PCS TG 004 Waste to Energy Tool Guide_v1.0

Document Control

Document identification

• Document code: PCS-TG-004

• Title: Waste-to-Energy Tool Guide

• Scope: User guidance for applying the PCS Waste-to-Energy quantification tool, including required inputs, calculation structure, monitoring data requirements, QA/QC expectations, reporting requirements, and verification readiness.

• Application: Supports consistent and audit-ready implementation of the associated WtE methodology by project proponents and VVBs.

Version history and change log

Table DC-1. Revision history

Version	Date	Status	Summary of changes	Prepared by	Approved by
v1.0	TBD	Draft	Release for public consultation	PCS	TBD

Superseded versions

No superseded versions for v1.0.

Governance note on versioning and archiving

Only the latest approved version of this Tool Guide shall be used for new project registrations and related submissions. Superseded versions shall be archived and retained for traceability and audit purposes, including for projects assessed under earlier versions where applicable, consistent with PCS governance rules.

Chapter 1 - Introduction and Purpose of the Tool

1.1 Background

1. Waste-to-Energy (WtE) systems convert municipal solid waste, commercial waste, biomass-rich fractions, or processed fuels such as RDF and SRF into useful forms of energy—typically electricity, heat, steam, or, in some cases, combustible syngas. These systems reduce greenhouse gas emissions by diverting waste away from landfills where it would otherwise generate methane, by displacing fossil fuels used in energy production, and by ensuring controlled combustion at high temperatures that minimizes uncontrolled emissions of methane and nitrous oxide.

2. Because WtE facilities also generate emissions—primarily from the fossil carbon component of waste, from the combustion of auxiliary fuels, from auxiliary electricity use, and from upstream or associated activities—the Planetary Carbon Standard requires a consistent and scientifically credible approach for estimating net climate impacts. This Tool provides that consistency by formalizing all necessary calculations in accordance with PCS-TR-010.

1.2 Purpose of the Tool

1. The Tool serves as the standardized quantitative framework for determining greenhouse gas impacts of WtE projects validated under PCS. It enables users to calculate the greenhouse gas emissions produced by the project, the emissions that would have occurred in the absence of the project, and any additional emissions that may occur outside the project boundary as a result of the project’s operation. Through these calculations, the Tool produces net emission reductions that determine the number of credits a project may claim.

2. The purpose of the Tool extends beyond numerical computation. It enforces methodological rules, embeds conservative defaults where required, ensures transparency and reproducibility, and creates a verification pathway that auditors can review without ambiguity. In this sense, the Tool is both a calculator and a compliance mechanism embedded within the PCS ecosystem.

1.3 Relationship with PCS Methodologies and Technical Requirements

1. The Tool operationalizes the provisions set out in PCS-TR-010. Whereas the technical requirements define eligibility, boundaries, monitoring expectations, additionality conditions, and emission sources, the Tool transforms these requirements into functional calculations. All equations in the Tool correspond directly to equations, definitions, or parameter rules in PCS-TR-010 and the broader PCS quantification framework.

2. The Tool must always be read and applied in conjunction with the methodology. Where discrepancies arise, the rules of PCS-TR-010 take precedence. The Tool is therefore an extension of the methodology, enabling its requirements to be implemented in a standardized, audit-ready manner.

1.4 Scope of the Tool

1. The Tool applies to WtE systems that thermally treat waste under controlled conditions and use the resulting thermal energy or combustible gases to generate electricity, heat, steam, or industrial thermal energy. Eligible project types include mass-burn incineration systems, advanced combustion systems, gasification and pyrolysis units where syngas is combusted for energy, and co-firing systems where RDF or SRF substitutes fossil fuels in industrial furnaces.

2. The Tool can support two primary baseline conditions: one where landfill methane emissions are avoided by diverting waste from land disposal, and another where fossil fuels are displaced by energy generated from waste. In some cases, both conditions apply concurrently. The Tool does not apply to biological waste treatment systems, open burning, or any thermal process that does not recover energy.

1.5 High-Level Calculation Logic

1. The Tool follows a structured calculation sequence that begins with quantifying the characteristics of the waste entering the WtE system. These characteristics determine the split between biogenic and fossil carbon, the energy content of waste, and the mass of recoverable energy. Project emissions are calculated next and include fossil carbon dioxide, combustion-related methane and nitrous oxide, emissions from auxiliary fuels and electricity use, and emissions associated with the handling or treatment of residues. Baseline emissions are then estimated based on either avoided landfill methane or displaced fossil energy, depending on the applicable scenario defined in PCS-TR-010. Leakage is assessed to capture potential indirect emissions outside the project boundary, and finally, net emission reductions are determined as the difference between baseline emissions and the sum of project and leakage emissions.

1.6 Scientific Basis and Alignment

1. The Tool’s structure and embedded formulas draw heavily from the IPCC 2006 Guidelines and 2019 Refinement, particularly the energy and waste volumes. The Tool also incorporates principles consistent with ISO greenhouse gas quantification standards and well-established emission accounting protocols used in regulated and voluntary carbon markets. Scientific integrity is maintained by requiring conservative parameter choices, by distinguishing fossil from biogenic carbon according to internationally recognized principles, and by incorporating methodological mechanisms that prevent overestimation of emission reductions.

2. Although the Tool incorporates default values, it prioritizes measured and site-specific data where credible and verifiable, thereby encouraging accurate project-level quantification.

1.7 Tool Structure

1. The Tool is organized into clearly defined worksheets, each corresponding to a specific component of the calculation process. These worksheets capture project identification information, global parameters, waste inputs, energy outputs, baseline modeling, project emissions, auxiliary fuel use, leakage estimation, and emission reduction summary. Additional sheets support quality assurance, documentation traceability, and user guidance.

2. Together, these sheets create a complete chain of calculations from raw monitored data to final emission reductions in a manner that is internally consistent and fully auditable.

1.8 Intended Users

1. The Tool is designed for project developers responsible for preparing project documentation, facility operators managing data collection, auditors performing verification assessments, and national or regional authorities evaluating the climate performance of WtE interventions. It is sufficiently rigorous for technical experts yet structured in a way that maintains clarity for non-specialist reviewers.

2. Its design ensures that every user—regardless of role—applies the same standardized logic, creating comparability across projects and ensuring the environmental integrity of PCS credits.

Chapter 2 - Scope, Applicability, and Entry Into Force

2.1 Scope of the Tool

1. This Tool is designed to quantify greenhouse gas emissions and emission reductions associated with Waste-to-Energy (WtE) projects that thermally treat waste in controlled conditions and recover useful energy. It translates the methodological requirements of PCS-TR-010 into an operational, standardized calculation framework. The Tool evaluates emissions from fossil and non-CO₂ combustion sources, auxiliary fuels, electricity consumption, residue management, transport, preprocessing, and any other relevant emission pathways, while also estimating baseline emissions from avoided landfill methane or displaced fossil energy.

2. The scope extends across the entire operational lifetime of a WtE system within the PCS project boundary. It allows the integration of diverse waste streams, variable operating conditions, and multiple forms of energy recovery. The Tool is applicable from the initiation of the first monitoring period onward and supports yearly, quarterly, or monthly reporting depending on monitoring arrangements defined in project documentation.

2.2 Applicability Conditions

1. The Tool applies only to projects that thermally treat waste in enclosed, controlled units with the primary purpose of energy recovery. Applicable technologies include mass-burn combustion systems, fluidized-bed incinerators, advanced thermal treatment systems such as gasification and pyrolysis where the produced gas or vapors are combusted to generate energy, and industrial co-firing systems where RDF or SRF replaces fossil fuels in kilns, boilers, or similar installations.

2. To use this Tool, a project must demonstrate that the thermal process is managed, monitored, and operated in accordance with regulatory and engineering standards, ensuring complete combustion or controlled conversion. Energy recovery must be measurable, verifiable, and transferred either to on-site uses or external consumers.

3. The Tool applies when waste diversion results in the avoidance of landfill methane or when the energy output of the WtE facility substitutes fossil-based power or heat. Both baseline conditions may apply simultaneously if justified by project circumstances. Projects that do not recover energy, that rely on open burning, or that perform biological treatment without thermal conversion fall outside the scope of this Tool. Anaerobic digestion and landfill gas projects follow separate PCS methodologies and cannot use this Tool.

2.3 Entry Into Force

1. The Tool becomes applicable from the date of its publication under the Planetary Carbon Standard. Any project with monitoring periods beginning after the official release date must use the current version unless PCS Secretariat specifies otherwise. Projects with monitoring periods already underway at the time of revision may transition to the updated version, provided the transition follows PCS guidance on versioning, transparency, and consistency.

2. When newer versions of the Tool are issued, they supersede previous versions for future monitoring periods. However, emission results already verified under earlier versions remain valid. The integrity of the Tool is preserved by version control protocols that record the date of issuance, update history, and applicable period for each version, ensuring clarity for project developers and auditors.

2.4 Relationship Between Applicability and Methodology Selection

1. The Tool’s applicability must align with the methodological choices made under PCS-TR-010. A project that intends to use the landfill methane baseline must demonstrate that, in the absence of the project, waste would have been disposed in landfills generating methane. A project using the fossil energy displacement baseline must show that its energy products replace identifiable fossil-based energy streams.

2. Where both conditions apply, the Tool supports dual baseline quantification, provided no double-counting occurs. Applicability must be justified with evidence, such as waste supply chain assessments, energy market data, and regulatory or municipal waste management plans.

3. Only after applicability is demonstrated may the Tool be used to generate quantitative results. This ensures that the Tool is applied within appropriate boundaries consistent with PCS methodological rules and ensures the environmental credibility of resulting emission reductions.

2.5 Limitations of Applicability

1. While broad in scope, the Tool has intentional limitations. It does not quantify emissions from upstream waste generation, consumer behavior, or broader municipal system changes, unless such changes constitute leakage or are directly attributable to the project. The Tool also does not determine additionality; it only quantifies emissions after a project is deemed eligible.

2. Further, the Tool does not assess circularity benefits, recycling displacement impacts, or avoided open burning unless these factors are explicitly included in PCS-TR-010 or supplementary PCS guidance. Emission sources that cannot be reasonably attributed to the WtE process fall outside the Tool’s calculation boundary.

2.6 Interaction With Other PCS Tools and Documents

1. This Tool is part of a larger suite of PCS quantification instruments. Projects using this Tool may also be required to apply the PCS Monitoring and Reporting Framework, PCS Non-Permanence Risk Tools, and applicable guidance for data quality, uncertainty management, and evidence referencing.

2. When multiple PCS tools are applied, the order of precedence is defined as:

3. PCS Core Framework

4. PCS-TR-010 Methodology

5. PCS-TR-010 Tool (this document)

6. Supplementary PCS guidelines

7. This ensures consistent interpretation and avoids conflicts between methodological requirements and tool implementation.

