10.3 Air Emissions

At Bayer, air emissions are caused mainly by the generation and consumption of electricity, steam and process heat. Our commitment to greater energy efficiency helps reduce both costs and emissions. We also aim to contribute to climate protection on several levels. We have set ambitious targets for resource efficiency and established relevant measures across the Group.

Group target Covestro:

improvement in production process technology to achieve better energy efficiency

Our commitment is divided into three areas:

1. More efficient production: we aim to reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases in our own production facilities by increasing energy efficiency, using combined heat and power generation in our power plants and developing and marketing new, more climate-friendly technologies. Thanks to our own energy management systems and production and process innovations, considerable resources have been saved in recent years. Energy efficiency projects resulting from STRUCTESE™ (Structured Efficiency System for Energy) implemented since 2008 lead to annual savings. Taking into account all sustainable savings effects since the system was introduced, these savings amounted to 1.55 million MWh in the area of primary energy consumption in 2015.

2. Reducing emissions using market solutions: our products play their part in saving energy and conserving resources in many different ways. We are able to help our customers in the areas of building insulation, lightweight construction and agriculture in particular. We provide solutions both for reducing emissions and for adapting to climate change. These include state-of-the-art crop protection products that enable higher yields, new cultivation methods such as precision farming and the development of crops that are better able to cope with stress factors such as extreme temperatures and aridity. You can read more, for example, about combating the growing threat of malaria – resulting from climate change – in the CropScience section of Chapter 4 “Research, Development, Innovation.”

3. Reducing emissions in nonproduction areas of Bayer: this includes – with the planned reduction of specific CO2 emissions of newly registered vehicles to 110 g/km through 2020 – an ambitious reduction target for our vehicle fleet, optimized logistics and enhancement of the environmentally friendly credentials of our information and communication technologies (Green IT). Through our EcoFleet initiative, CO2 emissions of newly registered vehicles for our global fleet of over 25,000 vehicles were reduced by a further 7 g/km to 141 g/km in 2015.

Greenhouse gas emissions

Bayer reports all Group greenhouse gas emissions in line with the requirements of the Greenhouse Gas Protocol ( GHG Protocol The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Standard is an internationally recognized standard for the recording and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions. It covers direct (Scope 1) and indirect (Scope 2) greenhouse gas emissions relating to a company’s value-added chain, as well as emissions resulting from third-party and acquired upstream services (Scope 3). Dual reporting was introduced in 2015 with the updating of the GHG guidelines for Scope 2. Indirect emissions have now to be reported using both the location-based and the market-based methods. The location-based method uses regional or national average emissions factors, while the market-based method applies provider- or product-specific emissions factors based on contractual instruments. ). Direct emissions from our own power plants, waste incineration plants and production facilities (corresponding to Scope 1 of the GHG Protocol) and indirect emissions that result from the external procurement of electricity, steam and refrigeration energy (Scope 2) are determined at all production locations and relevant administrative sites.

Dual reporting was introduced in 2015 with the updating of the GHG guidelines for Scope 2. According to this, indirect emissions have to be reported using both the location-based and the market-based methods. The location-based method uses regional or national average emissions factors, while the market-based method takes into account contractual instruments and uses provider- or product-specific emissions factors. From 2015, we are reporting for the first time in line with the new guideline, shown retroactively to 2012. To ensure the comparability of the data we are additionally reporting according to the previous system once more this year.

Group Greenhouse Gas Emissions1

 

 

Million metric tons of CO2 equivalents

 

 

2011

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

1

Portfolio-adjusted in accordance with the GHG Protocol

2

In 2015, 86.8% of emissions were CO2 emissions, 12.7% N2O emissions, just under 0.5% partially fluorinated hydrocarbons and 0.04% methane.

3

Typically, CO2 in incineration processes accounts for over 99% of all greenhouse gas emissions. When determining indirect emissions, our calculations are therefore limited to CO2.

4

Back calculation using the market-based method is only possible from 2012, as the RE-DISS factors needed for the calculation were only available for the first time for that year.

