 the communities team here at CAS. And our team is responsible for the implementation of the local government climate action program. And as part of that program, we're doing a series of webinars to launch year two of the program. At this point, I'd like to introduce a few other members of our team. First, we have Elizabeth Litviak. Hi, everyone. Elizabeth Litviak. And I'm a senior data and program analyst on the team. And I'll pass it on to Anna. Hey, everyone. I'm Anna Caudier. I'm a project coordinator on the team. And I'll be monitoring your chat questions as we go. Thanks. And hi, everyone. My name is Ken Porter. I'm the manager of the communities team and excited that we have such a strong turnout for this webinar on corporate measurement. Yes. And as Ken just said, the purpose of today's webinar is on the topic of corporate emissions measurement. So we'll be talking about that broadly. And it will apply to many of the program participants this year. And so thank you for coming. Slide please, Ken. There we go. Before we get started, we'd just like to gratefully acknowledge that Victoria, where we're all calling in from, is on the ancestral and unceded territories of the Lekwungen peoples on whose traditional territories we are all today. And we'd also like to take a moment to ask that everyone in the chat, everyone on the call reflect on the traditional territories from which they're calling from as we understand that we have participants from all across the land, which is today called British Columbia. And we want to honor the language, culture, and history and stewardship of the land for many generations from the Lekwungen peoples. Some housekeeping notes. So this webinar is being recorded. So if you aren't able to stay for the whole time or if there's somebody else at your municipality that would benefit from seeing this webinar, it will be on our website shortly. The live transcript is enabled. As well, we'd ask that while we're presenting, you keep your cameras off and your mics muted. Questions can go into the chat and you can raise your hand. We will be dealing with all questions at the end. And we did a run through yesterday and the presentation is not longer than an hour, so we will have plenty of time to answer all the questions that you may have regarding corporate emissions reporting. And as I mentioned, the video will be posted to the LGCAP website. Our agenda for today is to briefly go over the background of this program, the local government climate action program, and talk about some of the design elements of year two, one of which is corporate emissions inventories. And at that point, we're going to pass it off to Elizabeth, who's going to go over some details of how to perform a corporate emissions inventory, as well as some tools that we've created to help you in this endeavor. We will have a time for question and answer, and then we will leave by reminding everyone of the key dates of year two of the program, as well as how to get in touch with us. Should you have any questions? Slide. Okay, so some background on the local government climate action program. We call it LGCAP here at the province, so you might catch me saying LGCAP or just the program to refer to it. So LGCAP or the local government climate action program, slide please. The background to the program is as follows. After the sunset of the climate action revenue incentive program or CARIP, there was a lot of feedback received from local governments on the need for reliable, long-term, and flexible funding to advance climate action. This program came out of commitments that were made by the province through the CleanBC Roadmap to 2030. The first year of the program was launched under a tight timeline, and so there was no engagement or input, and there was an emphasis on getting the dollars out the door as soon and as efficiently as possible. The objective was to make this program accessible with no application process and minimal reporting requirements. There was a funding formula which allocated each community and modern treaty nation an amount annually for the first three years of the program. This formula is a base amount plus an adjusted per capita component, and the funding can be used for infrastructure projects, building local climate capacity, conducting assessments, building resilience, and any other climate initiatives that are consistent with the CleanBC Roadmap or the climate preparedness and adaptation strategy as well as local municipal objectives. Starting in January through March, a group of feedbacks and engagement sessions were conducted to consider and incorporate to consider the feedback from municipalities, regional districts, and modern treaty nations to be incorporated into year two design of the program, and these launch webinars are in response to the feedback that we heard. We had really important discussions regarding corporate emissions reporting, and we're going to discuss some of the decisions that we made today. The reporting requirements are meant to balance the need to demonstrate the success of the program when it comes up for renewal after year three, as well as to lessen the burden on local governments and modern treaty nations, especially those with limited human and financial resources. Slide. So the year two design of the program is as follows. Slide. So to be eligible for the second year of funding, the requirements are as follows. One must be a signatory to the BC climate action charter or be a BC modern treaty nation. They must report on the projects linked to objectives in the CleanBC Roadmap or the climate preparedness and adaptation strategy through our annual reporting survey, a link to which will be coming out shortly, and the chief financial officer or equivalent position within the local government or modern treaty nation must attest that the funds were or will be allocated to climate action and new this year. We're requiring measurement and reporting of corporate greenhouse gas emissions for communities with populations exceeding 15,000. Local governments can choose which greenhouse gas inventory or management tool best suits their needs. And we're making a series of resources available on the website, which Elizabeth will talk about later. And we'll talk a bit about the reasoning for this threshold policy and how we arrived at the number 15,000 in the coming minutes. Slide. So this pie chart shows kind of the issue that we had in year one of the program. And obviously year one of the program, we were still coming out of the pandemic. As we mentioned, the emphasis was on getting the money out the door and there wasn't time for full engagement. And there wasn't time to put a lot of conditionality on the money. And the result was that only 29% or 53 local governments and modern treaty nations reported their corporate emissions according to our year one survey. And it's worth noting that in 2018, which was the last reporting cycle for the previous program, the Climate Action Revenue and Senate program, 147 local governments reported their corporate emissions. So that's substantially higher. So the belief was that it is possible and it is feasible for more governments to report their corporate emissions as they have capacity and experience of doing this historically. And so this is what informed our decision to make it mandatory in year two of the program. However, we also heard during our engagement sessions that this can be a burden, especially for smaller local governments and modern treaty nations. Slide please. Which is how we came up with a threshold rule for determining who we will be requiring to report their corporate emissions as part of the program. And the threshold number we came up with was 15,000 population. The 15,000 population number is based on 2020 population estimates. And the reason we use 2020 is because that is the year that was used in the funding formula calculation. So we think it's only fair to use the number that was used in allocating funding for population to determine the threshold. And by having a threshold of 15,000 and above, that will require 64 local governments and modern treaty nations to report their corporate emissions. And I should emphasize that all eight of the modern treaty nations are under the threshold. So really, we're just talking about local governments in terms of requiring the population share is 90%. So 90% of the population is covered under this rule, as well as 64% of the year one funding and 81% of reported 2018 corporate emissions under the previous program. And importantly, as we can see in the last column, by choosing this threshold, we're not asking anyone to report their corporate emissions that hasn't demonstrated an ability to do it under the previous program. It is strongly encouraged that local governments and modern treaty nations under the threshold of 15,000 report their corporate emissions if it is feasible. And we will hear more about how that is