Chapter 3 - Definitions

3.1 Purpose of Definitions Section

1. The Waste-to-Energy Tool relies on a number of technical, methodological, and scientific terms originating from the broader PCS framework, international GHG accounting standards, waste engineering practice, and energy conversion science. This chapter provides clear and consistent definitions to ensure that users interpret each term uniformly. The definitions apply throughout the Tool, the PCS-TR-010 methodology, and any accompanying project documentation.

2. Terms are presented in two categories: general definitions relevant to greenhouse gas accounting across PCS methodologies, and tool-specific definitions relevant to thermal waste treatment and energy recovery systems. Consistent usage of these terms supports transparency and ensures that calculations follow the intended logic embedded in the Tool.

3.2 General Definitions

1. These definitions originate from the Planetary Carbon Standard’s core framework, international climate measurement protocols, and IPCC guidance.

• Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO₂e) refers to greenhouse gases expressed using a common scale based on their Global Warming Potential (GWP₁₀₀). It allows aggregation of gases with different radiative properties.

• Global Warming Potential (GWP) represents the integrated radiative forcing effect of a greenhouse gas relative to CO₂ over a 100-year time horizon. The Tool applies GWP values consistent with PCS versioning rules and international scientific bodies.

• Project Boundary defines the physical and operational limits within which emissions and activity data are quantified. For WtE projects, this includes waste reception, thermal conversion units, energy recovery systems, flue gas treatment, residue handling, and auxiliary systems.

• Baseline Scenario describes the situation that would occur in the absence of the project. Under PCS-TR-010, baselines may involve landfill disposal of waste or the consumption of fossil fuels for energy production.

• Monitoring Period refers to the discrete time interval during which data are collected and quantified for verification and credit issuance.

• Leakage denotes net increases in emissions occurring outside the project boundary but attributable to the project’s implementation. The Tool quantifies such emissions when they are material and measurable.

• Emission Factor is a coefficient that relates an emission quantity to an activity variable, such as CO₂ per tonne of fuel combusted or CH₄ per unit of electricity produced.

3.3 Tool-Specific Definitions

1. These definitions pertain to waste characteristics, thermal conversion processes, and energy accounting. They are central to how the Tool interprets input data and applies formulas.

• Waste-to-Energy (WtE) refers to thermal treatment of waste in managed, high-temperature systems designed to recover energy. Eligible systems include combustion, gasification, pyrolysis, and co-firing of refuse-derived fuels.

• Biogenic Carbon is carbon originating from biological materials such as food waste, paper, textiles, and wood. Biogenic carbon releases do not contribute to fossil CO₂ emissions in the Tool, although non-CO₂ gases from combustion are included.

• Fossil Carbon is carbon contained in plastics, synthetic fibers, petrochemical residues, and similar materials derived from fossil sources. Fossil carbon is fully accounted for as CO₂ emissions when combusted.

• Lower Heating Value (LHV) represents the net calorific content of waste or fuel, excluding latent heat of vaporization. LHV is essential for evaluating energy efficiency and determining the relationship between waste inputs and energy outputs.

• Syngas is a mixture of combustible gases generated during gasification or pyrolysis. Its energy content is accounted for only if the gas is subsequently combusted to produce measurable energy. Uncombusted syngas losses (syngas slip) are treated as emissions where applicable.

• Auxiliary Fuel includes diesel, natural gas, fuel oil, or any other energy carriers consumed by the WtE facility to support its operation. Emissions from auxiliary fuels are reported as project emissions.

• Residue refers to bottom ash, fly ash, flue gas treatment residues, boiler ash, or other solid materials generated from thermal conversion. When residues require transport or further treatment, their associated emissions fall under project or leakage categories depending on location.

• Net Electricity Export is the amount of electricity generated by the facility and delivered for external use after deducting internal consumption. It is used in both displacement baselines and project emissions.

• Net Heat Export refers to thermal energy delivered beyond internal uses. For projects with heat recovery systems, this energy is treated analogously to electricity in baseline calculations.

3.4 Mathematical and Symbolic Conventions

1. The Tool employs symbols that mirror PCS-TR-010 and IPCC formulations. These symbols ensure consistency across all equations and spreadsheets.

• PEᵧ denotes total project emissions for a monitoring period.

• BEᵧ represents total baseline emissions for the same period.

• LEᵧ denotes leakage emissions attributable to the project.

• ERᵧ is the net emission reduction, calculated as the difference between baseline emissions and the sum of project plus leakage emissions.

• DOC, DOC_f, MCF, k and related parameters follow the nomenclature of the first-order decay model where applicable.

• EF indicates emission factors associated with combustion, auxiliary fuels, grid electricity, or thermal fuels.

1. These symbols appear throughout the Tool to avoid ambiguity and maintain alignment with recognized scientific conventions.

3.5 Interpretation and Priority Rules

1. Where a term appears in both the Tool and the methodology, the definition in PCS-TR-010 prevails. The Tool may provide clarifying detail, but it does not modify methodological definitions. Terms with regulatory significance, such as landfill types or combustion efficiency classes, are interpreted in accordance with local laws unless PCS specifies otherwise. In all cases, interpretations must uphold the principle of conservative estimation unless robust evidence justifies deviations.

Chapter 4 - Parameters Determined by the Tool

4.1 Purpose of Parameter Determination

1. The Waste-to-Energy Tool translates monitored data, default factors, and methodological requirements into quantitative parameters used to assess greenhouse gas impacts of WtE projects. This chapter clarifies the parameters that the Tool calculates directly, their functional roles, and how they interact to form the final emission reduction estimate. The parameters generated by the Tool form the foundation of verifiable carbon accounting under PCS-TR-010. They must therefore be interpreted and applied consistently across all monitoring periods.

4.2 Overview of Core Quantitative Outputs

1. The Tool produces four principal outputs that define the greenhouse gas performance of a project. These outputs follow the structure of PCS quantification rules and together define the net climate benefit attributed to the WtE system.

• Project emissions (PEᵧ) represent all greenhouse gas emissions occurring within the project boundary as a result of facility operations during a monitoring period. They capture fossil CO₂ released from combustion of the waste’s fossil fraction, combustion-related methane and nitrous oxide, emissions from auxiliary fuels and electricity use, and emissions arising from residue handling or treatment.

• Baseline emissions (BEᵧ) represent the emissions that would have occurred in the absence of the project. Depending on the applicability conditions, this may include methane emissions from landfills that would have received the waste, fossil-based electricity or heat generation that is replaced by energy from the WtE facility, or a combination of these. The Tool applies the appropriate baseline scenario in accordance with PCS-TR-010.

• Leakage emissions (LEᵧ) account for indirect emissions outside the project boundary but attributable to project implementation. The Tool quantifies leakage from transport of waste, residues, or auxiliary materials, from preprocessing activities such as shredding or drying of RDF/SRF, and from any displaced waste treatment operations.

• Net emission reductions (ERᵧ) are the final quantitative output of the Tool. They represent the verified climate benefit of the WtE project and are calculated as the difference between baseline emissions and the sum of project emissions and leakage emissions. This value forms the basis for credit issuance under PCS.

4.3 Parameters Calculated Within the Tool

1. The Tool generates a series of intermediate parameters to support the calculation of PEᵧ, BEᵧ, and LEᵧ. Although these parameters do not appear as final reporting items, they are essential for the transparency and accuracy of the calculation chain.

• Waste-related parameters: The Tool calculates the biogenic and fossil fractions of waste streams when partial composition data are provided. It also determines fossil mass, biogenic mass, and the fossil-derived CO₂ emissions associated with combustion. Where lower heating value (LHV) is provided, the Tool may derive energy conversion efficiency indicators that support baseline displacement calculations.

• Combustion-related parameters: The Tool estimates methane and nitrous oxide emissions associated with thermal conversion using either emission factors consistent with IPCC guidance or facility-specific data when available. Fossil CO₂ is treated separately to ensure alignment with carbon cycle principles.

• Energy-related parameters: The Tool determines net electricity exported, net heat exported, and the fraction of generated energy used internally. These parameters are essential for displacement baselines and for evaluating on-site electricity consumption as part of project emissions.

• Landfill methane parameters: Where the landfill methane baseline applies, the Tool constructs baseline methane generation using the first-order decay model or validated site-specific data. It calculates methane oxidation, methane released to atmosphere, and ultimately methane expressed as CO₂e using applicable GWP values.

• Fuel and reagent parameters: Auxiliary fuel use, reagent consumption for flue gas treatment, or other operational inputs are quantified as CO₂e emissions based on fuel emission factors or material-specific coefficients. The Tool aggregates these inputs into the project emissions total.

• Transport and preprocessing parameters: Distance, load factors, and fuel consumption values feed into leakage quantification. The Tool converts these into CO₂e emissions using relevant transport emission factors.

4.4 Structure of Parameter Determination

1. The Tool organizes parameter determination across its worksheet architecture. Waste parameters are generated within the WASTE_INPUTS sheet, energy parameters within the ENERGY_DATA sheet, baseline quantities within the BASELINE_SCENARIO sheet, and project emissions within the PROJECT_EMISSIONS sheet. Each sheet serves a distinct role, but all are interconnected through formulas that prevent internal inconsistency.

2. Parameters not directly measured by the project—such as default emission factors, GWP values, and landfill methane modeling parameters—are located in the PARAMETERS sheet. The Tool applies these values automatically unless a user replaces defaults with site-specific data accompanied by appropriate evidence.

4.5 Interpretation and Use of Calculated Parameters

1. The parameters generated by the Tool must be interpreted strictly according to PCS rules. Project emissions cannot be adjusted or omitted based on facility performance claims without corresponding evidence. Baseline emissions may only reflect conditions that are demonstrably applicable and justified. Leakage parameters must be included whenever an attributable emission pathway exists, even if its magnitude is minor.

2. The final parameter, ERᵧ, reflects the quantitative mitigation outcome of the project. It is not a theoretical value but a monitored and verifiable result produced from multiple interlinked calculations. This value may be subject to verification adjustments or uncertainty assessments but remains the primary determinant of credits issued under PCS for a given monitoring period.

Chapter 5 - Calculation Procedures

5.1 Purpose and Structure of the Calculation Procedures

1. This chapter presents the quantitative logic that underpins the Tool’s emission calculations. It outlines the mathematical framework for determining project emissions, baseline emissions, leakage emissions, and net emission reductions, and reflects the requirements established in PCS-TR-010. The equations provided here are embedded within the Tool, ensuring that results are consistent, conservative, and scientifically supported.

2. The calculation procedures are organized into distinct components corresponding to major emission sources and sinks. Each component contributes to the final emission reduction value, and all components must be evaluated in accordance with the methodology and the monitoring data provided by the project.

5.2 Fossil Carbon Dioxide Emissions From Combustion

1. Fossil CO₂ emissions arise from the combustion of the fossil carbon fraction of waste. The Tool determines these emissions using the mass of fossil waste and a carbon oxidation factor reflecting near-complete combustion in controlled WtE systems.

