Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.1 

CHAPTER 6 

ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY EMISSIONS 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.2 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

Authors 

Scott Bartos (USA) 

Laurie S. Beu (USA), C. Shepherd Burton (USA), Charles L. Fraust (USA), Francesca Illuzzi (Italy), Michael T. 

Mocella (USA) and Sebastien Raoux (France/USA) 

Contributing Authors 

Guido Agostinelli (Italy), Erik Alsema (Netherlands), Seung-Ki Chae (Republic of Korea), Vasilis M. Fthenakis 

(USA) , Joseph Van Gompel (USA) , Hideki Nishida (Japan), Takayuki Oogoshi (Japan) and Kurt T. Werner 

(USA) 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.3 

Contents 

6 Electronics Industry Emissions .....................................................................................................................6.5

6.1 Introduction...........................................................................................................................................6.5

6.2 Methodological issues...........................................................................................................................6.6

6.2.1 Choice of method ..........................................................................................................................6.6

6.2.1.1 Etching and CVD cleaning for semiconductors, liquid crystal displays, and photovoltaics....6.6

6.2.1.2 Heat transfer fluids ................................................................................................................6.13

6.2.2 Choice of emission factors ..........................................................................................................6.15

6.2.2.1 Etching and CVD cleaning for semiconductors, liquid crystal displays, and photovoltaics..6.15

6.2.2.2 Heat transfer fluids ................................................................................................................6.22

6.2.3 Choice of activity data.................................................................................................................6.22

6.2.4 Completeness ..............................................................................................................................6.24

6.2.5 Developing a consistent time series.............................................................................................6.25

6.3 Uncertainty assessment .......................................................................................................................6.25

6.3.1 Emission factor uncertainties ......................................................................................................6.25

6.3.2 Activity data uncertainties...........................................................................................................6.26

6.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC), Reporting and Documentation ...................................6.29

6.4.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) .............................................................................6.29

6.4.2 Reporting and Documentation.....................................................................................................6.29

References .....................................................................................................................................................6.31 

Equations 

Equation 6.1 Tier 1 method for estimation of the set of FC emissions.......................................................6.9

Equation 6.2 Tier 2a method for estimation of FC emissions...................................................................6.10

Equation 6.3 By-product emissions of CF4...............................................................................................6.10

Equation 6.4 By-product emissions of C2F6 .............................................................................................6.10

Equation 6.5 By-product emissions of chf3...............................................................................................6.10

Equation 6.6 By-product emissions of C3F8 .............................................................................................6.10

Equation 6.7 Tier 2b method for estimation of FC emissions ..................................................................6.11

Equation 6.8 By-product emissions of CF4...............................................................................................6.12

Equation 6.9 By-product emissions of C2F6 .............................................................................................6.12

Equation 6.10 By-product emissions of CHF3 ............................................................................................6.12

Equation 6.11 By-product emissions of C3F8 .............................................................................................6.12

Equation 6.12 Tier 1 method for estimation of total FC emissions from heat transfer fluids.....................6.14

Equation 6.13 Tier 2 method for estimation of FC emissions from heat transfer fluids.............................6.14
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.4 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

Figures 

Figure 6.1 Decision tree for estimation of FC emissions from electronics manufacturing.....................6.8

Figure 6.2 Decision tree for estimation of FC emissions from HT fluid loss from electronics 

manufacturing......................................................................................................................6.15

Tables 

Table 6.1 Information sources necessary for completing the tiered emission estimating methods for 

electronics manufacturing......................................................................................................6.7

Table 6.2 Tier 1 Gas-specific emission factors for FC emissions from electronics manufacturing ....6.16

Table 6.3 Tier 2 Default emission factors for FC emissions from semiconductor manufacturing ......6.17

Table 6.4 Tier 2 Default emission factors for FC emissions from LCD manufacturing......................6.18

Table 6.5 Tier 2 Default emission factors for FC emissions from PV manufacturing ........................6.19

Table 6.6 Tier 2a & 2b Default efficiency parameters for electronics industry FC emission reduction 

technologies.........................................................................................................................6.20

Table 6.7 Country total silicon (Si) and glass design capacities (Mm2) for 2003, 2004 and 2005......6.23

Table 6.8 Country total PV production capacitya for 2003, Mm2........................................................6.24

Table 6.9 Tier 2 default estimates of relative errors (%) for emission factor for FC emissions from 

semiconductor manufacturing, 95 percent confidence intervals..........................................6.27

Table 6.10 Tier 2 default estimates of relative errors (%) for emission factor for FC emissions from LCD 

manufacturing, 95 percent confidence intervals ..................................................................6.28

Table 6.11 Information necessary for full transparency of estimates of emissions from electronics 

manufacturing......................................................................................................................6.30

Box 

Box 6.1 Example for semiconductor manufacture............................................................................6.13 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.5 