going in our engagements next year. But this is the threshold that we determined for requiring. And another important thing to note is for regional districts, in the funding formula, the non incorporated area of population is what was used to allocate the funding. And so it is the non incorporated population that is used in the threshold. So if a regional district has a population over 15,000, of which only 10,000 is in the unincorporated areas, they're not required to report. Because once again, we want to be consistent with how we determined the funding formula. Okay, at this point, we're going to talk about more of the nitty gritty details of how to actually report corporate emissions inventories. And I'm going to pass off to my colleague, Elizabeth. Thank you. Just going to apologize in advance. I'm just recovering from being ill. So I've got a bit of a cough that's lingering, but hoping won't have too many issues with that as I'm presenting. So yeah, just going to walk you through measure importing that's specific to this program. Next slide, please. So what are what is a corporate emissions inventory? And why is it important for this program? So the inventory is an assessment of an organization's GHG emissions that occur within a defined boundary and within a defined period of time. So for a given year, measuring and reporting corporate emissions not only demonstrates climate leadership, but also presents opportunities to reduce energy consumption and associated costs. So you can make more strategic and informed decisions on capital and infrastructure investments. Also supports the climate lens assessment process, which is becoming really predominant in infrastructure funding and financial decision making by lenders. So really important to develop these skills. We also cannot manage what we don't measure. So by making this a mandatory component of the program, we're hoping to institutionalize this over time. Next slide, please Ken. So the boundaries and scope for corporate inventories different differs from program to program. So for example, for LG cap, it's actually different from reporting under PCP or CDP. So we do follow the ISO principles. So ISO 14064-1 and that's inventories at the organization level. So this provides a standard framework and some tools. It helps build on existing good practice. So for example, the World Resources Institute GHG protocol. And this standard is meant to be a common building block that accompanies program specifications. So you want to apply these principles along with the LG cap methodology and scope to ensure credibility and then apples to apples comparisons across the province and over time. So the principles are relevant. So just selecting the appropriate GHG sources, data and following the 2022 BC best practices methodology for quantifying greenhouse gas emissions. So that's specific to this program. And then again, the traditional services framework composes the relevant sources for LG cap completeness, including all relevant GHG sources and consistency enabling meaningful comparisons over time and space, accuracy, reducing bias and uncertainties as far as practical. And then transparency is so disclosing sufficient and appropriate GHG related information to allow users to make decisions with reasonable confidence. And next slide, please. So just an overview of the process for measuring and reporting your community's corporate inventory under LG cap. And we'll go deeper into each of these steps moving forward. Next slide, please. Okay, so for determining what to include in your corporate inventory, you want to use the same corporate boundaries that are defined in the carbon neutral workbook. And again, all of these resources will be made available on our website. So don't worry about jotting any of that down. The boundaries for calculating emissions are based on the energy used for the delivery of traditional local government or modern treaty nation services. So that includes administration and governance, drinking water, stormwater, wastewater, solid waste collection, transportation diversion, roads and traffic operations, arts recreational and cultural services and fire protection. So this would also include any services that are contracted out to third parties on behalf of your local government or nation. And you'll notice that police fleets are not included. So this is because many communities do not have a local police force. And it can be really difficult to obtain that data from the RCMP. So communities also don't have financial operational influence over those GHG emissions from the RCMP fleet. So because of this, and since we want outposts to outpost comparison comparisons across BC in time, policing is excluded for this program. A following slide, please. Okay. So then we have to identify the emissions associated with the local government's operations and the types of greenhouse gases that need to be quantified. So we have three different types of emission sources, direct emissions or scope one emissions. And those are within an organizational boundary and are usually controlled by an organization. So an example of this can be fuel combustion for transportation or fleet vehicles. And then we have energy indirect or scope two emissions. So that's energy that's consumed on site. But the GHG emissions are off site and are generally not controlled by the organization. So that would be electricity or steam combustion or sorry, steam steam consumption. And then there are other indirect sources or scope three emissions. So those are produced from the activities of the company, but they are not sources owned or controlled by the company. And that could include things like extraction or production of purchase materials, for example, and scope three emissions are not measured or reported under LG cap. So you only need to worry about scope one and scope two emissions for this program. And we're also not requiring local governments or nations to measure emissions associated with refrigerants or fugitive emissions, just recognizing the difficulty in undertaking this work. So that would include HFCs, PCFs, nitrogen trifluoride and sulfur hexafluoride. So you can just see on the graphic there the ones that would be excluded. So in scope activities for LG cap include direct and energy and direct emissions. So again, scope one and scope two. And that's from stationary sources, so buildings and again, excluding space conditioning and refrigeration, and then mobile sources also excluding air conditioning. Next slide please. Okay, so the next step then is to collect your community's activity data. And that would be including again from contractors that are delivering traditional services on your behalf. So it's really helpful to have those communication channels established between your sustainability and finance staff for the purposes of attaining this information. And activity data can include fuel consumed or kilometers traveled for fleet vehicles and also hours of operation for facilities. So again, for credibility and comparability of inventories, please ensure that you're following the LG cap methodology scope and the appropriate emission factors for the 2022 year. And if you decide to use our inventory tool that we've developed and we'll talk more about that later, the appropriate emission factors will be automatically applied. Following slide please. Okay, so before we get into the calculation procedures, just want to dedicate some time to contracted services, because we know there's a lot of concerns around this and we heard them loud and clear during engagement. So just want to make sure that you know how to obtain this data and capture these emissions more accurately. So there's guidance on this and again that will be posted to our website, but it's guidance on including contract emissions and local government corporate inventories. And when you're reporting on contracted emissions local government should include contracts that are newer renewed as of June 1st 2012 and over $25,000 in value and in scope again based on the traditional services. And that's described in the workbook, which will also be on our website. And that's with the exception though for contracted services with the exception of administration and governance services. So for contracted services, you exclude that traditional service. And again, you're only required to track and report on mobile sources, not buildings for contracted services. So those are derived from fossil fuel consumption used to operate vehicles or equipment machinery. And yeah, that could include gasoline diesel natural gas propane or biofossil fuel blend consumption. Following slide please. Okay, so we've got the steps here. And I'm not going to read these all out, but just for coming up with sort of an internal process for collecting this data and reporting on your contracted emissions. So planning ahead for the inclusion of contracted emissions will make it easier