Bio-oil methodology

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background and Justification

The urgent need for effective carbon sequestration strategies in the battle against climate change has driven innovation in the utilization of biomass for long-term carbon storage. Industrial hemp, characterized by its rapid growth and high cellulose content, presents a sustainable solution for bio-oil production—a renewable resource that not only helps in reducing reliance on fossil fuels but also serves as a carbon sink. The conversion of hemp biomass into bio-oil, followed by its storage in geological formations, particularly in orphaned oil wells, offers a dual benefit of leveraging existing infrastructures and enhancing the sequestration of carbon dioxide. This approach aligns with global efforts to develop negative emission technologies, which are crucial to achieving carbon neutrality goals set by international agreements like the Paris Accord.

1.2 Objectives of the Methodology

This methodology aims to provide a detailed, systematic approach for the production of bio-oil from industrial hemp biomass and its subsequent storage in geological formations. The primary objectives include:

1. 1. • To establish standardized procedures for converting industrial hemp into bio-oil ensuring maximum efficiency and sustainability.
      • To define rigorous protocols for the safe and permanent storage of bio-oil in suitable geological sites, with a particular focus on using redundant, orphaned, or inactive oil wells.
      • To facilitate the accurate quantification and verification of the carbon sequestered through this process, enabling the issuance of carbon credits and contributing to global carbon reduction efforts.
      • To promote the adoption of this methodology by stakeholders across the carbon credit market, enhancing the economic viability of industrial hemp cultivation and bio-oil production.

1.3 Scope and Applicability

This methodology is applicable to projects involving the cultivation of industrial hemp specifically for bio-oil production and its subsequent carbon sequestration in geological formations. It is designed for application across various geographical and regulatory environments, assuming compliance with local and international environmental standards. The methodology is intended for use by project developers, carbon credit issuers, and regulatory bodies to ensure that all phases of the process—from biomass cultivation to bio-oil injection—are conducted under stringent quality control measures and contribute effectively to carbon sequestration.

1.4 Definitions and Key Terms

• Bio-oil: A liquid product produced by the fast pyrolysis of biomass, consisting mainly of oxygenated organic compounds, which can be used as a substitute for fossil fuel or as a feedstock for further chemical processing.
• Carbon Sequestration: The process of capturing atmospheric carbon dioxide and storing it in a carbon pool (e.g., geological formation, forests, or oceans) to prevent its release into the atmosphere.
• Industrial Hemp: A variety of the Cannabis sativa plant species that is grown specifically for industrial use of its derived products. It can be distinguished from other cannabis plants by its low tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) content and its utilization for producing fibers, biofuel, and other industrial products.
• Orphaned Oil Wells: Oil wells that have been abandoned and are no longer maintained by any company or operator, often due to bankruptcy or cessation of operations.
• Geological Formation: A naturally occurring body of rock or sediment that has significant size and uniformity, capable of serving as a storage site for bio-oil or other substances.
• Carbon Credits: Certificates representing the reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide emissions, which can be traded or sold to help finance carbon reduction strategies.

This section lays the foundation for understanding and implementing the processes detailed in subsequent sections of the methodology, ensuring clarity and adherence to intended environmental benefits and sustainability goals.

2. INDUSTRIAL HEMP AS A FEEDSTOCK FOR BIO OIL PRODUCTION

2.1 Characteristics of Industrial Hemp Biomass

Industrial hemp biomass is distinguished by its rapid growth rate and high yield of cellulose-rich biomass, which makes it a prime candidate for sustainable bio-oil production. Industrial hemp, specifically grown for fiber and bio-energy, consists predominantly of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin, with a lower content of extractives and ash compared to other energy crops. This composition is crucial because the high cellulose content translates into a higher yield of bio-oil when processed through pyrolysis or similar conversion techniques.

2. 1. • Cellulose Content: Industrial hemp fibers contain approximately 57-77% cellulose, depending on the cultivation conditions and plant parts (e.g., bast fibers vs. hurds).
      • Lignin Content: The lignin content in hemp ranges from 5% to 15%, which contributes to the structural strength of the plant but also impacts the quality and yield of bio-oil.
      • Growth Rate: Hemp can be harvested multiple times per year in some climates, providing a continuous supply of biomass for bio-oil production without the need for year-round cultivation or storage.

2.2 Advantages of Using Hemp for Bio Oil

Utilizing industrial hemp for bio-oil production offers several environmental and economic benefits:

2. 1. • Sustainability: Hemp grows with a minimal requirement for water, fertilizers, or pesticides, reducing the environmental impact associated with its cultivation compared to traditional energy crops.
      • Carbon Sequestration: As a fast-growing plant, hemp sequesters carbon dioxide quickly from the atmosphere, enhancing the environmental benefits of its use for bio-oil production.
      • Energy Efficiency: The high cellulose content ensures that energy output from hemp-derived bio-oil is significant, making it an efficient source of renewable energy.
      • Economic Viability: The dual-use of hemp (for both fiber and energy production) can increase the economic returns per hectare for farmers, promoting rural development and sustainability.
      • Waste Reduction: Using hemp biomass for bio-oil production utilizes by- products from hemp fiber processing, thereby reducing waste and enhancing overall resource efficiency.

2.3 Pre-treatment and Preparation of Hemp Biomass

The preparation of hemp biomass for bio-oil production involves several critical steps to ensure the efficiency of the conversion process and the quality of the final product:

• Drying: Hemp biomass must be adequately dried to reduce moisture content, which directly influences the thermal conversion efficiency and energy consumption during bio-oil production. Optimal moisture content is typically below 10%.
• Size Reduction: The biomass should be processed into uniform particle sizes to promote consistent heat transfer and reaction kinetics during conversion. This is usually achieved through milling or chipping.
• Homogenization: To ensure uniform chemical and physical properties throughout the feedstock, mixing different hemp fractions (such as fibers, hurds, and seeds) may be necessary depending on the desired quality and characteristics of the bio-oil.
• Chemical Treatment: In some processes, chemical pre-treatments may be applied to reduce the ash content or alter the lignin structure, enhancing the yield and quality of the resulting bio-oil.

Each of these steps must be carefully optimized based on the specific type of conversion technology used (e.g., fast pyrolysis, hydrothermal liquefaction) and the desired properties of the bio-oil. Proper preparation not only maximizes the yield and quality but also reduces the energy consumption and environmental impact of the overall production process.

3. BIO OIL PRODUCTION PROCESS

3.1 Overview of Bio Oil Production Techniques

Bio-oil production from biomass, such as industrial hemp, can be achieved primarily through two main thermochemical processes: pyrolysis and liquefaction. Each method has its specific conditions and outcomes, which are tailored to maximize the yield and quality of bio-oil:

3. 1. • Fast Pyrolysis: This is the most widely used method for producing bio-oil from biomass. It involves rapidly heating the biomass to temperatures between 450°C and 600°C in the absence of oxygen. This quick thermal decomposition leads to the production of bio-oil, non-condensable gases, and char. The process typically occurs within seconds, which helps in preserving the energy content of the biomass in the form of liquid bio-oil.
      • Hydrothermal Liquefaction (HTL): HTL is performed under high pressure and moderate temperatures (250°C to 350°C). It converts wet biomass into bio-oil, making it particularly advantageous for biomasses with high moisture content. The process uses water as the reaction medium, which acts as a solvent and catalyst during the conversion.

Both methods transform the complex polymers of biomass into smaller molecules that are then stabilized in a liquid form, commonly referred to as bio-oil.

