Managing CI Scores Starts Inside the Digester
Carbon Intensity as an Operational Metric
Carbon intensity has quickly moved from a compliance metric to a core driver of value in the renewable natural gas market. It shapes credit pricing, influences project economics and plays a growing role in how plants compete and perform over time. Despite this, it is still often treated as something that gets calculated at the end of the process rather than managed throughout it.
At Anessa, that way of thinking is starting to change. Through our digital twin software that monitors your plant like a vigilant assistant, carbon intensity data becomes part of everyday decision-making, something operators can track, understand and actively improve as the plant runs.
When you break it down, CI isn’t a single number that appears in a report. It reflects hundreds of small, ongoing decisions made across the lifecycle of a project, from feedstock choices to operational stability and energy use.
In one of the retrofit projects, Anessa optimized an RNG plant in North America by enhancing key areas such as feedstock supply planning, process design, and RNG utilization. The plant’s baseline production was 180,000 GJ/year with a carbon intensity (CI) score of 0 gCO₂e/MJ. Following Anessa’s optimization, the CI score improved to -50 gCO₂e/MJ, and RNG production increased to 230,000 GJ/year. Three specific interventions drove the improvement:
Optimizing the feedstock blend to reduce total methane emissions,
Improving logistics routing to lower transportation-related carbon emissions,
Reducing parasitic energy consumption across the plant's heating and mixing systems.
This resulted in greater greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions and an additional CAD 1.5Million in annual revenue for the plant.
Carbon Intensity Is Built Into Operations
It’s easy to think of CI scores as something tied to compliance or carbon markets. Something that gets calculated once the data is collected, verified and submitted.
But the reality is much more immediate.
Carbon intensity is shaped long before any report is generated. It is influenced by what happens inside the plant, every single day.
Feedstock selection plays a role.
Methane slip and fugitive emissions quietly impact the overall score.
Energy consumption within the plant adds up.
Even outside the digester, optimizing transportation routes, sourcing locations, and delivery schedules can simultaneously lower a plant's CI score meaningfully, for both cost (CAD/tonne) and carbon (CO2e per trip), often without any changes to the digester itself.
None of these is a one-time decision. They are ongoing operational variables. And that’s what makes CI so interesting. It is not fixed. It moves with the way a plant is run.
Small Inefficiencies Add Up Quickly
In a typical plant, inefficiencies rarely show up as one major issue. They tend to appear as small, manageable deviations.
A slight increase in electricity use.
Occasional flaring events during instability.
Feedstock variability that affects digestion performance.
Minor methane losses that go unnoticed in the short term.
Individually, these may not seem critical. But over weeks and months, they start to accumulate.
And when they do, they quietly influence the overall carbon intensity of the project.
Flaring events are one of the most undertracked CI variables. Each flare activation represents a direct methane emission event that accumulates in lifecycle calculations, often invisible. This is often the case for other factors as well. By the time they appear in a CI report, the effect has already been realized, and credits foregone.
That delay creates a gap between operations and outcomes.
The Limits of After-the-Fact Reporting
Most CI frameworks rely on periodic reporting. Quarterly or annual calculations provide a snapshot of performance over time.
These reports are essential. They provide transparency, ensure compliance and support participation in carbon markets.
But they also have limitations. They tell you what happened. They don’t necessarily help you understand what could have been done differently.
By the time a report shows a higher-than-expected CI score, the opportunity to influence that outcome has already passed. The feedstock decisions have been made. The energy has been consumed. The emissions have occurred.
For operators trying to maximize credit value and maintain strong environmental performance, that delay can be frustrating.
It raises a simple question.
What if CI could be managed in real time, rather than reviewed after the fact?
Bringing CI Into Daily Decision-Making
As plants become more data-driven, there is an opportunity to bring carbon intensity closer to operations.
Instead of treating it as a downstream metric, it can be integrated into the same decision-making process that already governs plant performance.
This starts with visibility.
Understanding how different variables influence CI in real time allows operators to see the impact of their decisions as they happen.
For example:
How does a change in feedstock mix affect overall emissions?
What is the impact of increased energy consumption on CI score?
How do short-term operational disruptions influence long-term performance?
These are not theoretical questions. They are practical considerations that can shape how a plant is run on a daily basis.
The Role of Modeling and Simulation
One of the most effective ways to manage carbon intensity proactively is through modeling.
Instead of reacting to outcomes, operators can test different scenarios before implementing them.
This is where modules like Simulation come into play. During the planning and development phase, different feedstock strategies, logistics configurations and plant designs can be evaluated not just for energy output, but for their impact on carbon intensity as well.