to identify collect and manage the emissions data coming from contractors and also makes it easier for contractors to understand what is required of them and also to understand what their role is in corporate GHG reduction activities. It also provides a basis to build those relationships with contractors and encourages them to reduce their emissions over time as well, which also reduces costs. So we acknowledge, especially for some smaller communities may not always be possible to get contractors to cooperate. And there might not be alternative contractors delivering those services in your area. Yeah, meaning it can be challenging or not possible at all to build those requirements into your contracts. So that's why we have provided some guidance and as well an estimation tool. Again, you can follow the threshold for reporting, but we do have a tool that you can use to estimate your GHG emissions associated with contracted services if you're having trouble getting this data directly from your contractors. Following slide, please. Okay, so again, while you're encouraged to work with your contractors to get the actual data, we understand that it's not always possible to do so. So if this is the case, you can choose one of the following estimation methodologies and that's going to be also located in Appendix B of the contracted services guidance. So yeah, you can refer to that later as well and get some more information on those three options. So option one is just to ask your contractor to provide an estimate. Option two is to use a proxy fuel consumption value based on a sample of contracts. So that option is appropriate for local governments that have the fuel consumption data for a limited sample of contracts, say for previous years or, you know, for a few of the contracts, but not for all of them, vehicle equipment type and hours or kilometers of usage. So this option is appropriate for local governments that are able to identify the type of vehicles and the equipment being used to deliver the contracted services and the amount of hours or kilometers driven and also, you know, for that term of the contract. So following slide, please. Okay, so again, just want to reiterate, we've been really driving this home through our engagements. But there are many really great measurement tools available on the market. And we know that some local governments too have developed their own inventory tools using Excel and we've seen a few of them now, people have reached out to give us the demos and there's some really great tools out there. But as mentioned, we also developed a tool to quantify your corporate GHG emissions. Again, just hearing loud and clear that that was a need during our engagement this spring. So for each source that is in scope for LG cap emissions must be calculated. So you'll need to take the activity data and multiply by the appropriate emission factor. So again, for 2022. And that would, and then you can arrive at the emission associated with that source. So you can look at our emission factor catalog. If you're using your own tool or a tool on the market to get the appropriate emission factor, otherwise, if you're using our tool again, it'll auto populate when you when you put in the fuel source or energy source that you're using. So we provide emission factors on an per unit of fuel basis. So like liters or kilograms, and on a per unit of energy basis. So gigajoules or kilowatt hours. So however your bills come, you can use the emission factor catalog, as well as our tool with minimal need to perform unit conversions. So that can really reduce errors from doing those calculations. And then your total sources are summed. But we do ask when you're reporting that you report your contracted services separately as well. So we don't need anyone to submit formal inventory reports. All you need to do is fill out those numbers in the LG cap online survey. So just no specific formats required. You don't need to submit any forms to us, just filling it out in the LG cap survey. Okay, so I'm going to just give a quick demo now of the inventory tools. And then once we're done that demo, we'll open it up for some questions. Just keeping in mind, we'll have a question period at the end. But just while we have the tool open and available, we want to make sure that people have an opportunity to ask any questions. And I'm just going to take control here of the screen. All right, how's that looking? Can I get a thumbs up from someone on the team if that? Okay, great. Awesome. Okay, so this one. Oh, pardon me. Maybe zoom in just a little bit. Oh, absolutely. Yeah. Okay. Okay, I hope that's good enough. This is just the information or the instructions tab. So, you know, this just gives a an overview of how to use the tool and just some notes and considerations. Then we've got the calculator tab here. Now again, we don't need you to submit this. And this is just an option for those that don't have their own tool or don't want to use a tool on the market. This is pretty basic. It's really user friendly. So it's great if you don't have some process already established to do your corporate inventory. But yeah, again, you don't need to fill out any of this stuff at the top here since we don't need it submitted. It's just for your own reference. If you want to fill it out, go for it. Otherwise, we'll just I'll just show you quickly how this sort of works. So you can see that it's separated out here stationary sources, mobile sources, and you have your total directly delivered sources. And then below here you have contracted mobile sources. And then it'll give you all these sub totals and then the the the final total here. So you can add columns or sorry, rows. So you can insert a row. And you'll see that the formulas just continue. So it's really great. And that way you don't have to worry about dragging down. And then in this first column here, you would select whatever the energy sources for the stationary sources. So say that some BC hydro maybe, and then here, you can select the units that you want to report. And now I'll just mention here, not all of them work. So for BC hydro, if you select leaders, that's not going to work because you would never get a utility bill in leaders from BC hydro. So, you know, you could set select something like mega jewels. And then all you have to do from here other than selecting from the drop down menus is enter your consumption data. So once you do that, let's just put 50,000 in there as an example. It will just automatically populate the emission factors you've seen here and then give you your total emissions for that source. So really straightforward, really easy to use. And then of course, all of these formulas here will also be updated as you go along here. So maybe we'll just pause there. Again, like you can add, you know, as many roses you need of under each of these sections. Maybe we'll just open the floor for some questions on this tool specifically or I guess, any other corporate emissions reporting tool. Yeah, so we do have some questions, but they're not specifically about the tool. Okay, so I've noted them all and no one will be missed, but we'll save those for the general Q&A. Actually, here we go. Here's a question. Okay, survey question. Is the okay, here we go is the reporting template online is missing the contracted services emissions section. Is this an updated template you are using? Yeah, so I believe you're referring to the energy consumption reporting template. And yeah, so this is basically an improved version of that. And we will have it posted shortly on our website. We are just having everything going through approvals, you know, so like the last minute just checks on everything. But yes, this will be available shortly. And then, unfortunately, this tool will only be appropriate for the 2022 year just because of the emission factors self populating. But we'll be developing something similar to this for next year as well, we just need to update the emission factors that's pretty straightforward. But just as an FYI, this tool only and actually included that in the instructions just to make it very clear that this tool needs to be updated for next year. But yes, this will be on online shortly. It'll be available to everyone. Awesome. Okay, here's another that's specific to the tool. Do you have RNG listed in building fuel with the emission factor? I believe so. Ken, can you speak to that? Do we have the RNG? I know there's some problems with that. Yeah, no, the RNG emission factor. It's the same one we've been using for the last number of years in the BC Best Practices methodology document. And we know that it's been removed from the BC Best Practices methodology document. But all the emission factors are in the Excel emission factor document we post on our LGCAP webpage and are the same ones we're using within this calculator. So yes, there is an RG emission factor. And if you're wondering what that