From greenhouse gas inventories to digital emissions management in Vietnam’s oil and gas industry

Abstract

This study proposes a digital greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions management framework tailored to the characteristics of Vietnam’s oil and gas value chain, addressing the limitations of inventory practices that rely primarily on spreadsheets and manual aggregation. The methodology includes a review of the GHG Protocol, IPCC, and IPIECA/API/IOGP guidance; analysis of oil and gas activities; identification of data requirements; and the design of a data model and processing architecture. The findings indicate that the system should manage emissions across multiple levels, ranging from organization, facility, process, equipment, emission source, and gas type to activity data, emission factors, calculation methods/Tiers, and results. A Star Schema is proposed to separate source data, emission factors, methodologies, and results while integrating uncertainty, QA/QC, version control, and recalculation capabilities. The proposed architecture, including: Excel/SharePoint, database, calculation module, Power BI, and reporting - supports phased implementation. The principal contribution is to shift the object of management from the “emission number” itself to the “data lineage that produces the number,” thereby providing a foundation for MRV, verification, and emissions-reduction governance.
Keywords
greenhouse gas emissions digital reporting oil and gas industry methane MRV

References

1.
Hình ảnh được tạo từ A.I dựa trên hướng dẫn kiểm kê KNK của API/IPIECA và dữ kiện sản xuất dầu khí của Petrovietnam.
2.
Lê Thống Nhất. (2017). Xác định thực trạng và dự báo nguồn phát thải khí của tất cả các hoạt động dầu khí (Đề tài NCKH cấp ngành, MS 02/ATSKMT(CPSE)/2017/HĐ-NCKH). Tập đoàn Dầu khí Việt Nam.
3.
American Petroleum Institute. (2021). Compendium of greenhouse gas emissions methodologies for the natural gas and oil industry (4th ed.).
4.
https://www.api.org/-/media/files/policy/esg/ghg/2021-api-ghg-compendium-110921.pdf
5.
Alvarez et al. (2018). Assessment of methane emissions from the U.S. oil and gas supply chain. Science, 361(6398), 186-188. DOI: 10.1126/science.aar7204.
6.
Brandt, M. J., Reyna, C., Chambers, J. R., Crawford, J. T., & Wetherell, G. (2014). The ideological-conflict hypothesis: Intolerance among both liberals and conservatives. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(1), 27-34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413510932.
7.
Busch, T., Johnson, M., & Pioch, T. (2022). Corporate carbon performance data: Quo vadis? Journal of Industrial Ecology, 26, 350-363. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13008 .
8.
Global Reporting Initiative. (2026). GRI 11: Oil and Gas Sector 2021.
9.
IPIECA, API, & IOGP. (2020). Sustainability reporting guidance for the oil and gas industry (4th ed.). https://www.ipieca.org/resources/sustainability-reporting-guidance.
10.
IPIECA, API, & OGP. (2011). Petroleum industry guidelines for reporting greenhouse gas emissions (2nd ed.). https://www.ipieca.org/resources/petroleum-industry-guidelines-for-reporting-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2nd-edition.
11.
United Nations Environment Programme. (2020). The Oil and Gas Methane Partnership 2.0 (OGMP 2.0) Framework.
12.
World Resources Institute. (2004). The greenhouse gas protocol: A corporate accounting and reporting standard (Revised ed.). https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/ghg-protocol-revised.pdf.
13.
World Resources Institute. (2011). Corporate value chain (Scope 3) accounting and reporting standard. https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/Corporate-Value-Chain-Accounting-Reporing-Standard_041613_2.pdf .