2. The basic equation for fossil CO₂ emissions is (implemented in the Tool) where the fossil mass of each waste batch is multiplied by the carbon-to-CO₂ conversion factor and any oxidation factor. Oxidation is assumed to be complete unless evidence supports a deviation, in line with international combustion engineering practice.

3. This calculation distinguishes fossil from biogenic carbon, ensuring that only carbon of fossil origin contributes to CO₂ emissions.

5.3 Methane and Nitrous Oxide Emissions From Combustion

1. Although high-temperature facilities minimize non-CO₂ emissions, measurable quantities of methane and nitrous oxide may still arise. These emissions depend on combustion conditions, residence time, and flue gas treatment configuration.

2. The Tool applies emission factors consistent with IPCC guidelines or validated facility-specific measurements, where emissions are estimated based on activity (energy generated or waste combusted) and converted to CO₂e using GWP values defined in the PARAMETERS sheet.

3. The Tool ensures that these gases are treated as project emissions even when their magnitude is small relative to fossil CO₂.

5.4 Avoided Landfill Methane Emissions (Baseline)

1. Where waste diversion prevents landfill disposal, the baseline consists of methane that would have been generated under business-as-usual waste management. The Tool applies the first-order decay (FOD) model, which represents the scientific basis for methane generation from degrading waste.

2. The equation for baseline methane generation is the IPCC FOD formula where the parameters correspond to degradable organic carbon content, decomposition factors, methane correction factors, fraction of carbon converted to methane, and decay constants.

3. Methane oxidation in landfill cover layers is then applied and the resulting methane is expressed as CO₂e using the standard GWP for methane.

4. The Tool allows the FOD model to be replaced by robust site-specific landfill gas measurements, provided these measurements meet PCS methodological requirements.

5.5 Fossil Energy Displacement Baseline

1. When a WtE facility supplies electricity, heat, or steam, it may displace fossil energy sources in the host grid or industrial system. The Tool calculates such baseline emissions using observed net energy exports and appropriate emission factors.

2. For electricity, baseline emissions are computed using net electricity exported multiplied by the relevant grid emission factor.

3. For heat or steam, the baseline uses net thermal energy exported multiplied by the appropriate thermal fuel emission factor.

4. These baseline emissions represent the fossil energy that would have been required to generate equivalent useful energy in the absence of the project. Emission factors may be national defaults, utility-specific values, or PCS default factors depending on data availability and the methodological rules governing conservativeness.

5.6 Auxiliary Fuel and Auxiliary Electricity Emissions

1. Auxiliary fuels such as diesel, natural gas, or fuel oil support facility operations. Their associated emissions are quantified by summing the product of each fuel quantity and its emission factor.

2. Electricity consumed on-site also contributes to project emissions unless it can be demonstrated that it is generated internally. The Tool applies imported electricity multiplied by the grid emission factor.

5.7 Residue Transport and Treatment Emissions

1. Residues generated from the thermal process may require transport, landfilling, stabilization, or other treatment. The Tool evaluates these emissions based on activity data such as tonnage transported, distance traveled, and energy required for residue handling.

2. Where residues displace other industrial materials (such as bottom ash used in cement), such benefits are not credited unless specifically allowed under PCS-TR-010.

5.8 Leakage Calculations

1. Leakage includes emissions occurring outside the project boundary but attributable to project activity. Common leakage pathways include transport of waste from alternative disposal sites, preprocessing operations required for RDF or SRF production, or increased transport distances for residues.

2. The Tool applies conservative conversion of activity data (distances, fuel use) to CO₂e using relevant emission factors.

3. Leakage is included only when the activity can be demonstrated to result from project implementation rather than from systemic waste management changes unrelated to the project.

5.9 Final Emission Reduction Calculation

1. After project, baseline, and leakage emissions are determined, the Tool calculates emission reductions for the monitoring period as:

ERᵧ = BEᵧ − PEᵧ − LEᵧ

This result reflects the verified climate impact of the WtE system. It must be positive for credits to be issued, and its value must be supported by transparent and auditable data.

Chapter 6 - Data and Parameters Used in the Tool

6.1 Purpose and Structure of Data Requirements

1. Accurate quantification of emissions and emission reductions depends on the quality and consistency of data used within the Tool. The Tool integrates parameters that originate from monitored measurements, laboratory analyses, engineering specifications, regulatory sources, peer-reviewed emissions databases, and approved PCS defaults. This chapter explains the categories of data required, the sources from which they may be drawn, and the principles governing their use.

2. The Tool distinguishes between data entered directly by the user and parameters that are pre-defined within the PARAMETERS sheet. The Tool prioritizes measured and verifiable site-specific data whenever such data meets PCS standards. When direct measurement is not feasible or reliable, appropriate defaults or conservative assumptions must be used following PCS-TR-010.

6.2 Data Not Measured by the Project (Default or External Sources)

1. Some parameters are not directly monitored by the project but are required for the Tool’s calculations. These parameters are obtained from IPCC guidelines, national inventories, industry standards, or PCS-approved default values. They ensure uniformity across projects while maintaining scientific consistency.

• Emission factors: Electricity grid emission factors, fossil fuel emission factors, thermal fuel substitution factors, and transport emission factors are typically sourced from national GHG inventories or internationally recognized databases. When national values differ significantly from standard references, the Tool applies the values most consistent with PCS conservativeness rules.

• Global Warming Potentials: GWP values for methane and nitrous oxide follow PCS versioning rules and are consistent with IPCC’s 100-year GWP₁₀₀ values. The Tool does not permit unverified substitution of GWP values.

• Landfill methane parameters: In baseline scenarios involving avoided landfill disposal, the first-order decay parameters—DOC, DOC_f, MCF, k, and oxidation fraction—are drawn from IPCC defaults unless robust site-specific studies justify alternatives. Values must reflect the type of landfill and climatic conditions described in PCS-TR-010.

• Auxiliary fuel emission factors: Fuels such as diesel, natural gas, or fuel oil use emission factors from recognized energy statistics or PCS default tables unless facility-specific fuel characteristics are documented and verifiable.

1. These default or external parameters establish a consistent reference framework across diverse project types and jurisdictions.

6.3 Data Measured by the Project (Monitoring-Based Inputs)

1. The Tool includes several parameters that must be measured directly by the project using calibrated equipment, standardized sampling procedures, and appropriate documentation. These data form the core evidence set supporting emission reduction calculations.

• Waste inputs: Waste mass, waste type, and corresponding batch information are measured at the facility’s reception system. The biogenic and fossil fractions of waste are determined through characterization studies or accepted sampling methodologies. Lower heating value (LHV) may be measured in laboratory settings or derived from representative testing campaigns.

• Energy production and consumption: Electricity generated, electricity consumed internally, heat produced, and heat consumed internally must be recorded using metering equipment that meets technical and regulatory standards. Net energy export values are calculated within the Tool based on these measurements.

• Auxiliary fuel use: Quantities of auxiliary fuels consumed and their units are measured from fuel supply meters, purchase records, or other verifiable sources. Their emissions are determined in the Tool by combining these measurements with emission factors.

• Residues: Mass of ash, flue gas treatment residues, or any other solid by-products is measured at the point of removal or disposal. Transport distances or treatment activities associated with these residues may also influence project or leakage emissions.

• Transport and preprocessing data: Vehicle distances, fuel consumption profiles, and preprocessing energy requirements (e.g., shredding, drying) are recorded when they form part of project or leakage boundaries.

1. Measured data serve as the primary inputs for emission calculations, and their accuracy is fundamental to the integrity of the Tool’s outputs.

6.4 Hierarchy of Data Use

1. The Tool applies a structured hierarchy to determine which data source is appropriate for each parameter:

2. Measured and verifiable site-specific data are used whenever feasible.

3. Scientific or engineering data from accredited laboratories or certified equipment follow when direct measurement is not available.

4. National defaults may be used when supported by authoritative sources and aligned with PCS conservativeness.

5. PCS-approved defaults or IPCC values serve as fallback options when no other reliable source is available.

6. This hierarchy prevents arbitrary substitution of values and ensures that projects use the most accurate and conservative parameters available.

6.5 Requirements for Data Completeness and Quality

1. All data entered into the Tool must be reported for the full monitoring period unless specifically exempted by PCS-TR-010. Missing data cannot be substituted without documentation, justification, and appropriate conservative assumptions. Supporting evidence for all data sources—whether measured or default—must be available for verification.

2. The Tool incorporates internal consistency checks, prompting users when inputs are incomplete or incompatible. These checks do not replace the need for robust QA/QC procedures but provide an additional layer of validation.

6.6 Integration of Data Into Calculation Processes

1. Each category of data feeds directly into specific calculation modules within the Tool. Waste characterization parameters determine fossil CO₂ emissions and influence landfill methane calculations. Energy production and consumption data determine both baseline displacement and project emissions. Auxiliary fuel and preprocessing data feed into the project emissions and leakage components. Emission factors and GWP values shape how each input translates into CO₂e.

2. The Tool’s structure ensures that all data interact seamlessly through linked formulas, producing transparent and auditable results. In this manner, the Tool maintains methodological rigor while allowing flexibility to accommodate project-specific conditions.

Chapter 7 - Monitoring Requirements

7.1 Purpose of Monitoring Requirements

1. Monitoring requirements ensure that data used within the Tool are accurate, complete, and traceable. Since emission calculations rely heavily on measured values from waste inputs, energy outputs, fuel consumption, and operational activities, monitoring serves as the foundation of credible quantification. The requirements in this chapter establish the minimum standards for how data must be collected, managed, and verified to support the Tool’s outputs in alignment with PCS-TR-010.

2. Monitoring is not limited to recording numerical values; it also encompasses documentation, calibration, procedural consistency, and evidence management. The objective is to ensure that all data entered into the Tool represent actual facility conditions and can withstand independent audit scrutiny.

7.2 Monitoring of Waste Inputs

1. Waste entering the facility must be monitored systematically. The mass of each load is recorded using calibrated weighbridges or equivalent weighing equipment. Waste types must be identified with sufficient detail to link them to composition studies, LHV testing, and biogenic–fossil fraction determinations.

2. The characterization of waste is conducted through representative sampling programs established at appropriate intervals. These programs must describe sampling frequency, sample preparation, laboratory testing standards, and statistical treatment of results. For facilities processing mixed waste streams, characterization must reflect actual variations rather than relying on static assumptions.

3. All waste monitoring records must include the date of receipt, origin (if available), load identifier, mass, and any relevant classification notes. These records form the basis for calculating fossil and biogenic carbon fractions and the associated emissions.

7.3 Monitoring of Energy Production and Consumption

1. Electricity and heat generation are central to the Tool because they influence both baseline displacement and project emissions. All energy meters used to measure electricity generation, electricity consumed internally, heat production, or steam output must comply with regulatory or industry calibration standards.

2. Monitoring must capture gross energy produced, internal consumption, and net exports. If energy is used on-site for auxiliary processes, such consumption must be clearly separated and accounted for. The facility must maintain meter readings, calibration certificates, operational logs, and maintenance records to demonstrate continuous measurement accuracy.