3.2 Selection of Technology and Equipment

Selecting the appropriate technology and equipment for bio-oil production depends on several factors including the type of biomass, desired scale of production, and specific product requirements:

3. 1. • Reactors: For pyrolysis, fluidized bed reactors are commonly used due to their ability to rapidly heat the biomass particles by direct contact with hot sand. For HTL, continuous stirred-tank reactors (CSTR) or batch reactors are preferred to handle the high pressures and corrosive environment.
      • Feedstock Handling System: This includes conveyors and hoppers equipped with feed mechanisms designed to handle the specific characteristics of hemp biomass.
      • Heat and Pressure Systems: These are critical for maintaining the required reaction conditions. They include boilers, heat exchangers, and pressure vessels.
      • Condensation System: This system is used to collect the bio-oil vapors produced during pyrolysis or liquefaction. It typically consists of a series of condensers and separators to capture and separate the bio-oil from water and non-condensable gases.

The selection of technology should also consider long-term operational sustainability and potential scalability.

3.3 Process Flow and Operational Parameters

The process flow of bio-oil production involves several critical stages:

1. Preparation and Feeding: Hemp biomass is dried, ground, and fed into the reactor.
2. Thermal Conversion: Biomass is rapidly heated under controlled temperature and pressure conditions to break down the large molecules into smaller ones.
3. Vapor Collection and Condensation: The vapors produced are quickly cooled and condensed into liquid bio-oil.
4. Post-processing: The crude bio-oil can be further refined or upgraded through additional processing steps to improve its stability and calorific value.

Operational parameters such as temperature, pressure, residence time, and heating rate are critical and must be optimized based on the chosen conversion technology to maximize efficiency and bio-oil yield.

3.4 Safety and Environmental Considerations

Safety and environmental considerations are integral to the design and operation of a bio-oil production facility:

• Safety Measures: Include the installation of pressure relief systems, inert gas blanketing, and fire suppression systems. Continuous monitoring of temperature and pressure is necessary to prevent explosive conditions.
• Emission Control: Treatment systems for off-gases to remove particulates and neutralize acidic compounds are essential to meet environmental regulations.
• Waste Management: Proper handling and disposal of residues like bio-char and process water are necessary to prevent environmental contamination.
• Regulatory Compliance: Adherence to local and international standards for air and water quality, as well as worker safety, is mandatory.

By addressing these safety and environmental issues, the production of bio-oil from industrial hemp can be a sustainable and safe process, contributing positively to the energy landscape and carbon management efforts.

4. CONVERSION OF BIOMASS TO BIO OIL

4.1 Chemical and Thermal Conversion Processes

The conversion of industrial hemp biomass into bio-oil involves both chemical and thermal processes, primarily through the methods of pyrolysis and hydrothermal liquefaction (HTL). Each process has distinct mechanisms and conditions:

4. 1. • Pyrolysis: This thermal decomposition occurs in the absence of oxygen, typically at temperatures between 450°C and 600°C. The process rapidly converts biomass into bio-oil, char, and gas. The key chemical reactions involve the breakdown of cellulose, hemicellulose, and lignin into smaller molecular compounds that stabilize into bio-oil.
      • Hydrothermal Liquefaction (HTL): HTL processes biomass in a water medium at temperatures ranging from 250°C to 375°C and pressures sufficient to keep water in a liquid state. This method is effective for processing wet biomass and results in a higher yield of bio-oil compared to dry-feed pyrolysis. The chemical reactions in HTL involve hydrolysis, dehydration, decarboxylation, and hydrogenation.

These conversion processes are influenced by the nature of the feedstock, specifically the chemical composition of the biomass, which in the case of hemp includes a high proportion of cellulose and a moderate amount of lignin.

4.2 Optimization of Yield and Quality

Optimizing the yield and quality of bio-oil involves adjusting several operational parameters within the conversion processes:

4. 1. • Temperature and Pressure Control: Precise control over the temperature and pressure during HTL or pyrolysis is crucial for maximizing bio-oil yield and minimizing unwanted by-products like char and gas.
      • Residence Time: Adjusting the time that the biomass spends at the peak temperature affects the decomposition pathways and the stability of the resulting bio-oil. Shorter residence times are generally favorable in pyrolysis to prevent further breakdown of the bio-oil into gases.
      • Catalysts: The use of catalysts can improve the breakdown of complex polymers in biomass and enhance the formation of desirable bio-oil compounds. Catalysts like zeolites or acidic materials can be used in pyrolysis to increase the yield of aromatic hydrocarbons and reduce oxygen content in the bio-oil.
      • Feedstock Preparation: Ensuring the biomass is uniformly dried and ground to an optimal size helps in achieving more consistent heat transfer and chemical reaction rates throughout the biomass load.

Each of these factors must be carefully balanced to achieve a high-quality bio-oil that is suitable for use or further upgrading.

4.3 By-products Management and Utilization

The by-products of bio-oil production, primarily char and non-condensable gases, also present opportunities for added value:

• Char: Produced as a solid residue in both pyrolysis and HTL, biochar has numerous applications including as a soil amendment to improve soil health and sequester carbon, and as a feedstock for activated carbon production.
• Gases: The non-condensable gases generated during bio-oil production can be combusted to provide heat for the bio-oil production process itself or can be cleaned and used as a syngas for power generation.
• Wastewater: Particularly in HTL, the process water contains a variety of dissolved organic compounds and can be treated and reused within the process or utilized for the cultivation of algae or other biomass.

Effective management and utilization of these by-products not only improve the environmental footprint of the bio-oil production process but also enhance the overall economic viability of the operation by converting waste streams into valuable products.

5. STORAGE OF BIO OIL IN GEOLOGICAL FORMATIONS

5.1 Selection of Geological Storage Sites

The selection of suitable geological formations for storing bio-oil is critical for ensuring the long-term sequestration of carbon. Criteria for selecting these sites include:

5. 1. • Geological Stability: Sites must be geologically stable with minimal risks of seismic activity or ground movement that could compromise the integrity of stored bio-oil.
      • Permeability and Porosity: The selected formation should have low permeability but sufficient porosity to accommodate the injected bio-oil while preventing leakage.
      • Caprock Integrity: A competent caprock layer is essential to effectively seal the storage site and prevent the migration of bio-oil to the surface or into groundwater.
      • Accessibility and Proximity: Sites should be reasonably accessible for monitoring and management but located away from populated areas to minimize risk to human health and the environment.

Geological surveys and assessments are required to evaluate these factors and ensure that the selected sites meet all safety and environmental protection criteria.

5.2 Suitability of Orphaned Oil Wells for Bio Oil Storage

Orphaned oil wells, which are no longer in use for petroleum extraction, offer a unique opportunity for repurposing for bio-oil storage due to their existing infrastructure:

5. 1. • Well Integrity Assessment: Before use, the structural integrity of old wells must be assessed to ensure they can withstand new operational pressures and do not possess leaks that could lead to environmental contamination.
      • Modification and Retrofitting: Wells may need modifications to handle the chemical characteristics of bio-oil, including resistance to corrosion and enhancements to sealing technologies to ensure safe storage.
      • Regulatory Compliance: Use of orphaned wells must comply with local and international regulations governing the repurposing of such sites, ensuring that all modifications are documented and certified.

These wells are particularly advantageous because they reduce the need for new drilling, thus minimizing environmental disturbance and lowering project costs.

5.3 Injection and Sealing Techniques

Injecting bio-oil into geological formations or orphaned wells requires careful handling to maintain the integrity of the bio-oil and the storage site:

• Injection Methodology: Bio-oil should be pumped into the storage site at controlled rates to maintain the stability of the geological formation and prevent fractures or leaks.
• Sealing Technologies: Advanced sealing techniques involving mechanical seals or chemical sealants like bentonite or other polymers are used to secure the storage site. This ensures that bio-oil is isolated from the environment and remains contained over long periods.
• Monitoring Injection Parameters: Pressure, volume, and temperature during the injection process must be continuously monitored to adapt the process in real- time and prevent over-pressurization or other operational issues.