is, it's the same as the one we used previously where the CO2 is considered biogenic, but the CH4 or an N2O is accounted for. Okay, and then just that document that Ken's referencing, it's called the emission factor catalog. And that is live now on our website. So you can reference that anytime. Again, if you use this tool, all of that will self-populate. We've got everything in the dropdown menu. So you don't need to worry about referencing the emission factor catalog if you decide to go with this inventory tool. Nice. Thanks you too. So another question here. We have nation-owned housing. Would we include this in the stationary emissions reporting? Nation-owned housing. So I would say that's out of scope because that's not a traditional service. Yeah, so no, you wouldn't need to include anything to do with housing. More so, yeah, again, administration and governance or delivery of cultural services things of that nature. And just to add to that, we're going to be posting sort of a more concise scope document for reference for the program. There is the guidebook in the workbook, which we know are large. It can be somewhat cumbersome to read through, but there'll be a more concise scope document that you can use for reference on what to include and not to include for the program in your tool. Yeah, and we'll go over all the resources toward the end of the webinar here just so you're familiar with everything that is available to you for corporate emissions reporting. And again, all of it will be on our website as well. Nice. Okay, another question here. Does electricity for lighting streetlights, signs, waste water, waste water go under building fuel? So stationary sources, is that maybe just to clarify in the chat, are you talking about just stationary sources? Yeah, Penny, if you want to either I can unmute you or if you want to... I do think that this is this is probably what they're talking about here. So yeah, so anything that's stationary goes here and then mobile sources. So like save for mowing lawns or some kind of equipment like that, that would go under mobile sources as well as things like your fleet vehicles or for waste transportation, it would go under mobile sources. So I hope that answers your question. Nice, let's see. Penny did confirm that that's what what they were asking about. Cool. Okay. And Penny has a follow up here. Can we add additional categories? Categories meaning like, oh, sorry, maybe can Penny either unmute or just clarify what you mean by categories. Here, I'm gonna Penny, I'm just going to enable your mic just one moment. Oh, wow, we have a lot of people in here. I'm scrolling forever. Okay, there you go, Penny. Thanks. Can you hear me? Yeah, we can hear you loud and clear. Awesome. So I guess traditionally we've kept track of stationary emissions in categories. So buildings and you have water, wastewater, street lights just so you can see, you know, just monitoring those over time. And I'm just wondering within this tool, it looks like you've got, you know, building fuel is the only option. Are we just supposed to put in? Oh, I see. Can we can we add another line with it? Yeah, absolutely. Yeah, feel free to play around with this. However, like best meets your needs, right? So this is just a resource. What you do with it is completely up to you. For our purposes, we don't need anything divided out like that. But if you want to, absolutely, you can add another, you know, another row here and put in whatever the specific sources, whether it's like your facilities or whatever. Happy to have you use this however you like. Okay, that's great. Awesome. Thank you. Yeah, I would just make sure that when you're updating it, you just make sure that the formulas all kind of copy over properly and everything's summing up. Still, it should just because of the way it's formatted. But that's the only thing is that the the onus is on you to make sure that the the information that you're reporting to us is accurate. We won't be able to go in and verify anything. Yeah, that makes sense. Thank you. Great. Thanks. I'm going to suggest, perhaps, Anna, Elizabeth, just I'm seeing a lot of questions. Some are focused on the calculator, but many are also not focused on the calculator in spirit of time because we do want to show all the resources that maybe we'll continue through the presentation. At this point, there's another calculator we want to show. And then at the end, we'll catch up on these questions. And once again, if we do not get through all the questions, we're going to be copy pasting them and we can make sure we provide resources either through something posted on our website or reaching out with folks. But just in the spirit of time, I want to make sure we get through everything we have for the presentation. So maybe we'll continue on. Yeah, absolutely. And just want to also mention that if you're playing around with this tool and it doesn't seem to be working or you're you're having some issues with it, you can also reach out to us directly at LGCAP at gov.bc.ca. And we're happy to set up a time or meeting or something and kind of answer any questions you have or walk you through it again, just individually happy to do that. So we'll just put that out there as well. But yeah, we'll move move along now to the next calculator. So sorry, it's a little clunky. I just got to pull up the other document here. And we'll walk you through the contracted service estimation tool. So again, there's a read me tab here. So gives you some information, some of the sources that we use to develop this tool. And then you'll see that there are two tabs here. So there's one for off road equipment. So something like lawn mowers, for instance, or, you know, something like a Zamboni say we had someone mention that yesterday. So yeah, you have the off road calculator here with those sources, if you can determine that certain contracts would be categorized as off road vehicles, equipment machinery, if not, then only use the heavy diesel calculator, please, because it will ensure that you're not underestimating your mission. So if you're unsure, just put everything under the heavy diesel calculator, if you can separate things out by gasoline and heavy diesel, go for it. That's great. Because it'll just mean your inventory is a little more accurate. So we'll just click on one of these. And I'm sorry this. So I'm going to do my best to give you the information you need to understand how to use the tool. Again, instructions here, there's instructions and a lot of the guidance materials as well for contracted services, where you can go more in depth. And really like understand how this tool works and what's happening. But I'm going to do my best to sort of do a very high level overview without getting into the weeds and having to just read off of that guidance document. So you'll have your statement of financial information data. And you want to enter that into this red box here. So your SOFI data, that will be for any contracts over $25,000. So it's great. So you can filter that out and then buy the the traditional services as well, right? And your traditional services for the LG CAT program. And as well, you want to put in the value of those contracts. And once you've done that, you need to determine the proportion of each contract that is associated with fuel consumption. So you can take a 25% sample of your your contract list if you have some of that data available. Or you can take the top contracts as well, top valued contracts associated with fuel fuel consumption and use professional judgment to if you have some other way to do that. And then you would put in here the percentage of that contract. So say this one here, the 60, you know, you have 68,062, 30, 30. So of these contracts of that sample, what percentage constitutes fuel consumption. So here we've just put in 20% as an example. So that would be 20% of the cost would be associated with fuel consumption. So once you do that, you can do the same for this calculator here, the heavy diesel. And again, just want to reiterate, if you're unsure, put everything in this tab, please the heavy diesel tab, and it will say that in the read me tab. So it should be clear in the instructions as well. And then we've got this outputs tab. Now you do need to select cost of diesel cost of gasoline. And we provide that in liters or cubic meters. And again, it'll automatically put in the cost associated with the units that you select. But likely you're going to have leaders for both of these. So we've just got them the default is leaders. And then it'll show you your associated emissions. So for the heavy diesel portion, and then associated with off road vehicles and equipment. And then up here you have your total emissions. So again, you'll fill this out and your numbers will be different and everything will populate. So this will, you know, be calculated for you as well as the total. So it's a really quick