Guidance for engineers and compliance teams working with DP flow measurement, laboratory data, compensated properties, and ETS reporting responsibilities.
Your meter's uncertainty is calculated at one operating point. But it runs across a range of flows all year. The flow-weighted uncertainty is what actually matters for compliance.
Read article →Your EU ETS annual emissions figure inherits the uncertainty of the flowmeter that measured the fuel. Here is how to quantify the CO₂ measurement uncertainty.
Read article →A headline uncertainty percentage is not enough. Verifiers need the methodology, the inputs, the assumptions, and the evidence trail. Here is what a complete report should include.
Read article →Compare the current case with a realistic improved case and judge whether tighter uncertainty is likely to matter before investing effort.
Read article →Why a corrected number is not automatically a correct number, and where compensation logic can quietly go wrong.
Read article →Clarifies what sits with the operator or regulated entity, what the verifier does, and where the uncertainty basis really belongs.
Read article →Why a mismatch between lab samples and the design case does not prove either one is wrong, but does show the basis must be reconciled.
Read article →Each article is intended to help you define the technical issue clearly before you decide whether to run a calculation, review a report, or challenge the basis behind an existing result.
Once the question is clear, the calculator is the next step. The example report and methodology pages show how the result is structured and what sits behind it.
Review the example report to see the compliance verdict with flow-weighted uncertainty, uncertainty budget, calculation workings, instrument register, and flow profile back-test.