6 ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY EMISSIONS 

6.1 INTRODUCTION 

Several advanced electronics manufacturing processes utilise fluorinated compounds (FCs) for plasma etching 

intricate patterns, cleaning reactor chambers, and temperature control. The specific electronic industry sectors 

discussed in this chapter include semiconductor, thin-film-transistor flat panel display (TFT-FPD), and 

photovoltaic (PV) manufacturing (collectively termed ‘electronics industry’).1 

The electronics industry currently emits both FCs that are gases at room temperature and FCs that are liquids at 

room temperature. The gases include CF4, C2F6, C3F8, c-C4F8, c-C4F8O, C4F6, C5F8, CHF3, CH2F2, nitrogen 

trifluoride (NF3), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6), and are used in two important steps of electronics manufacturing: 

(i) plasma etching silicon containing materials and (ii) cleaning chemical vapour deposition (CVD) tool 

chamber-walls where silicon has deposited.2 The majority of FC emissions results from limited utilisation 

efficiency (i.e., consumption) of the FC precursors during the etching or the cleaning process. In addition, a 

fraction of the fluorinated compounds used in the production process can be converted into by-product CF4 and 

in some instances into C2F6, CHF3 and C3F8.

3 Also, formation of CF4 as a by-product of etching or cleaning 

carbon-containing low dielectric constant (low k) materials (or carbide) must be taken into account.4 In addition, 

F2, COF2, and ClF3 use may increase. These gases, although not in themselves contributors to global warming 

may lead to CF4 formation under some conditions. 

Electronics manufacturers use FCs for temperature control during certain processes. Also known as heat transfer 

fluids, these FCs are liquids at room temperature and have appreciable vapour pressures. Evaporative losses 

contribute to the total FC emissions. These evaporative losses occur during cooling of certain process equipment, 

during testing of packaged semiconductor devices and during vapour phase reflow soldering of electronic 

components to circuit boards. Evaporative losses do not appear to occur when liquid FCs are used to cool 

electronic components or systems during operation. In this application, the liquid FCs are contained in closed 

systems throughout the life of the product or system. More than 20 different liquid FCs are marketed, often as 

mixtures of fully fluorinated compounds, to the electronic sector.5 Because the CO2 equivalents of each liquid 

differ, each should be tracked and reported separately. The precise value of this conversion will be determined 

by the specific applicable reporting requirements.6,7 In addition, liquid FCs are occasionally used to clean TFTFPD panels during manufacture.

 

1

 Recent comprehensive surveys of European and US PV manufacturers indicate that 40 to 50 percent of PV-manufacturers 

use relatively small quantities of FCs (predominantly CF4 during etching of crystalline silicon wafers and C2F6 during 

chamber cleaning after deposition of SiNx films). Global usage, according to these surveys for 2004, was approximately 30 

Mtonnes CF4. While global FC use appears low in 2004, credible growth-forecasts of the PV industry are approximately 30 

percent per year (and higher) for the foreseeable future. Morevoer, several reports extol the virtues of FC use as a means to 

increase manufacturing productivity and lower costs for silicon-based technologies (Shah et al., 2004; Maycock, 2005; 

Agostinelli et al., 2004 and Rentsch et al., 2005), Such expected growth rates and prospects for increase FC use motivate 

inclusion of FC emissions from PV manufacture in this chapter. 

2

 Although C5F8 does not currently have a global warming potential (GWP) recognized by the IPCC, C5F8 emissions are 

discussed in this chapter. C5F8 is a direct greenhouse gas and emissions can be estimated using methods and data described 

in this chapter. C5F8’s atmospheric lifetime is approximately 1 year, resulting in a relatively low GWP (Sekiya, 2003). 

3 Emissions of C2F6 by-products have been observed from the decomposition of C4F6 molecules and may occur for other FC 

molecules with greater than two carbon atoms. Note that for most FC precursors, C2F6 formation as a by-product has not 

been observed. CHF3 formation has been reported when c-C4F8 is used as an etchant in TFT-FPD manufacture and C3F8

by-product emissions have been reported when C4F8O is used in chamber cleaning. 

4

 Low dielectric constant (low k) materials were first used as insulators for the interconnect structure of semiconductor chips

at the 0.25μm node and below. Many low k materials contain carbon that may be removed as CF4 during etching of thin 

films or the cleaning of the CVD reactors used for low k deposition. CF4 may also be formed during cleaning of CVD 

reactors used for carbide deposition. 

5

 A relatively recent review summarises the uses of liquid FCs (heat transfer fluids), their chemical composition, GWPs, 

among other things. See Burton (2004a). 

6

 These materials are marketed under the trade names FluorinertTM and Galden®. The FluorinertTM materials are selected from 

fully fluorinated alkanes, ethers, tertiary amines and aminoethers and mixtures thereof to obtain the desired properties. The 

Galden® fluids span a range of fully fluorinated polyethers, called perfluoropolyethers (PFPEs), also selected for the 

desired properties. 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.6 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

6.2 METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES 

6.2.1 Choice of method 

6.2.1.1 ETCHING AND CVD CLEANING FOR SEMICONDUCTORS,

LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAYS, AND PHOTOVOLTAICS 

Emissions vary according to the gases used in manufacturing different types of electronic devices, the process 

used (or more roughly, process type (e.g., CVD or etch)), the brand of process tool used, and the implementation 

of emission reduction technology. 

