Home

What is Mass Balance

The mass balance approach is a mechanism to start the large-scale phasing out of fossil raw materials with the goal of a fully converted industry.

It is about mixing fossil and recycled or renewable in existing systems and processes while keeping track of their quantities and allocating them to specific products.

ISCC

Based on customer requirements, ISCC offers two chain of custody options for ISCC system users. Materials are either physically segregated in production processes throughout the supply chain (“physical segregation”) or mixed in production but separated in bookkeeping (“mass balance approach”).

The mass balance approach along the supply chain:

Over the past years, the mass balance approach has prevailed in the chemical industry. As an important milestone on the pathway to a circular economy and bioeconomy, it has been designed to trace the flow of materials through a complex value chain.

Since chemically recycled or bio-based feedstocks are typically blended in the manufacturing complex, physical segregation of recycled content is often practically and economically infeasible.

The mass balance approach makes it possible to track the amount and sustainability characteristics of circular and/or bio-based content in the value chain and attribute it based on verifiable bookkeeping.

“Free attribution” of circular feedstocks:

“Free attribution” of bio-based feedstocks:

One of the major advantages of the ISCC PLUS mass balance approach is the possibility to gradually increase the share of bio-based and/or circular feedstocks in the production process.

In addition, the calculated share of bio-based and/or circular feedstocks can be attributed on an equivalent basis to one or several outputs. On this basis, the ISCC PLUS mass balance approach allows system users to make credible claims.

Read More ISCC for the Circular Economy and Bioeconomy

Ellen MacArthur Foundation White Paper

The following document is: CE100 Whitepaper: Enabling a circular economy for chemicals with the mass balance approach

The Ellen MacArthur Foundation brings together decision-makers across business, government and academia and acts as a global thought leader for the circular economy.

The foundation’s Circular Economy 100 (CE100) Network provides a pre-competitive space for businesses and stakeholders to learn, share knowledge, and build new collaborative approaches.
 
An important milestone on the pathway to a circular economy is the mass balance approach for the chemical industry.

By publishing a whitepaper, the Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s CE100 Network, including ISCC members Eastman and UPM, propose a mass balance approach with predefined rules. ISCC has implemented the whitepaper’s concept in the ISCC PLUS mass balance approach.

Sabic Mass Balance Approach

Perstorp Mass Balance Approach

Perstorp vs BASF

• Perstorp vision – no credit transfer

They are calling for the concept of Traceable Mass Balance to underpin the new standard. This acknowledges the basic principles of mass balance but applies Chemical and Physical traceability.

Chemical traceability means: that only the raw materials used to make the product can be used to enable the shift, and that the recycled/renewable raw material can only replace its own part/share of the product.

Physical traceability means: a production process exists within the site for producing the product from the recycled/renewable raw material(s), and that the recycled/renewable raw materials have to be shipped to, and used at, the production site producing the recycled/renewable product.

A producer cannot transfer recycled/renewable credits from one site to another. Applying chemical and physical traceability means that it is possible to find recycled or renewable material in the product and that the real transition of that product is gradually taking place from fossil to fully recycled and/or renewable.

Read more Perstorp Vision on Mass Balance Standard and Greenwashing

• BASF Vision – Qualified Credit Transfer

A widely held opinion is that unrestricted Book & Claim cannot be allowed, but there is no consensus on the reason for not allowing the Book & Claim chain of custody.

Some consider it less transparent and therefore less reliable. Yet, it is believed that an important alternate chain of custody model is needed.

Circular Economy will be significantly accelerated and expanded if mass balance accounting includes a chain of custody model under which recycled material credits can be administratively transferred within a predefined system boundary.

Without the ability to transfer credits companies would face prohibitive challenges in shipping of materials (i.e. shipping essentially identical materials between sites) and the need for redundant assets that have no return on investment.

Qualified credit transfers between sites may help to accelerate the transition to a Circular Economy and while at the same time prevent unintended consequences or incentivise unsustainable practices.

For example, without the ability to transfer qualified credits between sites some companies might want to ship materials between distant sites in order to expand a mass balance system boundary.

Shipping just to expand the system boundaries would require additional transportation, it might also require constructing redundant storage and manufacturing assets all of which would incur additional unnecessary environmental impacts.

Specific limits to the expansion of the system boundary need to be developed within a multi-stakeholder standard development process and may include requirements such as:

1) in the absence of physical connectivity, credits may only be transferred for materials that both have been fairly assessed for their respective chemical value, e.g. by the LHV method,

2) each site must be included in a pooled mass balance system and be certified under the same certification system;

3) the sites must have management control by the same company; etc.

The option for credit transfers between sites under strict qualifying conditions is available in existing “mass balance” certification systems (derived from the biofuel certification) for all industries, not just chemicals. QCT may thus be discerned from unrestricted Book & Claim.

Remarks

• The whole system is in jeopardy if there’s fraud because we’ve completely lost track of what is where. It becomes a house of card. Think China!
• Certifications? Yeah right!
• It’s very convenient for the industry because no massive investments in new technologies are needed, but it’s not necessarily the best option for the environment.
• It’s in the advantage of drop-ins bio-similar plastic and chemicals (BIO-PE, BIO-PP, BIO-PET).
• 6 BASF employees where involved in the writing of the Ellen MacArthur foundation White Paper. Experience has taught me that BASF are masters in the science of greenwashing. My opinion is thus: this time let’s do it properly and say no to the BASF credit transfer scam.