3. In facilities producing both electricity and heat, monitoring systems must distinguish these outputs without ambiguity. Any instance of metering downtime must be documented and resolved through approved estimation procedures following PCS-TR-010 rules.

7.4 Monitoring of Auxiliary Fuels

1. Auxiliary fuels support ignition, temperature control, or process stability. Monitoring of these fuels requires tracking the type and amount consumed during each monitoring period. Measurements may come from tank level meters, fuel purchase invoices, supply meters, or flow meters.

2. The monitoring system must include:

• Clear identification of fuel type and its physical units,

• Records of delivery dates, withdrawal quantities, and consumption allocation,

• Evidence that measurements reflect actual operational usage and not inventory adjustments.

1. Auxiliary fuel data are necessary to calculate energy-related emissions within the project boundary and must be verified with supporting documentation.

7.5 Monitoring of Residues

1. Residues such as bottom ash, fly ash, and flue gas treatment solids must be monitored at the point of removal from the WtE system. Monitoring includes mass, moisture content (where relevant), and destination (landfill, reuse, or external treatment).

2. Where residues result in emissions—for example, due to transport or treatment—these activities must be recorded with sufficient detail to quantify their contribution to project or leakage emissions. Documentation should include transport records, disposal receipts, analysis of residue characteristics, and any regulatory evidence related to their handling.

7.6 Monitoring of Transport and Preprocessing Activities

1. Transport of waste, residues, auxiliary materials, or RDF/SRF must be monitored if such movements fall within project or leakage boundaries. This includes monitoring distances traveled, vehicle types, and fuel use attributable to transport. For preprocessing activities such as shredding, drying, or pelletizing of waste fuels, energy consumption and equipment operation data must be recorded.

2. These monitored values ensure accurate quantification of leakage emissions and must be supported by logs, equipment specifications, invoices, or automated tracking systems.

7.7 Monitoring of Operational Parameters Influencing Emissions

1. Certain operational conditions may materially affect emissions. Examples include combustion temperature, oxygen concentration in the primary chamber, residence time, flue gas treatment parameters, and syngas quality for gasification or pyrolysis systems.

2. While not all operational parameters are used directly in the Tool’s equations, they must be monitored to demonstrate that the facility operates within design specifications. Deviations should be documented and justified, and may necessitate adjustments to emission calculations depending on PCS-TR-010 requirements.

7.8 Calibration and Quality Assurance of Monitoring Equipment

1. All monitoring instruments must be calibrated in accordance with manufacturer recommendations, regulatory requirements, or recognized engineering standards. Calibration certificates must be retained and made available during verification.

2. A quality assurance plan should describe procedures for routine inspection, recalibration, troubleshooting, and correction of measurement errors. Any equipment malfunction must be logged, and corrective actions should be recorded along with the method used to estimate missing or unreliable data.

7.9 Data Management and Recordkeeping

1. Monitoring data must be stored in a secure, organized, and tamper-resistant format. Records must be kept for the duration specified in PCS documentation and host-country regulations.

2. Data management includes maintaining versions of spreadsheets, ensuring transparency in data entry, and avoiding overwriting of historical records. All data used in the Tool must be traceable to original sources. Evidence must be cataloged in the EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet, linking specific calculations in the Tool to their supporting documentation.

7.10 Verification Readiness

1. Monitoring procedures must be structured so that an independent verifier can reconstruct any reported value from underlying documentation. The project must demonstrate that monitoring practices follow PCS-TR-010 requirements and that all data used in emission calculations are accurate, properly validated, and readily auditable.

2. Verification readiness is an integral requirement; monitoring must be implemented so that the Tool’s outputs are defendable, consistent, and reproducible.

Chapter 8 - Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC)

8.1 Purpose of QA/QC

1. Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) ensures that all data entered into the Tool and all resulting calculations are accurate, reliable, and consistent with PCS requirements. Since emission reduction estimates depend heavily on measured data, proper QA/QC safeguards the scientific integrity of the Tool’s outputs. This chapter describes the procedures and expectations that projects must follow to ensure the credibility of monitoring data, the precision of measurements, and the traceability of all information used in the Tool.

8.2 Principles Governing QA/QC

1. QA/QC is guided by several overarching principles. Measurements must be performed using equipment that is suitable for purpose, properly calibrated, and operated under conditions that ensure reliable performance. Data must be recorded and stored systematically, and any deviation from standard practice must be justified and documented. The project must demonstrate that all procedures used to obtain monitoring data follow defined protocols and that any adjustments or corrections applied to data are transparent and technically justified.

8.3 Equipment Calibration and Verification

1. All monitoring equipment—such as weighbridges, electricity meters, heat meters, flow meters for auxiliary fuels, and laboratory instruments used for waste characterization—must undergo routine calibration. Calibration should follow either manufacturer guidelines or legal metrology standards applicable in the host country.

2. Calibration certificates must be retained for verification. The project must also maintain a calibration schedule outlining frequency, responsible personnel, and acceptance criteria. If any equipment fails calibration or produces inconsistent readings, the project must document the issue, implement corrective actions, and apply estimation procedures compliant with PCS-TR-010 to address data gaps.

8.4 QA/QC for Waste Characterization

1. Waste composition and lower heating value measurements rely heavily on laboratory or field-based sampling procedures. QA/QC measures must ensure that sampling is representative of the waste streams entering the facility and that analytical methods meet recognized technical standards.

2. Protocols must specify how samples are collected, handled, prepared, and analyzed. Any deviation from the sampling plan must be recorded and explained. Laboratory testing should be carried out by qualified personnel using equipment maintained under recognized quality systems. Results must be traceable to specific samples, and all documentation must be retained for audit purposes.

8.5 QA/QC for Energy Data

1. Electricity and heat measurements require high accuracy because they directly influence both baseline displacement and project emissions. Meters must be inspected periodically to ensure stable performance. Any discrepancies or meter downtime must be documented. Where necessary, conservative estimation methods must be applied to reconstruct missing data following PCS methodology.

2. Operational logs that record energy generation and consumption should be maintained consistently. Cross-checks between meter readings, facility operating hours, and energy production patterns help to validate recorded data.

8.6 QA/QC for Auxiliary Fuels and Operational Inputs

1. Auxiliary fuel consumption must be corroborated by purchase receipts, flow meter readings, or storage inventory logs. Discrepancies between recorded usage and fuel supply must be investigated and resolved. Documentation that supports the accuracy of fuel emission factors, particularly when site-specific values are used, must also be maintained.

2. Where reagent use contributes to emissions—for example, activated carbon or lime—records must support the quantities reported and verify their association with emissions accounted for in the Tool.

8.7 QA/QC for Transport and Preprocessing Data

1. Transport-related emissions often depend on measured distances, fuel consumption rates, or specific vehicle characteristics. QA/QC procedures should validate that recorded distances reflect actual movements associated with the project and that fuel consumption estimates are reasonable.

2. Preprocessing data, such as energy consumed for shredding or drying waste, must be linked clearly to operational logs or equipment specifications. Cross-checking energy consumption trends with waste throughput helps ensure that preprocessing-related emissions are accurately represented.

8.8 Internal Consistency Checks

1. The Tool incorporates automatic consistency checks that compare related data fields to identify irregularities. Users must review these checks and resolve inconsistencies before submitting results for verification. Consistency checks may include reconciliation between waste inputs and energy outputs, comparison of auxiliary fuel usage with facility operation hours, and validation of residue quantities relative to waste throughput.

2. These internal checks do not replace formal QA/QC procedures but act as an additional safeguard to help ensure that the Tool’s calculations reflect actual project conditions.

8.9 Data Traceability and Evidence Management

1. All data entered into the Tool must be traceable to a verifiable source. Evidence must be catalogued in the EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet, with clear links to documents such as calibration certificates, lab reports, operational logs, purchase records, and regulatory filings.

2. Traceability requires maintaining a clear chain of documentation that connects raw data to processed values used in the Tool. Changes to data inputs must be justified and accompanied by supporting documentation. Version control practices must ensure that historical records are preserved to allow auditors to replicate calculations from previous monitoring periods.

8.10 Handling Data Uncertainty and Data Gaps

1. Where uncertainty exists in measured values, the project must adopt conservative assumptions in accordance with PCS-TR-010. If data gaps occur, they must be addressed using approved estimation procedures, and the justification for these procedures must be documented. Missing data must never be replaced by speculative values or optimistic assumptions.

2. In cases of systemic uncertainty—such as variability in waste composition—the project must demonstrate that sampling methods appropriately capture expected variability and that the Tool’s calculations reflect the best available evidence.

8.11 Verification Readiness

1. QA/QC activities must be aligned with verification requirements. Prior to audit, the project must ensure that all data are internally consistent, properly documented, and fully traceable. Verification readiness includes confirming that the Tool is populated correctly, that calculations reflect methodological requirements, and that all evidence is available for review.

2. A well-structured QA/QC system not only supports compliance but also minimizes the risk of verification findings that may delay or reduce credit issuance.

Chapter 9 - Tool Implementation Workflow

Below is a step-by-step workflow for using the Waste-to-Energy Tool. Each step corresponds to actions, required data, the Tool sheet used, and outputs generated.

1

Define Project Information

• Action: Enter project identifiers, technology type, monitoring period, and applicable baseline scenario.

• Data Required: Project name, location, technology details, baseline justification.

• Tool Sheet: PROJECT_INFO

• Output: Structured metadata and scenario selection.

2

Enter Global and Default Parameters

• Action: Review and confirm GWP values, emission factors, landfill methane constants, and auxiliary defaults. Replace defaults only when justified.

• Data Required: GWP values, grid EF, landfill parameters, auxiliary fuel emission factors.

• Tool Sheet: PARAMETERS

• Output: Parameter set used across all calculations.

3

Record Waste Inputs

• Action: Input waste batches received, including mass, category, and characterization results. Tool generates fossil and biogenic fractions.

• Data Required: Load mass, waste type, LHV, fossil/biogenic fraction, sampling data.

• Tool Sheet: WASTE_INPUTS

• Output: Fossil mass, biogenic mass, and fossil CO₂ potential.

4

Record Energy Outputs and Onsite Use

• Action: Enter measured electricity and heat production along with internal consumption values.

• Data Required: Electricity generated, internal load; heat/steam production; metered data.

• Tool Sheet: ENERGY_DATA

• Output: Net electricity and heat export values.

5

Determine Baseline Emissions

• Action: Depending on applicability, the Tool computes avoided landfill methane or displaced fossil energy baseline.

• Data Required: Waste data, FOD parameters; grid EF; thermal fuel EF.

• Tool Sheet: BASELINE_SCENARIO

• Output: BE_CH₄ (landfill) and/or BE_energy (displacement).

6

Estimate Project Emissions

• Action: The Tool aggregates fossil CO₂, CH₄, N₂O, auxiliary fuel emissions, onsite electricity, and residue handling emissions.