5.4 Long-term Integrity and Monitoring Requirements

Long-term integrity and monitoring are crucial for ensuring the safety and effectiveness of bio-oil storage:

• Monitoring Systems: Include the installation of pressure and temperature sensors at the storage site, along with groundwater and soil gas monitoring systems to detect any potential leaks or environmental impact.
• Regular Inspections: Scheduled and unscheduled inspections are necessary to physically examine the storage site and its components for signs of wear or failure.
• Data Analysis and Reporting: Continuous analysis of monitoring data helps in early detection of potential issues, allowing for timely interventions. Regular reporting to regulatory bodies ensures compliance with environmental standards and helps build public trust in the technology.
• Emergency Response Plans: Clearly defined and practiced emergency response strategies are essential to address any accidents or failures effectively, minimizing environmental impact and ensuring public safety.

This comprehensive approach to the storage of bio-oil in geological formations not only secures the bio-oil but also ensures that the stored carbon does not re-enter the atmosphere, thus contributing to long-term climate change mitigation efforts.

6. QUANTIFICATION OF CARBON SEQUESTRATION

6.1 Calculation of Carbon Content in Bio Oil

The carbon content in bio-oil is a critical metric for quantifying the amount of carbon sequestered through the conversion of industrial hemp biomass. This calculation involves determining the proportion of carbon in the bio-oil relative to the total mass of the biomass processed. Key steps include:

6. 1. • Sampling and Analysis: Samples of bio-oil produced from hemp biomass are analyzed using standard laboratory techniques such as elemental analysis, which provides detailed composition including carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen content.
      • Carbon Percentage: The percentage of carbon in the bio-oil is calculated based on the elemental analysis. This percentage is crucial for understanding how much of the biomass’s inherent carbon remains fixed in the bio-oil.
      • Conversion Factor: Applying the appropriate conversion factors to convert the carbon content by mass into equivalent amounts of CO2. This typically involves using the molecular weight ratio of CO2 to carbon (44/12).

The result of these calculations gives a direct measure of the amount of carbon sequestered in the form of bio-oil, which can then be used to assess the contribution of the process to carbon removal efforts.

6.2 Estimation of Net CO2 Removal

Estimating the net CO2 removal involves accounting for all emissions and sequestrations associated with the entire lifecycle of bio-oil production from hemp:

6. 1. • Total Carbon Sequestration: Start with the total carbon content calculated in the bio-oil.
      • Emissions Accounting: Include all CO2 emissions released during the cultivation of hemp, transportation, processing into bio-oil, and any emissions from the energy used during these processes. These values are typically obtained from lifecycle assessment (LCA) data.
      • Net CO2 Removal: Subtract the total emissions from the total sequestered carbon to estimate the net CO2 removal. This figure represents the actual carbon dioxide reduction achieved by the project.

This estimation provides a clear picture of the environmental benefit of the bio-oil production process, essential for regulatory compliance and carbon credit applications.

6.3 Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) Protocols

To ensure the integrity and accuracy of the carbon sequestration data, robust MRV protocols are implemented:

• Monitoring: Continuous monitoring of all operational parameters that influence carbon emissions and sequestration, including energy consumption, bio-oil yield, and emissions from machinery. This monitoring is typically facilitated by automated systems that record data at various stages of the bio-oil production process.
• Reporting: Regular reporting of monitored data to regulatory bodies and stakeholders. Reports include detailed descriptions of the methodologies used for data collection and analysis, ensuring transparency.
• Verification: Independent third-party verification of reported data to ensure compliance with international standards and validation of net CO2 removal claims. Verifiers use established guidelines to assess the accuracy of the data and the adherence to reporting standards.

These MRV protocols are crucial for maintaining transparency and trust in the bio- oil production process as a legitimate carbon sequestration method. They help stakeholders, including regulators, investors, and the public, understand and evaluate the impact of these projects on carbon reduction efforts.

7. QUANTIFICATIONOF NET CO2E REMOVAL

7.1 Baseline

In the context of The Hemp Carbon Standard, the baseline scenario presupposes that activities related to the bio-oil project are non-existent, meaning no infrastructure is developed for such initiatives.

The counterfactual scenario addresses the CO2 that would have been durably stored in the industrial hemp biomass in the absence of the carbon dioxide removal (CDR) project. This scenario is termed as ineligible biomass, signifying that the CO2 inherently retained in the biomass without the intervention of the project does not qualify for crediting. The Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module delineates the protocols for identifying ineligible biomass as part of the C02e_{Counterfactual} Storage Eligibility criteria, also providing guidelines for its quantification.

The process of converting biomass to bio-oil is generally performed on a batch basis known as a ‘Production Batch’. This involves utilizing a specific type of industrial hemp biomass, typically from a single origin, processing it into bio-oil through pyrolysis, and subsequently managing the bio-oil’s storage and transportation to a designated injection site. The inherent properties of the biomass, the characteristics of the resulting bio-oil, the distances over which the bio-oil is transported, and the attributes of the storage site remain consistent across each Production Batch.

For a detailed approach to these calculations, see the comprehensive guidelines provided in the referenced sections of The Hemp Carbon Standard documentation.

7.2 Net CDR Calculation

7.2.1 Calculation Approach

In line with The Hemp Carbon Standard, the baseline scenario is predicated on the assumption that the activities associated with the bio-oil project do not commence and that no infrastructure is constructed.

The counterfactual analysis considers the CO2 that would have remained sequestered in the industrial hemp biomass in the absence of the project, labeled as ineligible biomass. This is because the CO2 stored would have remained in the biomass without any intervention from the carbon dioxide removal (CDR) project, hence it cannot be credited. The Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module specifies the criteria for identifying ineligible biomass under the Counterfactual Storage Eligibility criteria and provides detailed methods for its quantification.

The production of bio-oil from biomass is typically processed on a batch basis, known as a ‘Production Batch’p. This involves using a single type of industrial hemp biomass, sourced from a specific location, converted into bio-oil through pyrolysis, and subsequently transported and stored at an injection site. Each Production Batch maintains consistent characteristics regarding the biomass used, the conversion process to bio-oil, the resulting bio-oil properties, the transportation distances, and the storage site features.

The approach for emissions calculations follows this batch process, with a focus on calculating the net CO2 removal for each specific ‘Injection Batch’n. The net CO2 removed is defined as the difference between the total CO2 stored in bio-oil and the sum of the counterfactual CO2 and the CO2 emitted during the production and handling processes. The following sections outline the processes for calculating the net CO2e removed for each specific Injection Batch of hemp biomass processed and associated with bio-oil injections, defined as Removal.

The Reporting Period (RP) for a bio-oil project represents an interval of time over which removals are calculated and reported for verification. When net CO2e removals must be calculated for a reporting period, for example during submission of Claimed Removals in a GHG statement, it is calculated as the sum of removals during the reporting period:

Equation 1

N

CO_2e Removal, RP = ∑ CO_2e Removal, n

n=1

Details on calculating each component of this equation can be found in here in Section

7.4 of The Hemp Carbon Standard documentation.

For detailed procedures and calculations, consult the appropriate sections outlined in The Hemp Carbon Standard.

7.4.1 Calculation of CO2e_Removal,n

An ‘Injection Batch’ in the context of The Hemp Carbon Standard, refers to a specific activity where a predetermined quantity of bio-oil is injected into an approved underground storage facility. Each Injection Batch could be a segment of a Production Batch, a complete single Production Batch, or a blend consisting of multiple Production Batches. These are all aimed at achieving durable storage of the bio-oil.

The method for calculating emissions is tailored around these Injection Batches, focusing on determining the net CO2 removal for each Injection Batch. This involves quantifying the CO2 that has been permanently removed from the atmosphere and stored as biogenic carbon within each batch. The key elements of this calculation are outlined below:

1. CO2 Stored (Equation 2):

1. • This represents the gross amount of CO2 (expressed as organic carbon, C) that is injected and securely stored within geological or engineered storage formations per batch. This figure does not consider any potential spillage or reversals from the storage site.