That same thinking extends into operations.
With our Optimization module, operators can explore how adjustments to feedstock blends or operational strategies may influence both performance and CI outcomes. The key is that carbon credit optimization and financial optimization do not have to be separate decisions. Co-optimizing both simultaneously, adjusting feedstock and operational parameters to maximize credit revenues alongside EBITDA, is where the most material value is unlocked.
And with our Monitoring module, real-time monitoring brings another layer of awareness. Operational data can be used to track trends, identify deviations, and understand how day-to-day performance is shaping the overall emissions profile.
Together, these tools help bridge the gap between data and decision-making.
Methane Slip and Energy Use
Two areas where this becomes particularly relevant are methane slip and energy consumption.
Methane slip is often difficult to detect in real time, but it has a direct impact on emissions. Maximizing biomethane yield while actively minimizing slip, rather than treating slip as an acceptable loss, is both an environmental and financial decision. Even a 0.5% improvement in methane recovery has a compounding effect on CI scores and credit generation over a full operating year.
Similarly, energy use within the plant can quietly increase lifecycle emissions. Pumps, mixers, heating systems, and upgrading equipment all contribute to the energy balance.
Without clear visibility, these factors can be overlooked.
With better monitoring, they become measurable and manageable.
Operators can start to ask more targeted questions.
Is this level of energy use expected for this feedstock mix?
Are there opportunities to improve efficiency without affecting stability?
Are certain operational patterns consistently leading to higher emissions?
These insights allow for more informed adjustments over time.
CI as a Performance Metric
As this approach evolves, carbon intensity begins to look less like a reporting requirement and more like a performance metric.
Just like gas production, uptime, or efficiency, it becomes something that can be tracked, managed and improved. That means CI should appear on the same operational dashboard as gas yield, uptime, and feedstock cost, updated in real time, visible to operators and management alike, and tied directly to revenue forecasting.
This shift has practical benefits.
Operators gain more control over outcomes.
Projects become more resilient to market and regulatory changes.
Credit value can be protected and, in some cases, improved.
Plants gain visibility to manage the ROI of a biogas cycle.
Perhaps more importantly, it aligns environmental performance with operational decision-making and financial stability. Instead of treating sustainability as a separate objective, it becomes part of how the plant is run.
A More Connected View of Plant Performance
What this ultimately comes down to is connection.
Carbon intensity is not isolated from the rest of the plant. It is connected to feedstock strategy, energy use, equipment performance and biological stability.
When these elements are viewed together, rather than in isolation, it becomes easier to understand how decisions in one area influence outcomes in another.
Digital tools help bring that connection into focus.
They provide a way to see how the system behaves as a whole, rather than as a collection of separate components.
And when that happens, decision-making becomes more informed.
Looking Ahead
As RNG markets continue to evolve, the importance of carbon intensity will only increase. Policies, incentives and market structures are already placing more emphasis on emissions performance.
ECCC recently released the latest CFR Compliance Credit Market Dataset, and the signal is significant for RNG facilities. Credit prices have climbed from a full-year 2025 weighted average of CAD $176.73/tCO2e to CAD $319.95/tCO2e through the first seven months of 2026.
Q2 2026 reached CAD $343.36/tCO2e and July 2026 at CAD $328.26/tCO2e.
For facilities operating at low or negative CI scores, that trajectory is not just a market signal; it is a direct revenue multiplier on every gigajoule produced. But the value only materializes when the technical foundation is solid:
CI score modeling,
Material balance reporting,
Feedstock classification,
Monitoring plans,
Raw data traceability,
Verifier-ready documentation
All need to be aligned and audit-ready. This is exactly where Anessa's platform removes friction. The Material Traceability Tracker maintains a continuous, auditable record of feedstock, digestate, and energy flows in real time, eliminating the scramble of retroactive data collection at reporting time.
The platform's automated regulatory reporting capabilities reduce audit preparation time by up to 70%, and the Carbon-to-Cash Optimizer ensures that CI improvements are translated directly into maximized credit revenues.
As the CFR market matures and credit values rise, the gap between facilities with strong technical reporting and those without will only widen.
For operators and developers, this creates an opportunity.
The opportunity lies in using better tools and data to make CI complexity manageable.
Plants that integrate carbon intensity into their operational strategy will be better positioned to adapt to changing market conditions and regulatory requirements.
They will also be better equipped to capture the full value of the gas they produce.
Carbon intensity is often seen as a number that appears at the end of a process. Something calculated, reported and reviewed. In reality, it is shaped continuously. Inside the digester. Across the plant. Through every operational decision. And once you start looking at it that way, it becomes something you can influence long before the report is written.