• Data Required: Waste-derived fossil carbon; emission factors; auxiliary fuel data; residue data.

• Tool Sheet: PROJECT_EMISSIONS

• Output: Total PEᵧ for the monitoring period.

7

Quantify Leakage Emissions

• Action: Enter transport, preprocessing, reagent use, or displaced facility impacts attributable to the project.

• Data Required: Transport distances, vehicle data, preprocessing energy use, displaced treatment detail.

• Tool Sheet: LEAKAGE

• Output: Total LEᵧ.

8

Produce Net Emission Reductions

• Action: Tool computes final emission reductions based on all modules.

• Data Required: PEᵧ, BEᵧ, LEᵧ (auto-filled).

• Tool Sheet: ER_SUMMARY

• Output: ERᵧ = BEᵧ – PEᵧ – LEᵧ.

9

Complete QA/QC Checks

• Action: Review internal consistency checks, verify evidence links, confirm calibration, and resolve anomalies.

• Data Required: Evidence documents, logs, calibration files.

• Tool Sheet: QA_QC_LOG

• Output: QA/QC verification readiness.

10

Prepare Evidence Reference Matrix

• Action: Link each data point to an evidence source for audit.

• Data Required: Supporting documentation.

• Tool Sheet: EVIDENCE_REFERENCE

• Output: Full traceability for verification.

11

Finalize Tool for Submission

• Action: Lock non-editable cells, document assumptions, archive version, and prepare for verifier review.

• Data Required: Tool version, monitoring dataset.

• Tool Sheet: Entire Tool

• Output: Validated, traceable submission package.

Chapter 10 - Reporting Requirements

10.1 Purpose of Reporting Requirements

1. Reporting requirements ensure that the results produced by the Tool are communicated in a consistent, verifiable, and transparent manner. This chapter establishes the minimum reporting standards that project developers must follow when submitting monitoring results for verification and credit issuance. The reporting structure must allow an independent verifier to reconstruct the entire calculation chain from raw data to final emission reductions.

2. The reporting requirements apply to every monitoring period and must reflect the actual data entered into the Tool, the methodological decisions applied, and any assumptions or exclusions used in the calculation process.

10.2 Structure of the Monitoring Report

1. The monitoring report accompanying the Tool must follow a clear structure that aligns with PCS-TR-010. It must contain a narrative description of the project’s operational performance, data collection practices, and key quantification results. The required structure typically includes:

2. Project identification and monitoring period summary.

3. Overview of WtE facility operation during the period, including noteworthy operational changes or deviations.

4. Summary of monitored data: waste inputs, energy outputs, auxiliary fuel use, residues, and transport activities.

5. Explanation of methodologies applied, including justification for baseline scenario selection.

6. Presentation of calculated emissions (project emissions, baseline emissions, leakage).

7. Final emission reduction value for the monitoring period.

8. List of evidence and references supporting the calculations.

9. QA/QC measures implemented during the period.

10. Declaration of accuracy and completeness.

11. This structure ensures completeness and facilitates verification.

10.3 Reporting of Waste Inputs

1. The report must describe the total waste received, broken down by type, source (if applicable), and any significant variations in composition. Waste characterization campaigns must be summarized, including sampling frequency, analytical methods, and laboratory details.

2. Key elements to report include:

• Total waste mass processed during the period

• Average fossil and biogenic fractions

• Lower heating values (if measured)

• Description of waste sorting or preprocessing (if undertaken)

1. These data must correspond exactly to those entered into the Tool.

10.4 Reporting of Energy Generation and Use

1. Reporting must include gross and net electricity generation, heat production, and internal consumption values. The narrative must identify all meters used, their calibration status, and any instances of data loss or reconstruction.

2. If the project exports energy to the grid or an industrial user, the report must specify the point of delivery and document any contractual or technical arrangements affecting metering.

10.5 Reporting of Project Emissions

1. The report must clearly present emissions arising from:

• Fossil carbon dioxide from waste combustion

• Methane and nitrous oxide emissions from the thermal process

• Auxiliary fuel combustion

• Electricity consumed from the grid (if applicable)

• Residue transport and treatment

1. Each category must be associated with the parameters and formulas used to derive the results. Temporary deviations or unusual operational conditions influencing emissions must be described.

10.6 Reporting of Baseline Emissions

1. If the baseline is landfill methane avoidance, the report must describe the landfill conditions assumed, the waste disposal pathway in the absence of the project, and the FOD parameters used. Evidence supporting landfill type, climatic conditions, and methane correction factors must be included.

2. If the baseline is displacement of fossil energy, the report must identify the type of fossil energy displaced and justify the emission factors used. Where applicable, national grid EF sources must be cited.

3. If both baseline types apply, the report must demonstrate that no double-counting occurs.

10.7 Reporting of Leakage

1. Leakage emissions must be reported with a narrative explaining each pathway, including waste or residue transport distances, preprocessing requirements, auxiliary activities outside the project boundary, and any displacement of non-project waste treatment. All calculations must be supported by evidence, such as transport logs or equipment energy consumption data.

10.8 Reporting of Emission Reductions

1. The report must present the final emission reduction value (ERᵧ) for the monitoring period and include a table summarizing:

• Total baseline emissions

• Total project emissions

• Total leakage

• Net emission reductions

1. A narrative must explain any significant changes from previous monitoring periods, such as increased waste throughput or improvements in combustion efficiency.

10.9 Evidence Reference Requirements

1. All reported values must be linked to supporting documentation. The EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet in the Tool must be aligned with the monitoring report, and each evidence file must have a unique reference code. Documents must be organized in a way that allows auditors to trace values back to their original records.

2. Evidence typically includes weighbridge logs, laboratory reports, calibration certificates, operational logs, energy meter readings, auxiliary fuel invoices, residue disposal receipts, and transport documentation.

10.10 Reporting of Deviations and Corrective Actions

1. Any deviation from monitoring protocols, equipment malfunction, or substitution of data with estimates must be transparently reported. Each deviation must include:

• The reason for the deviation

• Time period affected

• Method used to reconstruct or estimate data

• Impact on emission calculations

• Corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence

1. Transparent reporting of deviations strengthens credibility and reduces verification disputes.

10.11 Submission and Version Control

1. The Tool and monitoring report must be submitted using the version mandated by PCS at the time of reporting. Version numbers and dates must be clearly indicated in both documents. Any changes to the Tool during the monitoring period—such as corrections or data updates—must be documented.

2. Final submission must include all attachments, evidence files, and a verification-ready archive of calculations.

Chapter 11 - Verification Requirements

11.1 Purpose of Verification Requirements

1. Verification establishes confidence that emission reductions reported in the Tool are accurate, justified, and compliant with PCS-TR-010. It provides an independent assessment of whether the data used represent actual facility performance and whether all calculations follow prescribed methodological rules. This chapter describes what a verifier must confirm and what the project developer must prepare to support a complete and transparent verification process.

11.2 Verification Boundary and Objectives

1. Verification covers all elements of the calculation chain, from waste acceptance and energy production data to leakage activities and baseline justification. The aim is to ensure that the information feeding into the Tool is correct and that the Tool’s formula-driven results have been generated without manipulation. The verifier must be able to trace each numerical value back to its original source and confirm that the project applied PCS-TR-010 correctly.

11.3 Requirements for Evidence Availability

1. All data entered into the Tool must be supportable with primary records. Projects are expected to maintain complete and organized documentation covering waste measurements, energy metering, laboratory analyses, equipment calibration, auxiliary fuel usage, transport activities, and residue handling. Evidence must be coded and referenced consistently so that each value in the Tool can be associated with a corresponding document. The EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet must provide a clear mapping between evidence files and the calculations they support.

11.4 Requirements for Data Review and Reconciliation

1. Verifiers must be able to compare data in the Tool with underlying evidence and reproduce the calculations performed. For waste data, this includes confirming the alignment between weighbridge logs and waste quantities entered. For energy data, it includes reconciling meter readings with values in the Tool. For auxiliary fuels, consistency between invoices, meter logs, and consumption entries must be demonstrated. Mutually reinforcing records—such as operational logs that correspond to waste throughput and energy production—support credibility. Any discrepancy between Tool entries and documentation must be investigated and resolved before verification can be completed.

11.5 Verification of Tool Integrity

1. Verifiers must confirm that the correct Tool version was used and that its formula structure remains intact. The Tool must not contain overwritten formulas, unauthorized modifications, or manual calculations in protected areas. The internal consistency checks built into the Tool must pass without unexplained anomalies. All links between the PARAMETERS sheet and downstream calculation sheets must be functioning. Where necessary, the verifier may conduct parallel calculations to confirm that the Tool’s formulas operate as intended.

11.6 Verification of Baseline Scenarios

1. Baseline verification begins with confirming that the selected baseline scenario is appropriate for the project’s conditions. For landfill methane baselines, verification involves checking that waste diversion is demonstrated and that the landfill characteristics align with the parameters selected. Landfill methane modeling values—such as DOC, DOC_f, methane correction factors, decay constants, and oxidation rates—must be justified using recognized sources.

2. For displacement baselines, verification focuses on confirming net electricity and heat exports, validating the emission factors applied, and assessing whether the facility indeed displaces fossil-based energy. The justification for each baseline parameter must be provided, and the verifier must ensure that no emission source is counted twice, especially in cases where both baseline types apply.

11.7 Verification of Leakage

1. Leakage must be verified to ensure that emissions attributed to activities outside the project boundary are correctly calculated and genuinely linked to the project. The verifier examines documentation relating to waste transport routes, residue handling movements, preprocessing energy use for RDF or SRF, and any shifts in external waste treatment systems. Where leakage values depend on assumed distances, fuel consumption rates, or operational characteristics, supporting evidence must be available. The verifier must confirm that all included leakage pathways are justified and that unrelated activities have not been erroneously classified as leakage.

11.8 Verification of QA/QC Systems

1. QA/QC systems are essential to maintaining reliable data. Verifiers must confirm that equipment calibration has been conducted as scheduled and that calibration certificates are current and valid. They must review documentation on equipment malfunctions, data reconstruction procedures, and corrective actions. For waste characterization, sampling plans and laboratory records must demonstrate methodological rigor. The overall QA/QC framework must show that the project actively manages data quality rather than correcting issues retroactively.

11.9 Handling of Deviations, Corrections, and Non-Conformities

1. Any deviation from monitoring procedures or methodological requirements must be transparently documented. This includes equipment failures, data gaps, atypical operating conditions, and any adjustments made to estimated values. The project must provide a clear explanation of why the deviation occurred, how missing or unreliable data were reconstructed, and what corrective actions were taken. The verifier assesses whether the proposed corrections follow PCS rules and whether they introduce uncertainty that requires conservative adjustment. Persistent or significant deviations may be classified as non-conformities and must be addressed before verification can be concluded.