Equation 2

Net CO2eRemoval,n = Total CO2eStored,n – (CO2eCounterfactual,n + CO2eEmissions,n)

Where:

• CO2e_Stored,n : Represents the total amount of CO2 removed from the atmosphere and durably stored as biogenic carbon for batch n, in tonnes of CO2e.
• CO2eCounterfactual,n : The total counterfactual CO2 that would have been removed from the atmosphere and durably stored as biogenic carbon in the absence of the project, for batch n, in tonnes of CO2e.
• CO2e_Emissions,n :Total greenhouse gas emissions associated with batch n, in tonnes of CO2e

This equation is used to calculate the net CO2 removal by considering the CO2 stored as a result of the project activities and subtracting any CO2 that would have been stored without the project’s intervention (counterfactual) along with the emissions produced by the project.

2. Total CO2 Contained in the Bio-oil (Equation 3):
   • Where all production batches of bio-oil are combined before injection, the total CO2 content in the injectant for each batch can be calculated using the following equation:

Equation 3

CO₂e Stored,n = C ⋅ mBio-oil,Inj,n

• Here, C represents the carbon content percentage of the bio-oil, and

mBio-oil,Inj,n is the mass of the bio-oil injected for batch n

This structured approach ensures that each batch’s contribution to CO2 removal is accurately recorded and assessed, providing clear and traceable documentation required for verifying compliance with The Hemp Carbon Standard. This comprehensive methodology facilitates the accurate reporting of greenhouse gas reductions, crucial for the integrity and credibility of environmental impact statements and carbon trading credentials.

7.4.1 Calculation of CO2eStored, n

In the framework of The Hemp Carbon Standard, the calculation of CO2 stored per Injection Batch, when bio-oil production batches are not blended prior to injection, is approached with precision to ensure conservative determination of net CO2 quantification. This process assures that the estimated amount of CO2 removed is accurately captured and durably stored as biogenic carbon.

For batches where production batches are handled separately, the Equation for calculating the total CO2 stored per batch is defined as (Equation 4):

Equation 4

CO

2e Stored,

n =

k  C

∑

p=1

⋅ mBio-oil, Inj,

p

CCO2e

)

Where:

• C represents the carbon content as weight percent (%wt) in the bio-oil injectant.
• mBio-oil,Inj,n is the total mass of the bio-oil injectant emplaced via injection for each production batch p included in Injection Batch n.
• Cco2e is the content of carbon in CO2 (as a mass percent), used to convert the stored carbon into equivalent CO2 based on its molecular weight ratio.
• k is the number of production batches included in the Injection Batch n

This equation ensures each batch’s contribution to CO2 storage is accurately recorded and assessed, providing clear and traceable documentation required for verifying compliance with The Hemp Carbon Standard. These calculations involve two primary measurements:

1. The percentage weight (%wt) of carbon in the bio-oil injectant.
2. The total mass of the injectant.

This structured approach facilitates the accurate reporting of greenhouse gas reductions, crucial for the integrity and credibility of environmental impact statements and carbon trading credentials under The Hemp Carbon Standard.

7.4.1.1 Measurements – CO2eStored, n

Calculation of CO2eStored requires two primary measurements:

• CBio-oil – %wt of C in the bio-oil injectant
• mInj – total mass of injectant

7.4.1.1.1 Bio-oil Carbon Content Measurement

In the context of The Hemp Carbon Standard, the determination of %wt of carbon in the bio-oil injectant, whether for a blended Injection Batch or individual Production Batches, is achieved through rigorous analysis. This analysis is essential whether the batch is blended prior to injection or consists of unblended, singular Production Batches.

Preferred Testing Methods:

7. 4. 1. 1. 1. • Primary Method: Utilize the NREL Laboratory Analysis Procedure for the Determination of Carbon, Hydrogen, and Nitrogen in Bio-oils for bio-oils or blends with vapor pressures above 3 psi.
               • Alternative Methods: If the primary method is unsuitable, ASTM D5291 or ASTM D5373 can be used for instrumental determination of carbon, hydrogen, and nitrogen in petroleum products and coal samples, respectively. These methods are acceptable if they are justified to be equivalent to the primary method.

Sampling and Analysis:

7. 4. 1. 1. 1. • For every Injection Batch, a minimum of one sample must be analyzed. Each sample should be well-mixed and representative, ensuring that any solids are included to maintain representativeness of the batch.
               • All analyses must be conducted by laboratories accredited to ISO 17025 or an equivalent standard, ensuring proper quality management and test method application.

Carbon Content Measurement Methods:

• Method A: Measure the C content of every batch through direct measurement. This method should be followed until sufficient data (minimum 30 Production Batches) allows for reliable statistical analysis.

Equation 5

• • Equation for blending batches prior to injection:

σCC =  sCC and  C_Biooil = μCC − zσCC nsamples    −

• Where μcc is the mean carbon content, σcc is the standard deviation, nsamples is the number of eligible samples for this production process and z is the z- score corresponding to the desired confidence level.

• Method B: Allows for sampling of only some batches with conservative estimation of C content for unsampled batches, based on the statistically significant data collected from sampled batches.
  • For unsampled batches:

CBio-oil, Est = μCC − 2 ⋅ σCC

Statistical Significance and Documentation:

• Regular random sampling must be documented in the Project Design Document, with sampling frequency agreed to be no less than once per month. Any significant change in the production process or deviations in carbon content must trigger a reassessment of the carbon content estimation process.

Handling of Outliers:

• Outliers are defined as measurements lying more than three standard deviations from the mean. These are handled through winsorization to minimize their impact:

• Where m is the measured value, μ is the mean, σ is the standard deviation, and

mw is the winsorized value.

This structured approach ensures that every batch’s carbon content contribution is accurately recorded and assessed, adhering to the rigorous standards of The Hemp Carbon Standard for credible carbon sequestration claims.

7.4.1.1.2. Measurement of Mass of Bio-oil Injected

In the context of The Hemp Carbon Standard, the process for handling the determination of carbon content through winsorization is critical to ensure the accuracy and reliability of data, particularly when dealing with potential outliers. This procedure is essential for maintaining the integrity of carbon content measurements in bio-oil injectants, whether these are from blended or individual Production Batches.

Winsorization of Carbon Content Measurements:

Winsorization is applied to manage extreme data points in carbon content measurements, ensuring that these do not skew the overall data analysis. This method adjusts values that fall more than three standard deviations from the mean:

• For Measurements Exceeding Upper Limit:

Equation 7

m_w =

m    if μ − 3σ ≤ m ≤ μ + 3σ

{μ + 3σ if m > μ + 3σ

• For Measurements Below Lower Limit:

m_w =

μ − 3σ if m < μ − 3σ

{m   otherwise

Where m is the original measurement, mw is the winsorized measurement,

μ is the mean of all measurements, and σ is the standard deviation.

Implementation Requirements:

• Statistical Significance: Winsorization is implemented only after a minimum of 30 measurements have been collected, ensuring statistical relevance and reliability.
• Monitoring of Outliers: The Project Proponent is responsible for regularly monitoring the frequency and pattern of outliers. If significant deviations are observed, it may indicate a systematic error, necessitating further review and potentially a project audit.
• Verification: This process must be documented meticulously, and deviations or adjustments made through winsorization must be clearly justified and recorded, subject to verification by authorized Verifying Bodies.

Measurement of Injected Mass:

The total mass of bio-oil injected is accurately determined using calibrated scales at the injection site. This involves measuring the weight of bio-oil delivery vehicles upon arrival and after offloading. Alternatively, calibrated flow meters or on-site weigh scales can be used where applicable:

• Calibration and Certification: All scales or meters used must be calibrated and certified according to local, state, or federal regulations. This ensures that the measurements are accurate and meet legal standards for trade.

Implementing these detailed protocols under The Hemp Carbon Standard ensures that the carbon content of bio-oil injected for carbon sequestration is measured and reported with high accuracy and integrity, supporting the overall credibility of carbon sequestration efforts.