overview of how this works. Again, there's way more detailed instructions in the guidance materials, but we'll maybe open it up. I just want to make sure that it's sort of clear, mostly how to use the tool, because again, you can have a closer look at the instructions later, but just in terms of usability want to answer any questions. So just open it up for questions. And do you mind facilitating that again? Yeah, for sure. Thank you. So again, these would be questions specifically about this calculator. You know, we've got a sea of questions that have come in. Let's see. Cost of fuel is the average over the year? Yes. Correct. For 2022, because it's the 2022 inventory we're asking for folks to report on. If we opt for either option two or option three in our contact fuel reporting, are we to illustrate how these options were used? I'm really sorry. I coughed in the middle of that. Do you mind? No worries. If we opt for either option two or option three in our contracted fuel reporting, are we to illustrate how these options were used? To illustrate how these options were used. So I would say no. We just need the numbers. So yeah, option two and three. So option two is using the proxy fuel consumption value based on the sample of contracts. So this calculator would work for that. We don't need you to justify your methods. We just ask that you follow the guidance. And then yeah, this tool should do the rest for you. I don't know if that answered your question. I'm sorry. Maybe if it didn't, please unmute yourself. Yeah. So Pratiba, please let me know. I'll go over and allow you to chat. Oh, here, I see a raised hand. Perfect. Oh, it's gone. All right. Oh, it's back. Okay, there we are. Okay. Yeah, you've got the floor. Pratiba. Hi. Yeah, I think I had raised the question before seeing the tool. Oh, okay. Yeah. So now that I see the tool, I can see exactly how I can input the information and provide that. Thank you. Okay, great. Perfect. Thank you. Thanks, Pratiba. So let me see. So is the only input the amount paid to the supplier and the emissions are estimated based on this? Yeah, so you want to put in the value of your contracts and then again, for some of your contracts, you can reach out to the contractors and actually get what the fuel consumption is, right? So it will be possible for some contracts to get your fuel consumption data, and then you can take a sample based on those few where you have better access to that data to determine what percent overall for the contracts is associated with fuel consumption. So again, we're just putting 20% in here, but that would mean, you know, 20% on average of all these contracts should be associated, the cost should be associated with fuel consumption. So, you know, however many leaders for this one of gasoline, because this one's for gasoline specifically. So that's how that works. And then in the outputs tab, you know, it looks at that cost that's associated with fuel consumption. And it looks at the cost of that fuel source, whether it's diesel or gasoline, to determine your emissions associated with all of those contracts. So I hope that was clear. And that answered your question. And is there guidance on the estimated fuel percentage to use? Yes. I mean, like there isn't guidance like use 20%. It's use professional judgment, talk to your contractors and come up with basically a professional judgment to determine the percentage or use a sample of contracts where you do have, say, the fuel consumption. So they maybe have tracked leaders consumed, use those contracts to as a sample to basically determine that percentage. It's going to be a crude estimate. It's not going to be, you know, accurate, but it's the best you can do under this option when you're not able to actually get that data directly from your contractors. So there is a lot more information in the guidance as well. So if this isn't, you know, completely, completely clear, you should be able to read the guidance on contracted emissions. And it should really walk you through how to do each of these everything to do with contracted services. So again, it's a pretty lengthy document. You can go into that. And then of course, if you're still having issues, reach out to us directly, and we're happy to schedule a call or answer any questions by email as well. Nice. A question here about other fuel types in the calculator, CNG, RNG, renewable diesel, biodiesel. Yeah, so we're not doing that for the contracted services. Actually, this is even an improvement on how it was before. It was just heavy diesel because most of your contracted services emissions will be associated with heavy diesel. So like bigger trucks and stuff like that. However, we added just this off-road gasoline for things like say lawn mowers again, maintenance, things like that, like actual equipment and machinery. Some contracts you'll be able to determine will be associated with the use of those equipment and machinery as opposed to vehicles. So that's why we only are providing the two fuel types. Again, if you have better data and you know that it's associated with a different fuel type, you can use the other calculator and determine what the consumption would be. If you have the percentage, you can try to figure out what the consumption would be and then calculate that under the contracted services section of the other tool, the inventory reporting tool, and you can select whatever fuel type you want for mobile sources. Awesome. Thanks, Elizabeth. I'm just going to scroll down to see if any follow-up came from that. No. Okay, cool. Based on this calculator, how would you know what group to put the fuel, such as gas or diesel? So again, if it's associated with equipment or machinery, I would use the off-road calculator and off-road is like off-road vehicles. So it's not like cars and trucks. So basically anything to deliver services that isn't associated with cars and trucks, you can put in the off-road calculator. Again, something like a lawn mower, for instance. Otherwise, put everything in heavy diesel. And if you're unsure, just put it in heavy diesel. You do not need to even look at that off-road calculator if you don't think it'll be helpful to you. It's just if you do have the data and you can divide it into those two fuel types, totally go for it. But if not, just focus on the heavy diesel calculator. Again, that's in the instructions, and you'll ensure that you're not underestimating your emissions if you do that. Awesome. Okay. So I know there are many other questions. Some will save for the, most of these will save for the general Q&A at the end. And like Ken said, we'll answer all of them if we don't have the time today. If anyone has a specific question about, I mean a question about this specific tool, do you want to either raise your hand right now or send a chat in the next minute and we can get to it? Yeah, I think maybe we'll open it for like one more question and then we'll maybe move on. We're almost at the end here and then we can just do the full Q&A session and make sure that we're covering all topics. Great. I'm not seeing any hands pop up. So I would say let's keep it going and then all these questions will be addressed. Great. Thank you, Anna, for facilitating. And I'm just going to let Ken take over sharing again. Okay, awesome. Do you mind advancing two slides, please? Yeah, so carbon neutrality here. Thanks. Okay. So just want to talk about carbon neutrality really quickly. So this is not a component of our program. So we're looking at sources, not removals. We're not looking at offsets. So we heard during our engagements again for year two that there's really a shift in focus towards net zero targets. And people aren't really concerned anymore with achieving carbon neutrality. Again, that's a general statement. Some people love it and that's awesome. We encourage you to keep doing that. And there are resources that are still available to you. So the Climate Action Toolkit website, again, we'll have everything linked, has a ton of different resources and includes some options for local governments to balance their corporate emissions to zero through investments in local emission reduction projects or by purchasing offsets. So next slide, please. Okay, great. So we have a number of resources here. And these are all the resources that we have associated with estimating corporate emissions. So you'll see that two of them aren't linked yet, but that's just because they haven't actually been posted at this point. But we will update before we post the webinar deck. We'll ensure that all those links are active in case anyone wants to keep the webinar deck on hand. So yeah, a number of different resources here. As Ken mentioned, we're going to have this scope summary document, which is just like a really quick and dirty awesome version of the Becoming Carbon Neutral Guidebook and Workbook. So really, really helpful because we know there's a lot of questions