11.10 Final Verification Statement

1. Once verification activities are complete, the verifier issues a formal statement summarizing the monitoring period assessed, the scope of verification, any adjustments made to emission calculations, and the final verified emission reductions. The statement also notes any conditions for future monitoring or recommendations for improving data quality. This verification statement, together with the Tool and accompanying documentation, forms the basis for credit issuance under PCS.

Annex A - Parameter Reference Table

1. This annex provides the complete set of parameters used in the PCS Waste-to-Energy Tool. It consolidates symbols, units, default values, and reference sources into a unified table to ensure consistency, transparency, and auditability across projects.

2. Each parameter listed below must either be:

• Used exactly as specified, or

• Replaced with a site-specific value supported by verifiable evidence and justified according to PCS-TR-010 rules.

1. Where multiple default options exist (e.g., landfill conditions), the project must select the most conservative applicable value and document the rationale in the monitoring report.

A.1 Global Parameters

Parameter	Symbol	Unit	Default Value	Source / Justification
Global Warming Potential of methane	GWP	tCO₂e/tCH₄	28 (or PCS-defined vintage)	IPCC AR5; PCS GWP rules
Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide	GWP	tCO₂e/tN₂O	265 (or PCS-defined vintage)	IPCC AR5; PCS GWP rules
Density of methane	ρ	kg/m³	0.67 at 0°C; 1 atm	IPCC defaults
Carbon fraction of CH₄	C	–	0.75	Molecular structure

A.2 Waste-Related Parameters

Parameter	Symbol	Unit	Default Value	Source / Justification
Degradable Organic Carbon	DOC	fraction	0.08–0.21 (waste-type dependent)	IPCC 2006, Vol. 5
Fraction of DOC that decomposes	DOC_f	fraction	0.5	IPCC 2006
Fraction of decomposed carbon converted to CH₄	F	fraction	0.5	IPCC 2006
Methane Correction Factor	MCF	fraction	0.4–1.0 depending on landfill type	IPCC 2006
Oxidation factor	OX	fraction	0–0.1 (default)	IPCC 2006; PCS conservativeness
Biogenic fraction of MSW	–	%	Project-specific; no default	Must be measured or based on study
Fossil carbon oxidation factor	–	–	1 (complete oxidation)	Thermal engineering standards

A.3 Combustion Emission Factors

Parameter	Symbol	Unit	Default Value	Source / Notes
Fossil CO₂ emission factor (per tonne fossil waste)	EF	tCO₂/t	Project-specific (calculated)	Based on fossil carbon fraction
CH₄ emission factor for controlled combustion	EF	kgCH₄/t waste	0.005	IPCC 2006, Energy Vol. 2
N₂O emission factor for controlled combustion	EF	kgN₂O/t waste	0.005	IPCC 2006
Combustion efficiency	–	%	98–100%	Engineering design—must document

A.4 Energy-Related Parameters

Parameter	Symbol	Unit	Default Value	Source / Notes
Grid emission factor	EF	tCO₂/MWh	Country-specific	National inventory or PCS default
Thermal energy displacement factor	EF	tCO₂/GJ	0.056–0.094 (fuel-dependent)	Based on displaced fuel type
Lower Heating Value of waste	LHV	MJ/kg	Project-specific	Based on lab testing
Electricity meter uncertainty	–	%	±1%	Metering standards

A.5 Landfill Methane Baseline Parameters

Parameter	Symbol	Unit	Default Value	Source
First-order decay constant	k	yr⁻¹	0.03–0.07 (climate-dependent)	IPCC 2006
Recovery efficiency (if landfill has gas system)	–	%	Case-specific	Verified landfill data
Methane generation potential	L	m³ CH₄/t	Derived from DOC, DOCf, F	IPCC formula

A.6 Auxiliary Fuel Parameters

Auxiliary Fuel	Emission Factor (CO₂)	Unit	Source
Diesel	2.68	tCO₂/kL	IPCC 2006
Fuel Oil	3.11	tCO₂/kL	IPCC
Natural Gas	56.1	kg CO₂/GJ	IPCC
LPG/Propane	63.1	kg CO₂/GJ	IPCC

Additional non-CO₂ factors apply if combustion conditions are atypical.

A.7 Transport and Leakage Parameters

Parameter	Unit	Default Value	Source
Heavy-duty truck EF	gCO₂/ton-km	62–85	International transport datasets
Diesel EF (CH₄ + N₂O)	kgCO₂e/L	0.009	IPCC
Distance baseline	km	Project-specific	Must match transport logs

A.8 Residue Management Parameters

Parameter	Unit	Default Value	Notes
Bottom ash moisture content	%	15–25	Typical range; site-specific preferred
Residue transport EF	kgCO₂/ton-km	Same as heavy-duty truck EF	Must use measured distance
Stabilization reagent EF	kgCO₂/kg	Project-specific	Must be evidenced

A.9 Parameter Use Rules

1. All parameters in this annex are governed by three rules:

2. Traceability - every parameter must be linked to a source.

3. Conservativeness - when multiple applicable values exist, the most conservative one must be selected unless robust justification supports otherwise.

4. Transparency - any deviation from defaults must be clearly explained in the monitoring report and evidenced.

Annex B - Data Requirement Matrix

1. This annex specifies all data required for the PCS Waste-to-Energy Tool, organized by category, source, measurement method, unit, frequency, and evidence expectations. It ensures that project developers, operators, and auditors can clearly understand what must be monitored, how, and where it is used in the Tool.

B.1 Purpose of the Data Requirement Matrix

1. The matrix establishes a unified reference for all quantitative and qualitative data needed to operate the Tool. It ensures:

• Completeness of monitoring systems

• Consistency between the Tool and real-world measurements

• Transparency during verification

• Proper alignment with PCS-TR-010

1. All data listed here must be collected, archived, and linked to evidence in the EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet.

B.2 Master Data Matrix

Table B-1 below summarizes core required data (selected entries retained for completeness). Projects must refer to the full matrix in their Tool and evidence files.

Data Item	Description / Purpose	Unit	Source / Measurement Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Project Name & ID	Identifier for reporting and verification	–	Administrative records	Once per project	PROJECT_INFO	Project document
Monitoring Period	Defines reporting window	Dates	Administrative	Each monitoring cycle	PROJECT_INFO	Project filing

Waste Input Data

Data Item	Description / Purpose	Unit	Source / Measurement Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Total waste mass received	Basis for all waste-related calculations	tonnes	Calibrated weighbridge	Every load	WASTE_INPUTS	Weighbridge tickets, logs
Waste type/category	Links waste to characterization profile	–	Operator classification; visual or documented	Each load	WASTE_INPUTS	Waste manifests
Biogenic fraction	Determines fossil vs biogenic carbon	%	Laboratory analysis; sampling program	Monthly or quarterly	WASTE_INPUTS	Lab reports, sampling plan
Fossil fraction	Derived or measured fraction	%	Laboratory analysis	Same as above	WASTE_INPUTS	Lab reports
Lower Heating Value (LHV)	Energy content; baseline displacement input	MJ/kg	Bomb calorimeter testing	Monthly or quarterly	WASTE_INPUTS	Lab certificates
Moisture content (if relevant)	Supports composition and LHV analysis	%	Laboratory	As per sampling schedule	WASTE_INPUTS	Lab reports

Waste Characterization Study Data

Data Item	Description / Purpose	Unit	Source / Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Sampling plan description	Ensures representative sampling	–	Technical document	Annual or per campaign	Evidence Reference only	Sampling protocol
Composition by waste category	Required for DOC and landfill baseline	%	Lab testing per IPCC/PCS protocol	Per campaign	WASTE_INPUTS	Full analytical report
Calorific value categories	Supports energy modeling	MJ/kg	Laboratory	Per campaign	WASTE_INPUTS	Laboratory results

Energy Production and Consumption Data

Data Item	Purpose	Unit	Measurement Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Gross electricity generated	Baseline displacement and net emissions	MWh	Calibrated electricity meter	Continuous logging	ENERGY_DATA	Meter logs, calibration
Electricity consumed onsite	Determines net export; part of PEᵧ	MWh	Meter	Continuous	ENERGY_DATA	Meter records
Gross heat/steam generated	Heat recovery assessment	GJ or tonnes steam	Heat meter, steam flow meter	Continuous	ENERGY_DATA	Meter logs
Heat consumed onsite	Determines net export	GJ	Meter	Continuous	ENERGY_DATA	Operational logs
Exported electricity	Displacement baseline	MWh	Delivery meter	Continuous	ENERGY_DATA	Grid/industrial offtake records
Exported heat	Displacement baseline	GJ	Heat meter	Continuous	ENERGY_DATA	Heat offtake contracts

Combustion and Stack-Related Data (if used)

Data Item	Purpose	Unit	Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Combustion CH₄ factor	Non-CO₂ emissions	kgCH₄/t	Default or continuous emissions monitoring	As needed	PARAMETERS	Source documentation
Combustion N₂O factor	Non-CO₂ emissions	kgN₂O/t	Default or monitoring	As needed	PARAMETERS	Evidence source
Oxygen concentration, temperature (if affecting EF)	Confirm combustion stability	% / °C	CEMS or manual readings	Continuous or routine	PROJECT_EMISSIONS	Logs

Auxiliary Fuel Data

Data Item	Purpose	Unit	Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Fuel type	Distinguishes emission factors	–	Procurement or metering	Per delivery	AUX_FUELS	Purchase records
Fuel quantity consumed	PEᵧ calculation	liters, kg, GJ	Flow meter, tank records	Continuous or monthly	AUX_FUELS	Invoices, logs
Fuel LHV (if used)	Supports conversions	MJ/kg	Standard fuel spec	As needed	AUX_FUELS	Supplier datasheet

Residues and Treatment Data

Data Item	Purpose	Unit	Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Mass of bottom ash	Residue emissions, leakage	tonnes	Weighbridge	Per removal	PROJECT_EMISSIONS	Disposal receipts
Mass of fly ash & APC residues	Treatment/transport emissions	tonnes	Baghouse/collection system	Per removal	PROJECT_EMISSIONS	Manifests
Disposal location & distance	Leakage	km	Transport logs, GPS	Per trip	PROJECT_EMISSIONS or LEAKAGE	Transport documentation

Transport & Preprocessing Data

Data Item	Purpose	Unit	Method	Frequency	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Distance travelled (waste, residues)	Leakage	km	Transport logs, manifests	Per movement	LEAKAGE	Routing documentation
Vehicle fuel consumption	Leakage	L/100 km	Manufacturer spec or monitoring	As needed	LEAKAGE	Vehicle data
Preprocessing energy (RDF/SRF)	Additional project emissions or leakage	kWh, GJ	Metering	Continuous or per batch	LEAKAGE	Energy logs