5

The market-based method of the new Scope 2 GHG Protocol most reliably reflects the indirect emissions and the success of emissions reduction measures, so we used emissions volumes calculated using this method when calculating the total and specific greenhouse gas emissions.

6

Specific Group emissions are calculated from the total volume of direct emissions and indirect – calculated using the market-based method of the new Scope 2 GHG Protocol – emissions of the subgroups, including the emissions at the Belford Roxo site and emissions from the vehicle fleet, both reported for the Group as a whole, divided by the manufactured sales volume of the three subgroups in metric tons. Quantities attributable to the supply of energy to external companies are deducted from the direct and indirect emissions. At Covestro, neither the by-products sodium hydroxide solution and hydrochloric acid generated during production nor trade products are included in the manufactured sales volume.

Direct greenhouse gas emissions2

 

4.23

 

4.24

 

4.09

 

4.02

 

4.41

Indirect greenhouse gas emissions3, according to the previous method (reported until 2014)

 

3.92

 

4.12

 

4.29

 

4.70

 

4.64

Indirect greenhouse gas emissions3, according to the location-based method (reported from 2015)

 

 

4.71

 

4.85

 

5.03

 

4.94

Indirect greenhouse gas emissions3, according to the market-based method (reported from 2015)

 

4

 

4.72

 

4.91

 

5.53

 

5.30

Total greenhouse gas emissions, according to the previous method (reported until 2014)

 

8.15

 

8.36

 

8.37

 

8.72

 

9.05

Total greenhouse gas emissions, according to the market-based method (reported from 2015)5

 

 

8.96

 

9.00

 

9.55

 

9.71

Specific greenhouse gas emissions (t CO2e / t), according to the previous method (reported until 2014)6

 

0.95

 

0.98

 

1.00

 

1.02

 

1.09

Specific greenhouse gas emissions (t CO2e / t), according to the market-based method (reported from 2015)5,6

 

 

1.06

 

1.09

 

1.12

 

1.19

The total volume of Group-wide greenhouse gas emissions rose by 1.7% (Scope 2 market-based) in 2015. Broken down, direct emissions rose by 9.7%, while indirect emissions fell by 4.1% (Scope 2 market-based). The rise in direct emissions is largely due to higher nitrous oxide emissions caused by a significant increase in nitric acid production at the site in Caojing, China, and to additional emissions from the incineration of liquid and thermal waste there. Another reason was increased energy consumption by third parties at the CropScience site in Institute, United States.

Group target 2020:

reduction of 20% in specific greenhouse gas emissions

In line with our Group target we are endeavoring to reduce specific greenhouse gas emissions (total emissions divided by the manufactured sales volume) by 20% through 2020. 2015 saw a rise of 6.0% (Scope 2 being calculated according to the market-based method) owing mainly to the effects described above.

Online annex: 3-10.3-1:

limited assurance

Even though a significant proportion of our direct emissions comes from the generation of energy that is delivered to other companies, we include all greenhouse gas emissions from the conversion of primary energy sources into electricity, steam or refrigeration energy in our energy balance, in line with the regulations of the GHG Protocol. Consequently, our absolute figures for greenhouse gas emissions are higher than the actual emissions resulting from Bayer’s business activities. The level of specific greenhouse gas emissions is a more meaningful statistic. This indicates only the greenhouse gas emissions for which Bayer is directly responsible in relation to the manufactured sales volumes of the three Bayer subgroups.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Subgroup and Service Company1

 

 

Total direct and indirect emissions in million metric tons of CO2 equivalents

 

 

20122

 

2013

 

2014

 

20155

1

The indirect emissions were calculated according to the market-based method. Since the RE-DISS factors needed for this were only available from 2012, the data are only indicated for the past 4 years.

2

Emissions from the Bayer Group’s vehicle fleet have been recorded since 2012, but not specific to any subgroup, and are assigned to the direct Group emissions in Table 3.10.3. In 2015, fleet emissions amounted to 0.14 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents.

3

The emissions reported for Currenta are attributable to the provision of energy to external companies at the Chempark sites.

4

The by-products sodium hydroxide solution and hydrochloric acid generated during production are not included in the manufactured sales volumes, nor are trade products.

