Changes in ISO 14064-2:2019 for GHG Reduction Projects. What's new?
Updated: Jun 18
For the last in our three-part series looking at the changes to the new version of ISO 14064, we’re looking at part 2 – GHG projects (you can read our post about part 1 on inventories here, and part 3 on validation and verification here). Part 2 has undergone the fewest changes of the three and in essence the 2nd (2019) version is very similar to the 1st (2006) version.
A couple of the changes are common to all three Parts of ISO 14064, such as the change to the definition of ‘justify’ and the change in nomenclature from talking about a ‘GHG assertion’ to a ‘GHG statement’.
However, the main changes to the standard fall under the following categories:
1. Describing the project – several changes that dovetail with existing good practice for project reporting have been added:
a. The project proponent is now required to not only identify risks but also, “if applicable, any measures to manage those risks”;
b. It has been clarified that relevant outcomes from consultation only need to be included “if applicable”, and
c. The chronological plan requirements have been expanded to include the GHG baseline time period and frequency of verification/validation.
2. Adding new activities/changing the project – this wasn’t addressed within version 1 of the standard. Where new activities or changes to the project are made, project proponents are now required to review and update the GHG baseline, project emissions/removals and, if necessary, have the project revalidated.
3. Determining the baseline scenario – an interesting addition here is that the project proponent must now consider the “likely future behaviour” of the selected baseline scenario. This is something that, practically speaking, has certainly impacted projects in the past (such as energy efficient lighting retrofit projects). It’s good to see the standard require project developers to think about this upfront, as it can have a significant impact on projected GHG reductions.
4. Monitoring – monitoring has always been required, but the new version of the standard explicitly requires project proponents to have and to follow a monitoring plan. The monitoring plan, furthermore, has to include controls over data, which while good practice, was not explicitly required beforehand.
5. Uncertainty – as with Part 1, the treatment of uncertainty has new prominence. Previously not discussed in Part 2, it is now required that the GHG report includes a statement on uncertainty and how it has been minimized.
If you need to understand these standards in more detail, Firefly GHG Consulting regularly conducts Canadian Standards Association (CSA) training courses on ISO 14064. Or, if you have questions or comments on the new Part 2 – or the new Part 1 or Part 3, for that matter – get in touch and we would be happy to help you!