario are quantified and attributed to the reporting period and the calendar year in which the median date of animal exit for the animal group falls. Even if some animals exit the project site in a different calendar year, all GHG emission reductions associated to the animal group are attributed to the calendar year and reporting period for the project scenario where the majority of animals exited the project site.
The median date of animal exit can be determined by ordering the exit dates of all animals for an animal group in the project scenario by earliest to most recent. For an animal group with an odd number of animals, the median is the animal exit date associated with the single animal in the center of the order. For an animal group with an even number of animals, the median is the midpoint between the animal exit dates associated with the two animals at the center of the order.
Related section in the Protocol: 8.0
Changes in manure storage
GHG emission reductions associated with eligible project activities that change the composition or amount of manure produced by the project compared to the baseline scenario may generate offset credits. However, GHG emission reductions from changes to manure management practices between the baseline and project scenario cannot generate offset credits. Crediting opportunities for projects that treat liquid manure (through anaerobic digestion, chemical treatment, and mechanical separation) will be available in the Reducing Manure Methane Emissions federal offset protocol.
To ensure that a project implemented following the Protocol does not generate offset credits for changes to manure management practices, the Protocol contains requirements on re-quantifying the baseline scenario GHG emission intensity if the manure storage systems change. Effectively, the reference values for parameters MCF, EFMS, FracV or FracL, as set out in the Emission Factors and Reference Values document, must be the same for a stratum in the project scenario and its corresponding stratum in the baseline scenario.
Related section in the Protocol: 8.2
Measurement and data
Animal inventory and diet information
The proponent must create an animal inventory to track relevant information for an animal group on a daily basis. This includes the number of animals, the type of diet, and quantity of dry matter delivered. The information must be in a head-days format that counts the total number of animals (head) for each day on feed for an animal group. Table B below is provided as an example with minimal project data that proponents may wish to follow.
| Day on feed | Number of animals (head) | Type of diet | Dry matter delivered (kg) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 120 | Diet x | 1000 |
| 2 | 118 | Diet x | 1000 |
| 3 | 118 | Diet y | 1200 |
| … | … | … | … |
| Note: One row for each day animals in a group are at the project site. | Note: Numbers represent the total animals in the animal group each day excluding those removed for death or illness. | Note: Diets x and y are specific and distinct diets fed on the given day. | Note: Each number in this column is the total amount of feed delivered to the animals in the group each day. |
Related section in the Protocol: 9.2
Feed analysis
Parameters determined through feed analysis must be completed using one of the four methods identified in the Protocol. Direct analysis of total digestible nutrients (TDN) is not commonly conducted. For this reason, if values for TDN are not available, proponents may use reference values sourced by a qualified professional from relevant resources such as the Nutrient Requirements for Beef Cattle (2016).Footnote 1 TDN is the only parameter where a reference value sourced by a qualified professional is a permissible method for feed analysis in the Protocol.
The values for parameters determined through feed analysis must be representative of the entire diet. The quantification methodology of the Protocol is based on the mass of dry matter delivered to animals and therefore, the Protocol provides equations for determining a weighted mean based on the dry mass of feed delivered.
Feed analysis can be completed for each specific diet or each distinct feed ingredient. The Protocol provides an equation to determine the mean value of a feed parameter for a specific diet based on the mass of each distinct feed ingredient. Feed analysis conducted by ingredient may be beneficial for situations where the livestock diet changes rapidly such as in the case of a step-up diet. This would allow a proponent to perform feed analysis once for each ingredient and perform calculations rather than analyzing the entire diet more frequently as it changes.
Related section in the Protocol: 9.3
Records
Qualified professionals
Records from qualified professionals are required to support the project documentation, as prescribed in Section 10 of the Protocol. Qualified professionals include veterinarians, Professional Agrologists (P.Ag.) and feed nutritionists. Requirements in the Protocol which require the involvement of qualified professionals are expected to be within the normal scope of practice and range of duties performed by the qualified professional.
Qualified professionals as defined by the Protocol do not conduct verifications of the project reports or corrected reports. Verification is a distinct process in the Offset System which must be completed by an accredited verification body.
Related sections in the Protocol: 2.0 and 10.0
Third-party data management
The proponent may work with third parties to collect, store and manage data for the project. In such cases, the proponent must have access to all data for the project.
Related section in the Protocol: 10.1
Radio-frequency identification tags
Documentation is required that allows for the identification of all animals in the baseline and project scenarios’ using radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags. Information about the incoming and outgoing mass of animals is not required to be linked to the RFID tags. However, the proponent is encouraged to link both the dates of entry and exit and the incoming and outgoing mass to the RFID tags. This will assist the proponent in calculating the median date of animal exit and animal performance. It may also help facilitate project verification and demonstrate that Protocol requirements have been met.
Related section in the Protocol: 10.2
Incoming and outgoing mass of animals
The proponent must keep records that demonstrate the mean incoming and outgoing mass of animals in an animal group. Records for animal mass can be based on individual measurements such as those obtained through a chute scale or for more than one animal at a time. Examples of multi-animal mass records include weigh scale tickets or purchase information.
Weight records, especially those pertaining to more than on animal at a time, must only apply to animals within an animal group. This is to prevent the growth of animals which are not part of the animal group or project from influencing the measurements.
Related section in the Protocol: 10.2
Reversals and environmental integrity account
Reversals
GHG emission reductions generated by a project implemented following the Protocol are achieved by reducing the amount of CH4 and nitrous oxide (N2O) emitted to the atmosphere from enteric fermentation and manure storage of beef cattle compared to the baseline scenario. These GHG emission reductions are permanent with no risk of reversal. Therefore, reversal risk management plans and permanence monitoring are not applicable for projects implemented following the Protocol.
Contribution to the environmental integrity account
The environmental integrity account (EIA) consists of a pool of credits acting as a form of insurance for ensuring the environmental integrity of the Offset System. All projects must contribute federal offset credits to the EIA.
The EIA contribution rate for projects implemented following the Protocol is 3% of the GHG emission reductions generated (after deducting any GHG emission reductions for which the proponent agrees to forego offset credits pertaining to direct financial incentives received for the project, as per section 29(2) of the Regulations, as applicable). As a result, the number of federal offset credits issued to the proponent for a reporting period will usually represent approximately 97% of the GHG emission reductions, depending on the result of the rounding.