5

The emissions from the production site in Belford Roxo, Brazil, totaling 0.06 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents are not included in this table but are reported for the Group as a whole in Table 3.10.3.

HealthCare

 

0.60

 

0.57

 

0.57

 

0.57

CropScience

 

0.96

 

0.99

 

0.97

 

1.05

Covestro

 

5.29

 

5.42

 

6.27

 

6.41

Currenta3

 

1.99

 

1.92

 

1.62

 

1.47

Specific greenhouse gas emissions for Covestro (metric tons of CO2 equivalents per metric ton of manufactured sales volume)4

 

0.93

 

0.97

 

1.03

 

1.10

In 2015, the waste incineration plants operated by Currenta generated just under 1 million metric tons of steam from the incineration of more than 250,000 metric tons of hazardous waste from the Chempark sites and some external production companies. Compared to using fossil energy sources, the use of this steam enables approximately 200,000 metric tons less CO2 to be emitted per year.

The reporting of all relevant indirect emissions resulting from the value chain is bindingly regulated by the GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting & Reporting Standard. Following a thorough examination, Bayer has identified nine essential Scope 3 categories, which we report on in detail in the CDP (formerly Carbon Disclosure Project) is an independent, not-for-profit organization that works on behalf of analysts and investors to promote the transparent reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and water use (Water Disclosure Report) by companies. CDP publishes two climate rankings each year: the Climate Disclosure Leadership Index (CDLI) rates the extent and quality of the disclosure of climate-relevant data, while the best-rated companies are additionally listed in the Climate Performance Leadership Index (CPLI). Report. We take particular account of those emissions where there is significant potential for reduction e.g. our transport-related emissions resulting from business trips.

In 2015, the Bayer Group was involved in European emissions trading with 19 plants in total. The greenhouse gas emissions of these plants amounted to approximately 2.32 million metric tons of CO2 equivalents.

Other direct emissions into the air

Emissions of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) fell by 20.7%. Emissions of volatile organic compounds excluding methane (VOCs) decreased by 24.0%. The main source of both types of emissions remains the CropScience site in Vapi, India, which accounts for 55.4% of VOC emissions and 94.3% of ODS emissions. The project initiated there four years ago to reduce these emissions continues to have an impact. VOC emissions fell by a further 38.3%. ODS emissions there also decreased, by 21.1%. A central waste air treatment system will go into operation at the Vapi site during 2016. This will bring together the many different sources of emissions there and cause another significant reduction in these emissions.

Emissions of Ozone-Depleting Substances (ODS)1

 

 

2011

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

1

Ozone-depleting substances (ODS) in CFC-11 equivalents

ODS in metric tons p.a.

 

16.3

 

16.3

 

15.7

 

14.8

 

11.7

Emissions of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)1

 

 

2011

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

1

Volatile organic compounds (VOC) without methane

VOC in 1,000 metric tons p.a.

 

2.69

 

2.60

 

2.27

 

2.12

 

1.61

VOC in kg per metric ton of manufactured sales volume

 

0.2457

 

0.2316

 

0.2047

 

0.1864

 

0.1379

Emissions of sulfur dioxide fell by 4.1%. Particulate emissions also declined, in this case by 8.9%, caused by reductions at Covestro’s sites in Baytown, Texas, United States, and Caojing, China. Emissions of nitrogen oxides, on the other hand, rose by 2.4% and of carbon monoxide by 2.1%. Both increases could essentially be attributed to differences in the types of coal used at the Uerdingen site in Germany.

Online annex: 3-10.3-2:

limited assurance
Other Important Direct Air Emissions

 

 

1,000 metric tons p.a.

 

 

2011

 

2012

 

2013

 

2014

 

2015

CO

 

1.31

 

1.00

 

0.94

 

0.91

 

0.93

NOX

 

3.66

 

3.07

 

2.51

 

2.36

 

2.42

SOX

 

2.27

 

1.85

 

1.32

 

1.22

 

1.17

Particulates

 

0.18

 

0.18

 

0.16

 

0.25

 

0.23