7.4.1.2 Required Records & Documentation CO2eStored, n

The project proponent must maintain the following records as evidence of CO2 removal in injected bio-oil, as stipulated by The Hemp Carbon Standard:

• Weigh Scale Tickets: Keep tickets for each bio-oil delivery (noting arrival and departure weights) or other equivalent records.
• Analytical Results: Document results for each ASTM D5291 analysis for carbon content of bio-oil from each batch as required.
• Spill Documentation: Maintain records of any spills during injection operations, including estimates of the quantity released.
• Records Maintenance: All carbon analyses and injection mass records (e.g., weigh scale tickets) must be maintained at the injection facility and made available for verification purposes for a period of five years.

Required Records & Documentation – CO2 Stored, n:

• Monitor injection processes to ensure that any process upsets or equipment failures and resulting spills of bio-oil are documented, quantified, and accounted for in the GHG Statement of the project batch. For each batch, if a process upset results in a loss of bio-oil, that amount must be deducted from the delivered amount of bio-oil based on delivery weigh tickets. Such amounts must be allocated directly to the specific injection batch of bio-oil.

Other Considerations – CO2 Stored, n:

• The calculation of CO2 is governed by the requirements of The Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module.

This structured approach ensures that each batch’s carbon content contribution is accurately recorded and assessed, adhering to the rigorous standards of The Hemp Carbon Standard for credible carbon sequestration claims.

26                  05.24

7.4.2 Calculation of CO2eCounterfactual, n

The calculation of CO2eCounterfactual, n is determined by the requirements of the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module.

7.4.3 Calculation of CO2eEmissions, n

CO2eEmissions, n is the total quantity of GHG emissions from operations and allocated embodied emissions for a batch. This can be calculated as follows:

CO2e,n = CO2e,Energy,n + CO2e,Transportation,n + CO2e,Embodied,n + CO2e,Misc.,n + CO2e,Leakage,n

• CO2eEnergy,n is the total GHG emissions associated with energy consumption for a batch, as detailed in Section 7.4.3.2
• CO2eTransportation,n is the total GHG emissions associated with the transportation of products for a batch, detailed in Section 7.4.3.3
• CO2eEmbodied,n includes all embodied GHG emissions allocated to a batch, detailed in Section 7.4.3.4
• CO2eMisc.,n covers all other miscellaneous GHG emissions for a batch that cannot be categorized by the above categories, detailed in Section 7.4.3.5.
• CO2eLeakage,n represents the total GHG emissions associated with the project’s impact on activities that fall outside of the system boundary of a project, allocated to batch n, as explored in Section 7.4.3.6.

Note: Reversals that occur after Credits have been issued are not included in this equation. Refer to The Hemp Carbon Standard for further information on the risk of reversal. This information is detailed within the relevant Storage Module.

This framework, as provided by The Hemp Carbon Standard, ensures a comprehensive accounting of all greenhouse gas emissions associated with each batch of bio-oil, facilitating precise and verifiable reporting of emissions reductions.

7.4.3.1 Emissions Allocation

Emissions related to a specific batch, denoted as n, must be fully accounted for in the reporting of emissions associated with that batch. These emissions cannot be distributed across multiple batches unless specifically agreed upon with The Hemp Carbon Standard on a case-by-case basis.

Allocation of Embodied Emissions:

Embodied emissions that are pertinent to multiple batches may be distributed according to the allocation rules established in the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module. This ensures that the emissions are allocated fairly and appropriately, enhancing the accuracy of the emissions reporting.

Post-Closure Emissions Monitoring:

When the Project Proponent plans to cease operations at a given storage site, emissions required for post-closure monitoring must be calculated and attributed to the remaining removal activities at the storage site. If direct allocation to these activities is not feasible, the Project Proponent must allocate these emissions to other projects or storage sites they operate, in alignment with The Hemp Carbon Standard. Failure to appropriately allocate emissions will trigger the Reversal process as specified by The Hemp Carbon Standard, to account for any unaddressed monitoring emissions.

Shared Monitoring Activities:

In scenarios where monitoring activities are shared between multiple entities, such as when several companies inject bio-oil into the same storage infrastructure, the emissions associated with these activities must be proportionally allocated among the entities involved. This collaborative approach ensures that each entity bears a fair share of the total emissions burden, reflecting their respective contributions to the overall emissions.

Emissions from Energy Use:

GHG emissions associated with batch n should encompass all emissions stemming from electricity usage or fuel combustion. This includes emissions from:

• Processing equipment, motors, drives, and instrumentation
• Facility operations
• Pyrolysis system startup
• Injection operations

These measures are crucial for maintaining comprehensive and transparent GHG accounting within The Hemp Carbon Standard, ensuring that all associated emissions are meticulously documented and reported.

7.4.3.2 Calculation of CO2eEnergy, n

GHG emissions related to each batch must include all emissions associated with electricity usage and fuel combustion involved in the batch’s processes. These emissions must be fully accounted for in the reporting specific to that batch and cannot be distributed across multiple batches unless explicitly agreed upon by The Hemp Carbon Standard on a case-by-case basis.

Examples of Electricity Usage may include, but are not limited to:

• Operation of processing equipment, motors, drives, and instrumentation.
• Facility operations.
• Starting up the pyrolysis system.
• Injection operations.

Examples of Fuel Consumption may include, but are not limited to:

• Startup of the pyrolysis system.
• Heating of the pyrolysis reactor.
• Emission control measures, such as propane for flare co-firing or pilot operations.
• Operation of handling equipment like fork trucks or loaders.
• Operation of sampling systems, including any pumps or heating systems.
• Installation, operation, or closure of monitoring systems.

Additionally, The Hemp Carbon Standard mandates that emissions from monitoring equipment operation—including analyzers, instrumentation, on-site laboratories specifically for monitoring activities, sampling pumps, sampling systems, or similar monitoring activities—must be documented. Off-site analytical laboratory operations and sample analysis, along with electricity for building operation and management of monitoring facility buildings, also fall under this scrutiny.

Calculation of CO2 Energy, n:

Emissions from energy usage are crucial and should be calculated to enable subtraction in the net CO2 removal calculations. The guidelines for these calculations are outlined in the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module, which details approaches for both intensive and non-intensive facilities, including acceptable emissions factors.

7.4.3.3 Calculation of CO2eTransporation, n

GHG emissions related to each batch must include all emissions associated with the transportation of products as part of that batch’s processes. This detailed account ensures that all emissions are accurately reported and managed.

Transportation Activities include:

• Transportation of industrial hemp biomass to the processing site.
• Transportation of bio-oil from the processing site to the injection site.
• Transportation of samples for laboratory analysis.

These transportation activities are crucial as they often contribute significantly to the overall emissions footprint of the batch.

Calculation of CO2 Transportation, n:

The GHG emissions from transportation are quantified to ensure that all transport- related emissions are included in the net CO2 removal calculations. The method for calculating these emissions is outlined in the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module, which provides comprehensive guidelines on how to account for transportation emissions effectively.

Guidelines for Emissions Calculation:

• The transportation emissions must be calculated following the methods specified in the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module. This includes using established emissions factors and accounting methodologies that ensure consistency and accuracy across all reporting.
• Detailed records of all transportation activities, including distances, fuel types, and vehicle types used, must be maintained. These records are essential for accurate emissions calculations and verification.

This structured approach ensures that emissions from all transportation activities are fully accounted for, adhering to the rigorous standards set out by The Hemp Carbon Standard for credible and transparent reporting of emissions.

7.4.3.4 Calculation of CO2eEmbodied, n

In accordance with The Hemp Carbon Standard, the Project Proponent is responsible for identifying all equipment and consumables used in the Direct Air Capture (DAC) process. They must identify appropriate cradle-to-grave emission factors for each and allocate these emissions to removals appropriately, following guidelines from the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module.