that come in on scope. So it should be really clear what's in scope and what's out of scope for each of those different sources. And we'll just go to the next slide, please, Ken. So we just want to go over some key dates. So May 15th, everything will be live. The survey will open. We'll have all the resources posted to the website. And then we'll have a reporting deadline of July 31st. Now, we have heard from a few local governments that it's going to be difficult to meet that timeline. Now, this deadline is pushed later than it was under CARA. So our assumption is you should be able to contact your contractors, your finance department and get this data and complete your reporting on time. But again, on an individual basis, reach out to us if you need an extension. And we'll try to work with you to provide support. But that is our deadline is July 31st. And then sometime at the end of August, likely we'll have the funding disperse for year two. And now we can move into the question and answer period. So yeah, Kevin and I will answer any questions you have on corporate reporting and we'll just get Anna to facilitate again. Thanks. Awesome. Okay, so I'm going to go in order asked. So up to Eli asked if we or a contractor purchase carbon offsets, how is that reported? Okay, so it's not reported under LG cap. So again, we aren't concerned with removals. So no offsets for this program. It's just your sources. Nice. Okay, should we include the RCMP building GHG mission? Okay, so no RCMP fleet even. So no RCMP, no policing included for LG cap. So policing is not in scope for our program. And again, that's just because some local governments have their own place for some have the RCMP and it is really hard to get data from the RCMP. Also, you have no influence over their GHG emissions. So don't worry about policing. And then the last thing I would mention is just for any contracted services, you do not worry about emissions associated with facilities. So no buildings, it's just for mobile sources for contracted services. So vehicles, equipment, machinery only. Nice. Are asphalt plants and or conference centers in scope? Ash fault plants. I would say no. Again, just looking at traditional government services and plants, I assume would be categorized as scope three. Ken, do you want to elaborate? Is that correct? Yeah, every year we get lots of questions on traditional services boundaries, the guidebook, the workbook, the new scope document we want to make public will be resources available. And when we're interpretations are needed, we're happy to provide them. But I think at the end of the day, and I've noticed a number of questions in the chat, we want to emphasize that it's emissions related to the operation and the maintenance associated with traditional services. So no new construction, no business travel, no employee community, no materials, these types of things are not included. And if there's a question on if something is a traditional service or a conference center, we can provide that interpretation, but that could potentially fall under arts, recreation and cultural services. So it could be something that be included. But I can't confirm this can't confirm that at this point in time. I think it's something we want to look at. We've received lots of these questions over the years, but we can provide that high level boundary. So please do follow up with us and we can confirm. Thank you. So this was maybe answered there, but it's contractors. So I'll ask it would we include contractors such as a planning consultant who makes trips into town over the course of a project or year. I would say that's also out of scope. It would be again the delivery of traditional services, and that excludes administration and governance. So yeah, I wouldn't think so. I think it's just for the delivery of the traditional services, but again, we'll provide the scope document and you can have a look through that and ensure it's got a lot more detail on that. And then if you're still confused, reach out to us and we can go through this exact scenario and walk you through it. We contract out to other local governments, presumably they are reporting so we can exclude these contracts. We contract to other local governments. Oh yeah, so okay. I would say for that actually, if you're contracting out to other local governments, you'll have a financial or operational stake in those emissions. So I wouldn't necessarily assume that they are going to account for emissions that are attributed to your local government. So I would definitely coordinate with the local government. So whoever you've contracted out and get that emissions data because that belongs actually in your inventory, not on theirs. So I would coordinate make sure there's no double counting happening, but certainly you should be reporting those emissions. Thanks, Elizabeth. And in terms of contracts, do we have to include construction contracts? So no new construction, but again, something like road maintenance or traffic like things like that again, you would need to include but not for construction of new buildings and things like that. Nice. Okay, we have transfer stations and landfills. I understand that landfill activities are not included. Is transfer station activity included? And how about transportation between transfer stations and the landfill? We do not report any contracted services emissions for administrative office buildings. Oh, it's the second question. And we do not. Okay. Let's focus on the first question. Then I might get you to do the second one again. So yeah, landfill emissions that's captured under our community energy and emissions inventory under community wide emissions, we know for under some protocols, it is included in corporate inventory. So that's somewhere where we differ. And in terms of so emissions, we would want to include transportation of the waste to the landfill. Now, in terms of between the landfill and transfer station, I would say no. But maybe Ken, do you want to speak to that if you have anything to add? Yeah. So once again, we've got strong language on all of this in our resources that we're going to make more predominant on our government climate action program website. And so when it comes to waste, I'm just looking at the guidebook right now. When it comes to transfer stations, the buildings associated with the collection, transportation and diversion of solid waste, including buildings used to house vehicles and staff as well as the transfer stations and buildings that yard in garden waste stations are in scope. So these types of questions when you're wondering about scope boundaries, we would be pointing you towards these resources as we've thought through a lot of these types of questions. Okay. And can you, sorry, I didn't quite catch the second component of that question. Can you clarify, we do not report any contracted services emissions for administrative office buildings? Yeah. So for administration and governance and for buildings, if that's all excluded for contracted services. So Anna, maybe just as Ken sort of mentioned, there's a lot of questions here on scope for contracted services. Maybe we can try, well, not just contracted services, but maybe we can try to avoid some of those questions and focus on some of the other ones that are coming up just to allow people to ask a variety of different questions. And then again, for people that have scope related questions, we'll ensure that you have access to the scope document. And if you're still confused after reviewing that, please reach out to us individually and we can help you out. Sounds good. Okay. So in the survey, is there a need to provide an emissions breakdown by service? So an emissions breakdown by service? No, absolutely not. It'll just be your directly delivered emissions, your contracted emissions, and then the total of those two. That's it. Yeah. And could we have the 2021 emissions factor since 70% of the organizations haven't reported the 2021? Yeah, so the 2021 emissions are in the emission factor catalog. It has all the historic emission factors. The only thing I will say is again, for this program, we are asking for the 2022 reporting year. And that is the requirement. It's not for the 2021 reporting year, it's for the 2022 reporting year, that's the requirement for year two of this program and to be eligible for funding. So I just want to make that clear. It sounds like maybe some local governments would go back to 2021 if the tool was tweaked to also work for that year. Oh, yeah. And I mean, I'm happy to do that as well if that's what that question was related to. Happy to update the emission factors to the previous year and then if that helps you do your 2021 inventory. Yeah, happy to help in any way to get you guys to do this. But not required. But not required, no. Nice. So I noticed in the chat, there's a lot of discussion about base years and how as the measurement gets better, the