Baseline Scenario Data

Landfill Methane Baseline

Data Item	Purpose	Unit	Source	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Landfill type	Determines MCF	–	Municipal documentation, site survey	BASELINE_SCENARIO	Landfill classification evidence
DOC, DOCf values	FOD model inputs	fraction	IPCC defaults or local study	PARAMETERS	Citation or study
Decay rate (k)	FOD parameter	yr⁻¹	Climate classification	PARAMETERS	Climate data source
Oxidation factor	Methane oxidation	fraction	IPCC default or field test	PARAMETERS	Documentation

Energy Displacement Baseline

Data Item	Purpose	Unit	Source	Tool Sheet	Evidence Required
Grid EF	Displacement baseline	tCO₂/MWh	National inventory or PCS default	PARAMETERS	Citation
Displaced thermal fuel type	Defines EF	–	Market or operational data	PARAMETERS	Evidence of displaced energy
Thermal EF	Heat displacement	tCO₂/GJ	National/default	PARAMETERS	Documentation

B.3 Data Completeness and Cross-Checks

1. The Tool expects all required fields to be populated unless PCS-TR-010 provides specific exceptions.

2. Cross-checks include:

• Waste mass vs. energy output trends

• Auxiliary fuel consumption vs. operating hours

• Residue mass vs. waste input composition

• Transport distances vs. routing documents

1. Any anomalies must be resolved or justified before verification.

B.4 Minimum Evidence Requirements

1. Each data point must be linked to an evidence file. At minimum, projects must maintain:

• Logs and meter readings

• Laboratory reports

• Calibration certificates

• Transport manifests

• Procurement records

• Operational logs

• Sampling protocols

• Regulatory documents when relevant

1. All evidence files must be referenced in the EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet.

Annex C - Waste Characterization Guidance

1. Waste characterization is fundamental to the accuracy of the Waste-to-Energy Tool because the fossil carbon fraction, biogenic fraction, DOC content, moisture content, and calorific value directly influence project emissions and baseline calculations. This annex provides a complete framework for sampling, laboratory analysis, data treatment, and integration into the Tool.

C.1 Purpose and Scope

1. This annex defines the procedures required to generate reliable and representative waste composition and energy-content data for use in PCS-TR-010 calculations. Characterization must reflect the actual waste entering the facility throughout the monitoring period, acknowledging temporal variations caused by season, collection practices, and waste management policies.

2. The guidance applies to mixed municipal solid waste, commercial waste, and refuse-derived fuels (RDF/SRF). It does not apply to single-stream homogeneous industrial wastes unless the project demonstrates that such waste has stable and predictable composition.

C.2 Principles of Representative Sampling

1. Representative sampling is central to characterization. The objective is to ensure that the sampled waste accurately reflects the broader waste stream. Representative sampling requires planned, structured, and unbiased collection of waste batches. Sampling must be performed at intervals sufficient to capture variability.

2. Samples must be taken from multiple points within a waste load to avoid stratification effects. Larger waste particles may require manual sorting before homogenization. The sampling plan must specify how samples are collected, the tools used, and the personnel responsible.

3. Waste loads should be mixed or turned—where operationally feasible—before sampling to reduce heterogeneity. If mixing is not possible, subsampling must target different depths and areas of the load.

C.3 Sample Size and Frequency

1. Sample size must be large enough to represent the waste stream but manageable for laboratory preparation. Typical composite sample sizes range from 50 to 100 kg before reduction for laboratory analysis. Facilities processing waste with high variability may require larger composite masses.

2. Sampling frequency must correspond to operational patterns. A minimum of one full characterization campaign per quarter is recommended, although higher frequencies may be necessary if waste inputs shift significantly due to seasonal or operational changes.

3. Characterization must include several subsamples collected across the monitoring period, aggregated or analyzed individually depending on variance.

C.4 Sample Preparation

1. Sample preparation ensures that the analyzed sample reflects the original waste characteristics. Steps typically include sorting, shredding, homogenizing, and quartering.

2. Sorting distinguishes waste into categories (organics, paper, plastics, textiles, metals, glass, and inert materials) according to methodological needs. Categories that influence DOC and fossil-carbon estimation must be preserved and weighed individually.

3. Homogenization reduces particle-size variability, particularly for RDF/SRF. Shredding must follow safety and quality guidelines, ensuring that moisture and volatile content are not unintentionally altered.

4. Quartering reduces large composite samples into laboratory-ready portions without bias. Each reduction step must maintain proportional representation of all fractions.

C.5 Laboratory Analytical Methods

1. Laboratory analysis must be performed by accredited or competent laboratories using standardized techniques.

• Moisture Content: Determined by drying a sample at 105°C until constant mass is achieved. Moisture influences LHV calculations and may affect carbon content estimates.

• Lower Heating Value (LHV): Measured using a bomb calorimeter following recognized standards. Results must reflect as-received, dry, or dry-ash-free conditions depending on analytical objectives. The selected basis must be consistently applied when entering Tool values.

• Carbon Content (Fossil and Biogenic): Fossil carbon determination may use radiocarbon (¹⁴C) analysis or compositional inference based on category-level percentages. Biogenic carbon is calculated as the complement. For RDF/SRF, ¹⁴C analysis is strongly preferred as it provides high accuracy.

• Waste Composition Categories: Laboratory results must produce quantitative breakdowns of waste categories relevant to DOC calculations. Categories must be compatible with IPCC defaults or PCS-defined classifications.

1. All laboratory data must include metadata describing sample origin, analysis date, equipment used, and uncertainty ranges.

C.6 Calculation of Biogenic and Fossil Fractions

1. Biogenic and fossil fractions derive from laboratory or compositional analysis. When ¹⁴C methods are used, the fraction is calculated directly from the proportion of modern carbon detected. When composition-based analysis is used, each category contributes to biogenic or fossil mass based on recognized definitions.

2. Biogenic fraction = (Mass of biogenic material / Total sample mass) Fossil fraction = 1 − biogenic fraction

3. These fractions scale directly to total waste inputs in the Tool.

C.7 Calculation of Degradable Organic Carbon (DOC)

1. DOC is calculated based on category-level contributions following IPCC guidance where DOC is the sum over waste categories of the weight fraction times the default DOC for that category.

2. DOC values for paper, textiles, food, wood, and garden waste dominate the calculation, whereas plastics, metals, and inert materials contribute zero.

3. DOC must reflect seasonally adjusted composition when significant variations exist.

C.8 Quality Assurance Requirements

1. Quality assurance requires calibration of laboratory instruments, standardized preparation protocols, and chain-of-custody procedures for sample transfer. Duplicate or replicate samples must be analyzed when variability is expected. Laboratories must document uncertainties and provide certificates of analysis.

2. Sampling teams must be trained to ensure consistency. All deviations from the sampling plan must be recorded and justified. If field conditions require modifications to sample mass or collection points, the rationale must be included in the monitoring report.

C.9 Integration of Characterization Results Into the Tool

1. The Tool uses characterization results to compute fossil CO₂ emissions, landfill methane baselines, and energy-related parameters. Therefore, results must be transferred to the Tool in a consistent and documented manner.

2. Biogenic and fossil fractions must populate the WASTE_INPUTS sheet. DOC values are entered into PARAMETERS unless default values apply. LHV values populate the waste batch entries and influence displacement baseline calculations.

All characterization documents must be referenced in the EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet.

C.10 Updating Characterization During the Project

1. Waste composition may shift over time due to municipal policy changes, population variations, or facility sourcing agreements. Projects must periodically review whether previously collected characterization data remain valid.

2. If significant changes are observed, additional sampling campaigns must be conducted. Monitoring plans should reflect expected variability and define thresholds that trigger new characterization studies.

Annex D - Baseline Decision Framework

This annex provides structured guidance to determine the appropriate baseline scenario (landfill methane avoidance, fossil energy displacement, or hybrid) for a given WtE project, and documents required evidence and logic.

D.1 Purpose and Function of the Decision Framework

169–171. The baseline scenario represents the emissions that would occur in the absence of the WtE project. The framework ensures baseline selection is evidence-based, conservative, and avoids double-counting. The decision framework must be applied during project design, reviewed during monitoring periods when conditions change, and validated during verification.

D.2 Core Criteria for Baseline Selection

172–173. Baseline selection depends on:

• Waste’s most likely fate without the project (landfill → landfill methane baseline).

• Energy system characteristics (project energy displaces fossil-based energy → displacement baseline).

• Regulatory or market conditions (policy-driven diversion or renewable obligations that affect baseline).

D.3 Decision Framework Presented in a Logical Sequence

1. The logic sequence guides when to apply landfill methane baseline, displacement baseline, or both.

D.4 Decision Tree — Structured Logic Table

Decision Step	Question	If YES	If NO	Result / Notes
1	Is the waste thermally treated in a controlled chamber under the project?	Proceed to Step 2	Not eligible	Baseline assessment stops.
2	Would the waste be landfilled in the absence of the project?	Apply landfill methane baseline (go to Step 3)	Proceed to Step 4	Requires evidence of current waste management practice.
3	Does the landfill receive similar waste streams today?	Apply FOD-based methane baseline	Adjust if landfill has gas capture	Supports methane avoidance baseline.
4	Does the project generate useful energy (electricity/heat/steam)?	Proceed to Step 5	Project is not eligible	Energy recovery is mandatory.
5	Does the generated energy displace fossil-based electricity or heat?	Apply fossil displacement baseline	Proceed to Step 6	Requires grid EF or fuel EF evidence.
6	Is waste-derived syngas combusted for useful energy?	Apply ATT (gasification/pyrolysis) provisions	Proceed to Step 7	Determines methodological pathway.
7	Is RDF/SRF co-fired in an industrial furnace?	Apply co-firing baseline rules	Proceed to Step 8	Determines additional displacement logic.
8	Does the project prevent materials from reaching an existing incinerator?	Adjust baseline to avoid double-counting	Proceed to Step 9	Needed if waste was already destined for thermal treatment.
9	Does the project produce both waste diversion AND energy displacement benefits?	Apply hybrid baseline (summation without overlap)	Apply single baseline	Must ensure no double-counting.

D.5 Narrative Explanation of Baseline Selection Outcomes

• Landfill Methane Baseline: Applies when evidence shows waste would be landfilled absent the project; use FOD or site-specific landfill gas data, accounting for capture systems as appropriate.

• Fossil Energy Displacement Baseline: Applies when project energy displaces fossil-based electricity or heat; use appropriate grid or fuel emission factors.

• Hybrid Baseline: Both components may apply if they represent distinct, non-overlapping benefits; documentation must demonstrate separability and avoid double-counting.

D.6 Documentation Requirements for Baseline Determination

175–176. Baseline selection must be justified with evidence (municipal plans, disposal records, contracts, grid mix data, landfill operations). All supporting documents must be referenced in the EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet.

Annex E - Tool Workflow Diagram

E.1 Process Flow Table for PCS Waste-to-Energy Tool

177–177. The process flow is linear and decision-linked. Table E-1 summarizes steps (also represented in Chapter 9 stepper).