GHG Emissions Considerations:

GHG emissions calculations should include all emissions related to the procurement and utilization of materials, consumables, and equipment involved in the non-feedstock conversion process. This includes, but is not limited to:

1. Consumables:
   • Catalysts.
   • Water.
   • Thermal oils for heat transfer.
   • Coolants used for bio-oil quench.
   • Gases like nitrogen for process or instrumentation purges.
   • Injection additives such as biocide and salt.
   • Gases, reagents, or other materials for operation of monitoring equipment and on-site analyzers.

1. Equipment:
   • Pyrolyzer reactors.
   • Conveyors, augers, feed bins, and related equipment.
   • Bio-oil quench or condenser units, including heat transfer equipment like glycol chillers and pumps.
   • Ash and char collection and quench or cooling systems.
   • Tailgas emissions control systems, such as flares or oxidizers.
   • Preparation or mixing equipment.
   • Pumps, piping, and related equipment.
   • Storage tanks and injection well materials.

• All support structures, facilities, and infrastructure including steel platforms, framing, supports, concrete footings, and building structures.
• Monitoring wells and all associated materials like steel casing and concrete.
• Online analyzers, measurement equipment, or other monitoring devices.
• Buildings and associated equipment used for monitoring purposes, such as on-site laboratories.

Calculation of CO2 Embodied, n:

Emissions from embodied energy in materials and equipment are crucial and should be calculated to enable appropriate subtraction in the net CO2 removal calculations. The method for calculating these emissions is outlined in the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module, providing detailed guidelines for consistent and accurate accounting.

These detailed protocols ensure that emissions from all related activities are fully accounted for, adhering to the rigorous standards set out by The Hemp Carbon Standard for credible and transparent reporting of emissions.

7.4.3.5 Calculation of CO2eMisc, n

Under The Hemp Carbon Standard, GHG emissions related to each batch must include all miscellaneous emissions that cannot be directly categorized by energy, transportation, or embodied emissions. The Project Proponent is responsible for identifying and documenting any emissions that fall outside of the typical categories, referred to as miscellaneous emissions.

Examples of Miscellaneous Emissions:

• Waste processing related to all aspects of the project.
• Staff travel directly associated with the project.
• Direct emissions from tailgas as part of a pyrolysis process, particularly when pyrolysis gases are emitted to the atmosphere, used within the process for thermal energy, or treated in emissions control processes like flares or thermal oxidizers.

Calculation of CO2e Misc.,n (Equation 8):

The GHG emissions for these miscellaneous sources are calculated using:

Equation 8

CO_2e Misc., n = ∑ (Emissions from non-standard sources)

This includes, for instance, the emissions from taiga’s, which can be calculated as:

CO2e Tailgas, n = mTailgas × CTailgas, CH × GWPCH₄ × tp

Where:

• mTailgas is the mass flow rate of tail gas (kg/hr)
• CTailgas, CH4 is the concentration of methane in the tail gas (wt%)
• GW PCH4 is the global warming potential of methane, using the most recent IPCC report
• tp is the duration of the pyrolysis process operation (hours) for the production batch

Measurement and Documentation:

Quantification of these emissions requires careful measurement and analysis, including:

• Flow measurement of tailgas using calibrated flow meters.
• Analysis of gas composition for CH4 content using on-line analyzers or accredited emissions testing methods.

The Project Proponent must maintain detailed records of all miscellaneous emissions, ensuring comprehensive documentation that supports the calculation of emissions, such as flow rates and gas compositions, along with any other relevant operational data.

7.4.3.6 Calculation of CO2eLeakage, n

Under The Hemp Carbon Standard, it is crucial to address GHG emissions associated with a project’s influence on activities that fall outside the project’s system boundary. This includes instances where the project inadvertently causes an increase in GHG emissions by diverting resources from their usual applications or by incentivizing increased production activities elsewhere, known as leakage.

Responsibilities of the Project Proponent:

• The Project Proponent must identify potential sources of leakage emissions. For bio-oil projects, considering replacement emissions is mandatory, at minimum.
• Meticulous calculations for replacement emissions tied to market leakage are detailed in the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module. These calculations are crucial for ensuring that all indirect impacts of the project on GHG emissions are accounted for accurately.

Eligibility Criteria:

• According to the guidelines in the Industrial Hemp Biomass Accounting Module, any projects likely to lead to ecological leakage due to land use changes are deemed ineligible under this protocol. This ensures that projects supported under The Hemp Carbon Standard do not inadvertently contribute to environmental degradation or increased GHG emissions elsewhere.

Calculation of CO2e Leakage, n:

• • The formula for calculating the CO2e associated with leakage per batch is defined as follows:

CO_2e Leakage, n = Total emissions from diverted resources or increased production due to project activities

• • This formula helps in quantifying the unintended side effects of project activities that extend beyond the immediate operational boundaries, ensuring comprehensive accounting of all related GHG emissions.

This section ensures that the Project Proponent remains vigilant about the broader environmental impacts of their activities, aligning with the rigorous standards of The Hemp Carbon Standard for comprehensive and responsible carbon accounting.

8. REGULATORYAND COMPLIANCE FRAMEWORK

8.1 Compliance with Environmental Regulations

Ensuring compliance with environmental regulations is fundamental for the establishment and operation of any project involving the production and geological storage of bio-oil from industrial hemp. The compliance framework involves several critical elements:

8. 1. • Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Before the project’s initiation, an EIA is required to identify and mitigate any potential adverse environmental impacts. This assessment helps in planning the project in a manner that minimizes its ecological footprint.
      • Permitting and Licensing: Obtain all necessary environmental permits and licenses from local, regional, and national authorities. This typically includes permits for air emissions, water discharge, and waste management.
      • Emission Standards: Compliance with local and international emission standards is crucial. This includes regulations concerning the release of greenhouse gases, particulate matter, and other pollutants during the biomass conversion process.
      • Waste Management: Adherence to regulations regarding the handling, treatment, and disposal of waste products, such as bio-char and process residues, ensuring that all waste is managed in an environmentally responsible manner.

8.2 Alignment with International Standards and Protocols

Alignment with international standards ensures that the bio-oil production and carbon sequestration processes are recognized and validated globally, facilitating participation in international carbon markets and compliance with global carbon reduction commitments:

8. 1. • ISO Standards: Adherence to ISO standards such as ISO 14064 for greenhouse gas accounting and verification, ensuring the project’s carbon management practices are internationally credible.
      • The Kyoto Protocol and Paris Agreement: Ensuring project activities contribute to national and international goals for carbon dioxide reduction under these agreements, enhancing the project’s legitimacy and alignment with global climate change mitigation efforts.
      • Carbon Certification Standards: Aligning with standards set by organizations such as the Verified Carbon Standard (VCS) or the Gold Standard, which provide frameworks for quantifying, monitoring, and verifying carbon sequestration projects.

8.3 Certification and Credit Issuance Process

The certification and credit issuance process is pivotal in translating the carbon sequestration efforts into quantifiable and tradable assets:

• Certification Process: Undergo a rigorous certification process involving third- party auditors who validate the project’s carbon sequestration claims against established standards. This includes detailed documentation of methodologies, MRV protocols, and compliance with all applicable regulations.
• Credit Issuance: Once certified, carbon credits are issued based on the net CO2 removed from the atmosphere. These credits can be sold on carbon markets, providing financial returns that help sustain and expand the project.
• Registry and Tracking: Carbon credits are registered in a recognized carbon registry, ensuring they are uniquely numbered and tracked to avoid double counting and ensure transparency in transactions.

Implementing a robust regulatory and compliance framework not only enhances the project’s environmental and social integrity but also bolsters its acceptance and credibility in international markets, playing a crucial role in the global effort to mitigate climate change.