emissions will appear to grow even though in fact they might not actually be growing. So I don't know if this is a question or just a general discussion, but I just wanted to comment on it. The basic principle under ISO and the greenhouse gas protocol is that anytime a change is made to the scope or the measurement, it must also apply, it should also apply to the base year calculation. So in terms of for calculating changes. Now obviously, different local governments are going to have different base years and that could be hard to track overall. And out of respect to that, I don't see an instance where we would have a public facing tabulation of the trends just to just to be careful. Thanks, Kevin. I've been seeing those questions as well. And I think a frame I'd want to put on this is even under the previous climate action revenue incentive program, trends were really quite challenging to frame because we know that local governments were adding additional contracted services as contracts were coming up for renewal. And so there was this perhaps false perception that inventories were increasing and then over time on aggregate inventories are increasing. The real focus and we said this through our engagement sessions and it will continue to be a focus of our program for the first few years here is we're being asked loud and clear what are the impacts of the local government climate action program on climate action around British Columbia. And so in our first few webinars we've done, we've pointed towards how we're looking for metrics, key performance indicators, wanting to have an understanding of people are calculating the emissions reduced as a result of the local government climate action program. If we can have metrics on sustainability, FTEs employed, dollars leveraged, how we're creating more resilient communities, because this is the type of information that we're wanting to present to our Treasury Board for the continuity of the program. So I think we're less interested in trends recognizing the challenges and methodologies and data available and more focused on what is the impact of this program in the short term as we want to continue to grow in advance the program. So the KPI that we're really focused on right now going into year two and three that will is basically the number of local governments in modern treaty nations that are reporting corporate emissions. Given the graph we showed of the reduction since the previous program. So if we can report to Treasury Board that there's been a large increase in the number that are reporting, that would be a key outcome that could help justify the program moving forward. So that isn't exactly the same as showing trends and things like that. Yeah, thanks, C2. Okay, so I love this question. I hope it's been addressed, but I just want to answer it. If the local government is under 15,000 population, can we still report corporate emissions to the province? Yes, you can. Yes, you can and you're encouraged. Yeah, totally. Love the question, Jennifer. Okay, let's see. Okay, so if you have electricity from BC Hydro, is there a difference with the emissions factor of Fortis BC Electricity? Yes. And again, you can look at the emission factor catalog and it'll have all of those different energy sources or fuel types per vehicle type. And you can find all of that the emission factors associated with each of those. So don't guess no guesswork. Just check out the emission factor catalog. Beauty. Is the 15,000 threshold only applicable for year two reporting or also for year three and onwards? So we're only committing to that for year two. And then we'll reevaluate for year three. Kevin, do you want to, sorry? Yeah, I'm just going to say there'll be a whole new round of engagement sessions leading into year three of the program and there'll be further discussions about where that's going to go. So yeah, Elizabeth is right. It's only a one year commitment. Perfect. Is Pacific Northern Gas, PNG, a natural gas provider in the Northwest included as a building fuel type? Yes. Beautiful. Okay, so I've got the questions in order here, but again, I'm going to skip a couple just on scope and we'll get to them if we can. Okay, I remember there was a previous exemption of emission sources that are less than 1% of the total emissions. Is this still in place? Okay. Again, you can refer to the scope document. Oops. That was all good. My bad. Cool. Scope document to come, Kevin. Okay, so we have a note here. FYI, there's a unit's error in the purchased electricity tab of the emission factor catalog. Is it gigawatts? Gigawatt hour column values are correct, but kilowatt column is off by a factor of 1,000. Okay, great. Sorry. I have to look into it. Thanks for doing that. Thank you. Okay, great. Thank you for noticing that. All right, so William asked if Ken could speak to three cases of supply chain contracted emissions versus building emissions. I'm going to leave this because I would think this might be scope stuff here. Ken, I'm not sure if you've seen this question. A little three-parter. Yeah, I saw it and William, thanks for the question. I think once again, this comes back to common questions that we are hearing in regards to scope boundaries associated with the program and needing interpretations for clarity. Our scope documentation, as I was looking at these, I feel do an accurate job of capturing these, but once again, if there's any confusion or we're happy to walk through this, we understand, because this has happened every year in the program since I've been around, that every year between now and approximately a reporting timeline, there's questions on scope boundaries or a resource on this. I think it's something we're going to want to continue to consider the scope boundaries and clarity moving forward, and especially recognizing that many local governments are expanding beyond the traditional services framework and what that looks like. So once again, as we did our engagement, we did mention that we want this to be a dynamic program or an annual basis for consulting and understanding what's working and what's not working and making sure we're making the best possible program. And so what we haven't changed the scope, the boundaries remain consistent to what previously existed as we get deeper into corporate measurement. This is something we can consider. Thanks, Ken. So Linda has asked, could you please provide a link to the reporting tools? So we will update our website Monday, May 15th. So have an awesome weekend. Don't even think about it. On Monday, you can check it out. Okay, so let's see here. So Rose had a follow-up. This was about local governments contracting other local governments, I believe. Regarding our question on other local governments doing our services, we are a regional district and we have a service where these local governments are doing the service. So it is a traditional service. The other government has always reported on the fuel as they were getting a care grant on the fuel. They have a vested interest in the service. It would seem to make sense for them to report versus shipping out and segregating their fuel by what they are doing. This would be a huge undertaking for them to segregate. So maybe just something to think about there. So just to that point, I'd say once again our scope documentation clarifies when that relationship between regional districts and local governments on assets and in situations where there are potentially challenges or there are ways that it was done previously under the Climate Action Revenue Incentive Program. We are happy to have conversations. We are not wanting to keep emphasizing. We are not wanting to create challenges, barriers, burdens on this, but we are wanting to ensure that there is accurate measurement of corporate emissions. So A, look to the guidance and B, if there are any challenges in the scope guidance when there is a relationship between multiple local governments, talk to us and we can look at the best way to proceed forward. Okay. If we pay a contractor over 25K one year, do we include the contract for all future years even if they are paid under 25K for some years or is it just year by year? If they are under 25K for the year, they are excluded. This occasionally happens with contracts that we pay per haul, for example. Yeah. So I was reviewing my notes for this and it said for any year within the contract, but I'm not sure if that was just maybe my interpretation of it, Ken. I think that's correct, isn't it? Contract and services guidance states, yeah, the contract needs to be over $25,000 and so if you have a contract over $25,000 in the following year, you do not. It would not need to be included. This is in part because if you're using it in one year and you're having to use an estimation approach to your statement of financial interest to your SOPHI reports, it wouldn't show up in the following year. So you wouldn't be able to use