Step No.	Process Step	Input Required	Output Produced	Next Step
1	Initialize project information	Project metadata, monitoring period	Project profile established	Step 2
2	Select applicable baseline scenario	Waste fate evidence, energy system data	Baseline pathway identified	Step 3
3	Enter global parameters	GWPs, emission factors, landfill constants	Parameter set validated	Step 4
4	Record waste inputs	Waste mass, composition, LHV, fractions	Fossil & biogenic carbon values generated	Step 5
5	Record energy data	Electricity/heat generation and consumption	Net energy exports determined	Step 6
6	Compute baseline emissions	Baseline parameters + energy/waste data	BEₓ calculated (landfill, displacement, or hybrid)	Step 7
7	Compute project emissions	Combustion, auxiliary fuels, residues, electricity use	PEₓ calculated	Step 8
8	Compute leakage emissions	Transport, preprocessing, off-site impacts	LEₓ calculated	Step 9
9	Generate emission reductions	BEₓ, PEₓ, LEₓ	ERₓ = BEₓ − PEₓ − LEₓ	Step 10
10	Conduct QA/QC review	Monitoring records, calibration, consistency checks	Validated dataset	Step 11
11	Compile evidence references	All supporting documentation	Referenced evidence matrix	Step 12
12	Finalize submission package	Tool output + report + evidence	Verification-ready package	End

Annex G - Evidence Reference Structure

This annex standardizes how evidence is catalogued and linked to Tool inputs. Every data point entered must reference an evidence item from the index.

G.1 Evidence Reference Framework

179–180. Evidence items receive a Reference Code used in the EVIDENCE_REFERENCE sheet. The framework identifies category, type, date, and source.

G.2 Evidence Reference Table

Table G-1 — Master Evidence Reference Index (examples):

Reference Code	Evidence Category	Document Type	Description / Purpose	Source	Date	File Name / Location
W-01	Waste Inputs	Weighbridge log	Daily waste receipt record (mass & category)	Facility weighbridge	DD/MM/YYYY	/waste/weighbridge_log_DDMMYY.pdf
W-02	Waste Inputs	Waste manifest	Supplier documentation for waste batch	Municipal supplier	DD/MM/YYYY	/waste/waste_manifest_DDMMYY.pdf
C-01	Characterization	Sampling plan	Protocol for waste sampling and sorting	Project operator	Version/date	/characterization/sampling_plan.pdf
C-02	Characterization	Lab analysis report	Biogenic/fossil fraction, composition, moisture	Accredited lab	DD/MM/YYYY	/characterization/lab_report_biogenic.pdf
C-03	Characterization	LHV certificate	Calorific value analysis (bomb calorimetry)	Laboratory	DD/MM/YYYY	/characterization/LHV_report.pdf
E-01	Energy Data	Electricity meter log	Gross generation and internal consumption	Facility SCADA	DD/MM/YYYY	/energy/electricity_meter_log.xlsx
E-02	Energy Data	Heat meter log	Steam/thermal output meter readings	Heat meter system	DD/MM/YYYY	/energy/heat_meter_log.xlsx
F-01	Auxiliary Fuels	Fuel purchase record	Fuel type, quantity, delivery confirmation	Fuel supplier	DD/MM/YYYY	/fuels/purchase_invoice.pdf
F-02	Auxiliary Fuels	Fuel tank reading	Onsite consumption record	Facility operations	DD/MM/YYYY	/fuels/tank_readings.xlsx
R-01	Residues	Ash disposal record	Bottom/fly ash mass and disposal location	Disposal operator	DD/MM/YYYY	/residues/ash_manifest.pdf
R-02	Residues	APC residue analysis	Chemical analysis if required by regulations	Lab	DD/MM/YYYY	/residues/APC_lab_report.pdf
T-01	Transport & Leakage	Transport log	Distance, vehicle ID, waste/residue trip log	Transport contractor	DD/MM/YYYY	/transport/transport_log.xlsx
T-02	Transport & Leakage	GPS route map	Route verification	GPS system	DD/MM/YYYY	/transport/GPS_route.pdf
B-01	Baseline	Municipal waste plan	Evidence of waste fate in absence of project	Municipality	Version/date	/baseline/waste_management_plan.pdf
B-02	Baseline	Grid emission factor source	National GHG inventory or PCS default source	Gov./PCS	DD/MM/YYYY	/baseline/grid_EF_source.pdf
B-03	Baseline	Landfill data	Landfill type, gas capture info, operational status	Municipality / Landfill operator	DD/MM/YYYY	/baseline/landfill_data.pdf
P-01	Parameters	IPCC factor source	Source for DOC, DOCf, MCF, decay constants	IPCC 2006/2019	–	/parameters/IPCC_reference.pdf
QA-01	QA/QC	Calibration certificate	Weighbridge calibration documentation	Calibration service	DD/MM/YYYY	/QAQC/weighbridge_calibration.pdf
QA-02	QA/QC	Meter calibration	Electricity/heat meter calibration	Certified technician	DD/MM/YYYY	/QAQC/meter_calibration.pdf
QA-03	QA/QC	Monitoring deviation note	Explanation of missing data, estimated values	Operator	DD/MM/YYYY	/QAQC/deviation_note.pdf

G.3 Evidence Categorization Rules

181–181. Evidence items use category prefixes (W, C, E, F, R, T, B, P, QA) and sequential numbering. Files should follow a standard naming convention and folder structure:

/evidence/

/waste/

/characterization/

/energy/

/fuels/

/residues/

/transport/

/baseline/

/parameters/

/QAQC/

G.4 Required Evidence Characteristics

182–182. Evidence must be traceable, verifiable, complete, consistent, and unaltered (except for scans/digital conversions). Projects must retain evidence for required durations.

G.5 Integration With the Tool

183–184. Each Tool sheet contains an "Evidence Reference" column. This must contain the corresponding Reference Code from Table G-1 (e.g., waste mass entry → W-01).

Annex H — Formula Transparency Notes

This annex documents the embedded calculations and formula groups used within the Tool to ensure transparency and alignment with PCS-TR-010 and IPCC guidance.

H.1 Overview of Formula Groups

186–186. Calculation groups include baseline emissions, project emissions, leakage emissions, net emission reductions, and supporting calculations (carbon content, biogenic/fossil split, energy exports).

H.2 Waste Characterization and Fossil Carbon Calculations

H.2.1 Fossil and Biogenic Fractions

1. Derived from characterization data (lab or compositional analysis).

H.2.2 Fossil Carbon Mass

1. Fossil carbon mass per tonne of waste is computed from fossil fraction and total mass.

H.2.3 Fossil CO₂ Emissions From Waste Combustion

1. Assuming complete oxidation of fossil carbon, fossil CO₂ = fossil carbon mass × (44/12) [3.667] × oxidation factor.

H.3 Baseline Emission Calculations

1. Baseline emissions include landfill methane (using FOD) or displaced fossil energy (electricity or heat).

H.3.1 Landfill Methane Baseline — FOD Model

192–195. Baseline methane generation is computed using the FOD model with DOC, DOCf, MCF, F, k parameters; oxidation and GWP applied to convert to CO₂e.

H.3.2 Energy Displacement Baseline

196–197. Electricity displacement: BE_electricity = net electricity exported × grid EF. Heat/steam displacement: BE_heat = net heat exported × thermal EF.

H.4 Project Emissions Calculations

1. Project emissions aggregate fossil CO₂ (from waste), CH₄ and N₂O (combustion), auxiliary fuel emissions, electricity imported, and residue handling.

H.4.1 Fossil CO₂ From Combustion

1. As in H.2.3.

H.4.2 CH₄ and N₂O From Combustion

1. CH₄ and N₂O emissions = activity × corresponding EF, converted to CO₂e by GWP.

H.4.3 Auxiliary Fuel Emissions

Aux_fuel_emissions = Σ (fuel_i_quantity × EF_fuel_i).

H.4.4 Electricity Consumption by the Facility

Imported_electricity_emissions = imported_electricity × grid EF.

H.4.5 Residue Transport and Treatment Emissions

Transport_emissions = Σ (residue_mass × distance × vehicle EF). Treatment emissions calculated per treatment-specific factors.

H.5 Leakage Calculations

1. Leakage includes off-site transport, preprocessing energy, and other indirect emissions linked to the project.

H.5.1 Transport Leakage

Transport leakage = activity × transport EF (ton-km × EF).

H.5.2 Preprocessing Energy Use (RDF/SRF)

Preprocessing_emissions = preprocessing_energy × applicable EF.

H.6 Net Emission Reductions Formula

1. ER = BE − PE − LE (calculated per monitoring period and aggregated annually where relevant).

H.7 Embedded Consistency Checks

206–207. Tool performs checks: waste mass vs. residue mass, energy export vs. generation, parameter completeness, and fossil fraction sum validations.

Annex I — Glossary Of Technical Terms

1. This glossary standardizes terminology used in the Tool and associated documents, ensuring consistent interpretation across stakeholders.

I.1 Glossary of Terms

(Selected entries presented — full glossary available in the Tool)

• Auxiliary Fuels: Fuels used within the WtE facility for support functions.

• Baseline Scenario: Emissions representing what would occur without the project.

• Biogenic Carbon: Carbon from recently living biomass; considered climate-neutral under PCS rules.

• Bomb Calorimetry: Method to measure LHV of waste samples.

• Carbon Fraction (Fossil/Biogenic): Proportion of total carbon in waste that is fossil or biogenic.

• CH₄ (Methane): GHG emitted from landfill decomposition and small amounts from combustion; expressed using GWP.

• Combustion Efficiency: Measure of completeness of oxidation during thermal treatment.

• Degradable Organic Carbon (DOC): Input for first-order decay landfill methane model.

• Displacement Baseline: Baseline emissions from fossil grid electricity or thermal energy that would have been generated without the project.

• Emission Factor (EF): Coefficient indicating GHG emissions per unit of activity.

• Energy Export (Electricity/Heat): Net quantity delivered outside the facility boundary.

• First-Order Decay (FOD) Model: Model used to estimate landfill methane generation.

• Fossil Carbon: Carbon from geological sources (plastics, etc.) that produces fossil CO₂ when combusted.

• Fossil CO₂ Emissions: CO₂ resulting from oxidation of fossil carbon.

• Global Warming Potential (GWP): Metric to compare climate forcing of GHGs over a time horizon.

• Lower Heating Value (LHV): Net calorific energy content of waste.

• Leakage: Emissions outside the project boundary attributable to the project.

• Net Emission Reductions (ER): ER = BE − PE − LE.

• Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QA/QC): Procedures for data accuracy and integrity.

• Refuse-Derived Fuel (RDF) / Solid Recovered Fuel (SRF): Pre-processed waste fuels used in co-firing or ATT systems.

• Residues (Ash / APC Waste): Solid materials after combustion or flue-gas treatment.

• Syngas: Combustible gas from gasification or pyrolysis used for energy.

• Tool Integrity: Condition where the Tool’s formulas and structure remain unaltered and function as intended.

• Verification: Third-party evaluation confirming data accuracy and compliance.

---

End of document.