9. RISK MANAGMENT AND MITIGATION

9.1 Identification of Potential Risks

Risk management in the production and storage of bio-oil from industrial hemp involves identifying potential risks that could impact operational safety, environmental integrity, and project viability. Key areas of risk include:

9. 1. • Technical and Operational Risks: These include equipment failure, process inefficiencies, and technological malfunctions that could lead to production downtime or suboptimal bio-oil yield.
      • Environmental Risks: Potential contamination of air, water, and soil from accidental spills or leaks during the bio-oil production or injection process.
      • Geological Risks: In the context of storing bio-oil in geological formations, there is a risk of seismic activity or other geomechanical failures that could compromise the integrity of storage sites.
      • Regulatory and Compliance Risks: Failing to adhere to environmental, health, and safety regulations can lead to fines, legal sanctions, or operational shutdowns.
      • Market and Financial Risks: Fluctuations in market demand for bio-oil or changes in carbon credit values could affect the economic sustainability of the project.

9.2 Mitigation Strategies for Identified Risks

To address these risks effectively, the following mitigation strategies are employed:

9. 1. • Robust Design and Engineering: Utilize state-of-the-art technology and equipment designed for maximum reliability and efficiency. Regular maintenance schedules and upgrades should be adhered to prevent technical failures.
      • Environmental Safeguards: Implement comprehensive spill prevention and response strategies, including secondary containment systems and regular environmental monitoring of air and water quality.
      • Geological Assessments: Conduct detailed geological surveys prior to storage site selection to ensure stability and suitability. Regular monitoring of geological conditions should be carried out to detect any changes that might impact storage integrity.
      • Regulatory Compliance: Maintain stringent compliance with all applicable regulations through continuous training of staff, regular audits, and staying updated with changes in legislation.
      • Financial Risk Management: Diversify financial risk by securing multiple buyers for bio-oil and carbon credits and by leveraging insurance and hedging options to protect against market volatility.

9.3 Contingency and Emergency Response Planning

Developing comprehensive contingency and emergency response plans is crucial for minimizing the impact of unforeseen events:

• Emergency Response Team: Establish a trained and equipped onsite emergency response team ready to act in the event of an incident such as a spill, fire, or equipment failure.
• Incident Management Plans: Detailed incident management plans should be in place, outlining procedures for immediate response, communication, incident containment, and mitigation.
• Business Continuity Planning: Develop a business continuity plan to ensure that critical business functions can continue during and after a disaster. This includes alternative supply chain arrangements, data backup, and recovery plans.
• Regular Drills and Training: Conduct regular emergency response drills and training to ensure that all staff are prepared to respond effectively in a crisis.

By implementing robust risk management and mitigation strategies along with effective contingency planning, the project can enhance safety, ensure environmental protection, and maintain operational stability, thereby securing the long-term success and sustainability of the bio-oil production and carbon sequestration initiative.

10. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS AND MARKET OPPORTUNITIES 

10.1 Economic Feasibility and Cost-Benefit Analysis 

The economic feasibility and cost-benefit analysis of producing bio-oil from industrial hemp and its subsequent storage in geological formations involve evaluating the costs associated with the entire lifecycle of the process against the expected financial returns:

10. 1. • Initial Investment: Includes the costs of setting up bio-oil production facilities, purchasing equipment, and preparing geological storage sites.
       • Operational Costs: Ongoing costs such as labor, maintenance, raw material procurement (hemp biomass), energy usage, and compliance with regulatory requirements.
       • Revenue Streams: Primarily from the sale of bio-oil and carbon credits. The value of bio-oil depends on its quality and market demand, while carbon credits are influenced by global carbon markets and the verified amount of CO2 sequestered.
       • Cost Savings: Reduced waste management costs due to the utilization of by- products and potential government subsidies for renewable energy and carbon reduction initiatives.

A detailed financial model should be developed to project cash flows over the life of the project and calculate key financial metrics such as Net Present Value (NPV), Internal Rate of Return (IRR), and payback period to determine the project’s economic viability.

10.2 Market Analysis for Bio Oil and Carbon Credits

Understanding the market dynamics for bio-oil and carbon credits is essential to gauge the potential success of the project:

• Bio-Oil Market: The demand for bio-oil is influenced by its applications, which range from use as a renewable fuel to chemical feedstock. Market growth is driven by increasing demand for sustainable and renewable resources in various industries, including energy, automotive, and chemicals.
• Carbon Credits Market: This market is influenced by global climate policies, carbon pricing mechanisms, and participation in international agreements aimed at reducing carbon emissions. The value of carbon credits can vary significantly based on regulatory changes and market sentiment.
• Competitive Analysis: Analyzing competitors in the bio-oil production and carbon sequestration market to understand market trends, pricing strategies, and technological advancements.

10.3 Financial Incentives and Support Mechanisms

Various financial incentives and support mechanisms can enhance the economic attractiveness of bio-oil production projects:

• Government Subsidies and Grants: Many governments offer financial support for renewable energy projects and carbon sequestration initiatives to meet their environmental targets. This can include direct subsidies, tax incentives, or grants for research and development.
• Carbon Pricing Mechanisms: Systems such as cap-and-trade or carbon taxes that assign a monetary value to carbon emissions can make carbon sequestration projects more financially viable.
• Green Financing: Access to special loans, green bonds, and other financing options designed specifically for environmentally beneficial projects.
• Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs): Collaboration with governmental entities can provide financial, technical, and regulatory support, reducing project risks and improving profitability.

Incorporating these economic analyses and leveraging market opportunities and financial incentives are crucial for justifying the investment in bio-oil production from industrial hemp and ensuring the project’s long-term sustainability and profitability.

11. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

11.1 Stakeholder Identification and Analysis

Successful implementation of bio-oil production and carbon sequestration projects requires identifying and understanding the various stakeholders involved or impacted by the project. Stakeholders typically include:

11. 1. • Local Communities: Residents and local groups affected by or benefiting from the project activities.
       • Governmental Agencies: Local, regional, and national authorities responsible for environmental, energy, and economic regulations.
       • Investors and Financial Institutions: Entities providing the capital necessary for project development and expansion.
       • Environmental NGOs: Organizations interested in the project’s environmental impacts and benefits.
       • Industry Partners: Companies involved in the supply chain, from hemp cultivation to technology providers for bio-oil production.

Analyzing stakeholder interests and concerns involves mapping out their influence and interest related to the project, understanding their expectations, and assessing how the project impacts them, positively or negatively.

11.2 Strategies for Effective Engagement

Effective stakeholder engagement is crucial for gaining support, facilitating smooth project implementation, and enhancing the project’s social license to operate. Key strategies include:

• Regular Communication: Establishing ongoing dialogues through meetings, newsletters, or digital platforms to keep stakeholders informed about project progress, decisions, and impacts.
• Community Involvement: Engaging local communities in the planning and decision-making processes, possibly through public forums or participatory assessments, to ensure their voices are heard and integrated.
• Transparency: Sharing information openly with stakeholders about project goals, methodologies, benefits, and risks to build trust and credibility.
• Partnership Development: Collaborating with local businesses, educational institutions, and NGOs to leverage local knowledge and resources, and to foster community support.
• Feedback Mechanisms: Implementing systems to collect, analyze, and respond to stakeholder feedback, ensuring that concerns are addressed promptly and effectively.

11.3 Handling and Responding to Public Concerns

Addressing public concerns proactively is vital for maintaining public trust and support:

• Issue Identification: Actively listening to the community and stakeholders to identify potential issues or concerns related to the project.
• Responsive Action Plans: Developing and implementing action plans that address the identified issues. This could include modifying project plans, enhancing safety measures, or increasing environmental protections.
• Public Reporting: Regularly reporting on how concerns are being addressed and the outcomes of any actions taken.
• Conflict Resolution: Establishing mechanisms for resolving disputes or conflicts that may arise from project activities, which may include mediation or arbitration processes.
• Continual Learning: Using experiences and feedback from stakeholders to improve engagement strategies and project operations over time.