that estimation approach potentially. So I think it comes back to with contracted services. We encourage you to acquire information from your contractors to have the most refined estimates possible and in situations where you cannot use our estimation approaches to come up with those values recognizing they'll be somewhat crude and they will be conservative. Thanks, Ken. And William, maybe the time stamp on this, this might have been answered, but is there a new municipal scope guidance document that has yet to be released? So you can, yeah, that's a lot of nodding. Yes, that will be available to you on Monday on our website. Okay, let's see here. What sources do you use for population figures? So that's BC STATS data. Yeah, I would just make one comment about that. Unfortunately, one thing that happens is every year there's slight revisions of fractions of a percent due to backcasting done by Statistics Canada. So the numbers we're actually using are the numbers that were correct as of the last year's start of the program, and we're not changing them. It doesn't actually affect anyone under the threshold, but if you're confused about whether you're counted, you send an email to the LGCAP email and we will confirm. I don't believe there's any municipality where the revisions have affected their, whether they count. Thanks, Kevin. Okay, a question here from Jennifer. Can you clarify the GHG value that we are reporting in the survey with the carbon neutrality comments in mind, or confirm that this is included in the guidance once available? From this conversation, it sounds like the ask is gross emissions, the summary of the sources, but we have some carbon credits we apply to our inventory. Would we report the gross or net or both in the survey? Okay, so gross. We are not concerned with removals or carbon neutrality for this program. Thanks, Elizabeth. Okay, let's see what this one is. Time to ask a favor. I'm intrigued. Could you please include E0 and B0 EFs in the EF catalog slash fleets would avoid a lot of back calcs. We calculate our own fuel blends. So emissions factors. Yeah, I was just going to say, I've looked at the catalog and Lloyd, I think to your comment, we have E100 and B100 within there. So it should be there as a resource. Okay, cool. Lloyd says I'm looking for E0 and B0 and Lloyd, I could unmute you if that's helpful. No, I understand what Lloyd's saying now. Also no ethanol and no biodiesel. Oh, yeah, sorry, I might not working. Okay, Lloyd, permission granted, you may speak. All right, let me hear me. Yeah, yes. Hey, okay, that works. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know, thanks Ken. Yeah, I know you've got E100 and B100. I need E0 and B0. So no, no, no, no special content, like full on fossil fuels, because we have our own blends that we calculate, basically. So it saves me from having to back out like E5 and B4 and to do that calculation again. And it also wasn't clear which ones were E5 and B4. I had to kind of go forensically through the guidance and kind of cross ref with the catalog to see. So anyway, it might be helpful for other people too, I don't know. Gotcha, noted. Yeah, I was aware because the renewable low carbon fuel requirements regulation, there's that presumed amount of 4%, 5% in all fuels. But yeah, we could look at providing the factor without. Or even just making sure it's labeled maybe. I mean, I've had enough experience with this, but even for me, it was a little bit unclear what was presumed within just my duty big old gasoline, for instance, right? Gotcha. Yeah, no, we can definitely do that. Awesome. And should I just ask my next question anyways? Sure, why not? Sure, why not? Yeah, so some previous points were made, I think Conor made them around the trend lines and how we were handling them. I'm sorry, I'm working on a few different things. I didn't hear the answer to that. But yeah, just noting that the global warming potentials were updated this year as well. So now we're going with AR5, which is great. Our practice has been to backcast all of our previous inventories to the latest science. So we're doing that, just wondering how if you guys are publishing trend lines or anything, how you guys are handling that. Yeah, so we're actually the three of us, Ken, Kevin and myself are in a methodology working group and our next topic is talking about the global warming potentials and backcasting. So it is on our minds. And yeah, we are looking at way to be doing that on an ongoing basis. Okay, all right. But it sounds to me like what you're doing is the correct thing, which is using a consistent methodology in the base year as well as every subsequent year. And that is both scope as well as the appropriate emission factors and the appropriate global warming potentials. And so yeah, we're working on getting very clear guidance to everyone on how to do that appropriately. Awesome. I would just say maybe we're getting to the weeds too much here that in the emissions factors catalog, we show all the constituent gases, so CH4N2O and CO2. And while we're using the previous global warming potentials, anyone could use any series of global warming potentials they want to calculate the CO2 equivalent based on all the constituent gases being there. Yeah, and that's what we do. Thank you. Beauty. Okay, so there were some other questions. I did feel like they were scope questions. If you have a question that may not be about scope or it's about scope and you're more of an audio learner, feel free to raise your hand and I'll pass the mic over to you. We've got about eight minutes left here, so if I see any hands raised, I'm going to go to you or feel free to pop another question in the chat or Ken, do you think should I just go along the other questions that have been asked that are about scope? I'm just scrolling through myself to see if there's little tidbits we want to focus on. Mm-hmm. Yeah, I would suggest if anyone wants to unmute themselves, like Anna said, please feel free and then all these questions I see here on scope we can address and we can put together a little response form on our website just providing guidance on that. And I'll take this opportunity, this pause, just to reiterate our intent here is early next week to post all these pieces of guidance and resources on corporate measurement so everything should be live and ready to go. At which point, please don't hesitate to reach out to us as this all becomes live if you have questions, concerns or thoughts on it. But we're really hoping based on our engagement and just pulling up these resources that corporate measurement is something that is hopefully not as challenging. And I think we also want to emphasize that the tools we're providing, the resources we're providing have been created in a way where if you need to take more of an estimate approach in order to conduct a corporate inventory that that's okay. This is something that I'm hoping we can build up again over time. The ideal of of course is to get the information and for it to be the perfect corporate emissions inventory but in the short term there's tools and resources there to conduct estimates and that's perfectly fine. Beauty. So I'm not seeing hands raised, I'm not seeing other questions come up in the chat. So maybe back over to look at key dates. Boom. Yeah, I know Elizabeth's already talked briefly about these key dates but just may as well hit them again right before we leave just so everyone knows. So May 15th, which is on Monday, the year two begins, the year two kickoff if you will. And what that means is that you'll all be receiving a link with the year two survey. So that will be open for you to start filling out. The reporting deadline including for corporate emissions will be July 31st. You also submit your LG cap survey as well as your attestation form by that date. And by the end of August the funding disbursement will go out so you will receive money from us. So that is positive as well which I'm sure you're all excited about. So big summer for LG cap. And any questions you have we have an inbox, LG cap at gov.bc.ca. We'd really like to thank everyone for such engaging participation today. Like I said the actual presentation was less than an hour but here we are five minutes before 1130 and that's due to all the wonderful questions that you received and I know there was a lot more questions about scope and so we'll make sure that everyone's aware of where to find the scope document when it's out there as well as a recording to this video. And as always this program has an iterative approach to engagement and incorporating feedback. So some of the feedback that we received today we will discuss internally and work on improving the program for you all. I'd like to thank Elizabeth, Ken and Anna for helping us put this on as well as everyone who joined us today. Thank you very much. Thanks everyone. Appreciate your time. Thank you. Thanks everyone. Thank you.