These strategies ensure that the project not only complies with regulatory requirements but also aligns well with the community’s expectations and sustainability goals, fostering a positive and cooperative relationship with all stakeholders involved.

12. RESEARCH ANE DEVELOPMENT NEEDS

12.1 Current Challenges and Technological Gaps

The development of bio-oil from industrial hemp and its storage in geological formations face several technological and scientific challenges that can impact efficiency and scalability:

12. 1. • Conversion Efficiency: Current technologies for converting hemp biomass into bio-oil, primarily through pyrolysis and hydrothermal liquefaction, often do not achieve optimal yields. The efficiency of these processes can be affected by the variability in biomass composition and the presence of contaminants.
       • Bio-oil Stability and Quality: Bio-oil produced from hemp is often acidic, unstable, and contains high levels of oxygen, which can complicate its storage and use as a fuel or chemical feedstock. Enhancing the stability and quality of bio-oil is crucial for its broader application.
       • Storage Safety and Integrity: Ensuring the long-term integrity and safety of geological storage sites, particularly in the context of using orphaned oil wells, presents significant challenges. These include preventing leakages, managing the interaction of bio-oil with geological materials, and monitoring site stability.
       • Regulatory and Environmental Compliance: Navigating the complex regulatory landscape and ensuring compliance with environmental standards across different regions can be challenging, especially as policies continue to evolve.

12.2 Opportunities for Innovation and Improvement

Addressing the current challenges opens several avenues for innovation and improvement:

• Advanced Conversion Technologies: Developing more efficient thermal and chemical conversion processes that can handle a broader range of biomass inputs and produce higher quality bio-oil.
• Bio-oil Upgrading Technologies: Techniques such as catalytic upgrading, esterification, and emulsification can be developed further to enhance the bio-oil’s fuel properties, making it more comparable to conventional hydrocarbons.
• Enhanced Storage Techniques: Innovations in sealing technologies and monitoring systems for bio-oil storage could significantly reduce risks and improve the feasibility of using existing geological formations.
• Integration with Renewable Energy: Combining bio-oil production with renewable energy sources to minimize the carbon footprint of the production process and increase overall sustainability.

12.3 Priorities for Future Research

To overcome the challenges and capitalize on the opportunities, several research priorities can be outlined:

• Feedstock Optimization: Researching genetic and agronomic improvements to industrial hemp to enhance its yield and uniformity, making it more suitable for bio-oil production.
• Process Integration: Studying the integration of bio-oil production processes with existing industrial systems, such as refineries or chemical manufacturing plants, to improve scalability and economic viability.
• Lifecycle and Impact Assessments: Conducting comprehensive lifecycle analyses and environmental impact assessments to better understand the implications of large-scale bio-oil production and storage.
• Policy and Economic Analyses: Examining the economic impacts of bio-oil production under different policy scenarios to guide future legislation and support mechanisms.

By focusing on these research priorities, the field can move towards more sustainable and economically viable solutions for carbon sequestration using bio-oil from industrial hemp, addressing both environmental concerns and market needs.

13. REFERENCES

For the development of this methodology, several sources and key literature were consulted to provide a robust foundation for the processes described. Below is a list of references that significantly contributed to the formulation of the methodology, including insights into biomass conversion, bio-oil production, carbon sequestration, and regulatory frameworks:

13. 1. Bridgwater, A.V. (2012). “Review of fast pyrolysis of biomass and product upgrading.” Biomass and Bioenergy, 38, pp. 68-94. This reference provides comprehensive details on the process of fast pyrolysis, which is critical for understanding the conversion of hemp biomass into bio-oil.
    2. Demirbas, A. (2009). “Biorefineries for biofuel upgrading: A critical review.” Applied Energy, 86, pp. S151-S161. This article reviews the technologies for upgrading bio-oil into more stable and useful forms, addressing the challenges and innovations in bio-oil upgrading.
    3. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). (2020). “Guidelines for Water Reuse.” This document was used to address environmental and safety concerns related to the use of water in hydrothermal liquefaction processes.
    4. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2018). “Technology Roadmap: Bioenergy for Heat and Power.” This roadmap outlines the potential for bioenergy technologies in contributing to global energy and climate goals, providing a strategic framework that supports the development of bio-oil production from biomass.
    5. Lehmann, J., & Joseph, S. (2015). “Biochar for Environmental Management: Science, Technology and Implementation.” Routledge. This book offers insights into the management of by-products like biochar from pyrolysis processes, emphasizing their environmental benefits.
    6. Rogelj, J., et al. (2016). “Paris Agreement climate proposals need a boost to keep warming well below 2 °C.” Nature, 534, pp. 631-639. This article is crucial for understanding the global climate goals that guide the carbon sequestration efforts discussed in the methodology.
    7. Standards and Industrial Research Institute of Malaysia (SIRIM). (2019). “ISO 14064-1:2018 – Greenhouse gases — Part 1: Specification with guidance at the organization level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals.” This standard provides the framework for the MRV (Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification) protocols used in the methodology.
    8. Williams, R.H., & Larson, E.D. (2003). “A comparison of direct and indirect liquefaction technologies for making fluid fuels from coal.” Energy for Sustainable Development, 7(4), pp. 103-129. Used for understanding different liquefaction technologies that can be applicable to biomass.

Each of these references provides a foundation of scientific, technical, and regulatory information that supports the effective implementation and validation of the processes described in the methodology for producing and storing bio-oil derived from industrial hemp.

14. APPENDICES

This section contains supplementary materials that support the main content of the methodology, providing detailed technical data, examples of calculations, and resources for monitoring and verification. These appendices are designed to enhance understanding and provide tools and references for practical implementation.

Appendix A: Technical Specifications and Data Sheets

This appendix includes detailed technical specifications and data sheets for all equipment and materials used in the production of bio-oil from industrial hemp. Specifications cover:

14. • Pyrolysis and Hydrothermal Liquefaction Equipment: Dimensions, operating parameters, energy requirements, and manufacturer details.
    • Biomass Handling and Preparation Equipment: Specifications for dryers, grinders, and conveyors.
    • Storage Facility Specifications: Details on the design and construction specifications of geological storage sites and orphaned oil wells.
    • Safety Equipment: Specifications for safety and emergency equipment, including spill containment and fire suppression systems.

Each data sheet provides essential information required for procurement, installation, operation, and maintenance of the equipment.

Appendix B: Sample Calculation Worksheets

This appendix provides sample worksheets for calculating:

14. • Bio-oil Yield: Formulas and step-by-step instructions for calculating the yield of bio-oil from hemp biomass based on different operational parameters and conversion efficiencies.
    • Carbon Content in Bio-Oil: Worksheets to calculate the percentage of carbon in the bio-oil produced and its translation to CO2 equivalents, using empirical data from elemental analysis.
    • Net CO2 Removal: Templates to help quantify the net amount of CO2 removed, accounting for all emissions from the process and the carbon sequestered in the bio-oil.

These worksheets are designed to be used as tools for project developers to easily estimate the environmental impact and efficiency of their operations.

Appendix C: List of Approved Monitoring and Verification Agencies

This appendix contains a comprehensive list of agencies and organizations approved to conduct monitoring, reporting, and verification (MRV) for projects involving the production and storage of bio-oil. It includes:

• Contact Information: Names, addresses, contact details, and website links of approved agencies.
• Services Offered: Detailed descriptions of the services provided by each agency, including greenhouse gas measurement, data verification, and compliance auditing.
• Accreditation Details: Information on the accreditation and credentials that qualify these agencies to perform MRV tasks according to international standards.

This resource is intended to assist project managers in selecting qualified agencies to ensure their projects meet regulatory standards and achieve credible, verifiable results in carbon sequestration.

Each appendix serves as a resource to provide technical guidance, facilitate calculations related to bio-oil production and carbon sequestration, and ensure compliance with monitoring and verification requirements, supporting the practical application of the methodology outlined in the main document.14