The choice of methods will depend on data availability and is outlined in the decision tree, see Figure 6.1, 

Decision Tree for Estimation of FC Emissions from Electronics Manufacturing. Emissions from liquid FCs are 

estimated using Tier 1, 2 and 3 approaches and are described separately in this section.8

Continuous (in-situ) emissions monitoring is currently considered a technically and economically unviable 

means to estimate emissions from this industry. FC emissions are periodically measured, however, during the 

development of new processes and tools, and after the establishment of commercial-ready process conditions 

(also known as centreline process conditions).9 The industry seeks, prior to the introduction of high-volume 

manufacturing, centreline process designs that minimize FC emissions. However, it must be noted that FC 

emissions can be affected by changes in process variables (e.g., pressure, temperature, plasma power, FC gas 

flow, processing time). Thus, the accuracy of the methods used for estimating emissions will be affected by 

eventual differences between the process used in production and the reference centreline process. In addition, the 

efficacy of FC emission control equipment depends on operating and maintaining the equipment according to the 

manufacturer’s specifications: Increased gas flows, improper temperature settings, and failure to perform 

required maintenance will individually and collectively negatively impact performance. 

The accuracy of estimated emissions depends on the method used. The Tier 1 method uses default values for all 

parameters and does not account for the use of emission control technology. The Tier 2a method uses companyspecific data on the proportion of gas used in processes with and without emission control technology, but does 

not distinguish between etching and cleaning, and uses default values for the other parameters. The Tier 2b 

method uses company-specific data on the proportion of gas used in etching versus cleaning and the proportion 

of gas used in processes with emission control technology, but relies on default values for some or all of the 

other parameters. The most rigorous method, Tier 3 method, requires a complete set of process-specific values 

rather than defaults. 

Table 6.1 summarises the data requirements for the tiered emissions estimating methods for electronics 

manufacturing. 

 

7

 Where a commercial mixture is used inventory compilers will need to ensure that the conversion of the mass of the mixture 

to CO2 equivalents uses the appropriate conversion factors. 

8

 The logic depicted in Figure 6.1 does not show the possibility of combining tiers to improve estimates of emissions. For 

example, improved estimates of emissions might be achieved by using Tier 3 for a specific gas and process and Tier 2b for 

other gases and processes instead of using only the Tier 2b method. Similarly, the Tier 2a and 2b methods might be 

combined to produce an improved estimate compared to using only Tier 2a. However, the Tier 1 method should not be 

combined with any other method. 

9

 Centreline conditions refer to the conditions under which equipment manufacturers standardise their equipment for sale. 

These are nominal specifications for gas flows, chamber pressure, processing time, plasma power, etc. It is common for 

semiconductor manufacturers to modify these conditions to optimise for particular needs. 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.7 

TABLE 6.1 

INFORMATION SOURCES NECESSARY FOR COMPLETING THE TIERED EMISSION ESTIMATING METHODS FOR 

ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING

 Data Tier 1 Tier 2a Tier 2b Tier 3 

FCi,p = kg of gas i fed into specific process 

p or small set of common process tools 

(e.g., silicon nitride etch). 

 M 

FCi,p = kg of gas i fed into broad process 

category (e.g., etching or CVD chamber 

cleaning). 

 M M(etch) & 

M(CVD) 

Process Gas Entering 

Tool 

h = Fraction of gas remaining in shipping 

container after use (heel). D D M 

Ui,p = Use rate (fraction destroyed or 

transformed) for each gas i and process p. D D(etch) & 

D(CVD) a M 

Process Gas 

Reactions and 

Destruction in 

Tool 

BCF4,i,p, BC2F6,i,p, BCHF3,i,p and BC3F8,i,p = 

Emission factor for by-product emissions 

of CF4, C2F6, CHF3 and C3F8 respectively 

for gas i for each process. 

 D D(etch) & 

D(CVD) a M 

ai,p = Fraction of gas i volume fed into 

processes with certified FC emission 

control technologies. 

 M M M 

di,p = Fraction of gas i destroyed by the 

emission control technology. D D a M 

Downstream FC Emission 

Control 

dCF4,p, dC2F6,p, dCHF3,p and dC3F8,p = Fraction 

of CF4, C2F6, CHF3 and C3F8 by-products 

respectively destroyed by the emission 

control technology.b 

 M 

Cd = Annual manufacturing design 

capacity in surface area of substrate 

processed (e.g., silicon, glass). 

M 

Annual 

Production 

Capacity 

Cu = Fraction of annual capacity utilisation D/M 

M = measure or acquire these values. 

D = Use default factors from guidance. 

a

 When available and supportable, M values may be substituted for D values for Tier 2a and 2b. See conditions in Table 6.6. 

b

 There are no default values for Tier 2a and Tier 2b because the effect of by-products has been incorporated into the D-values for 

di,p for gas i. 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.8 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

Figure 6.1 Decision tree for estimation of FC emissions from electronics manufacturing 

Start

Are FC

activity data available

from electronics

companies?

No

Is

Electronics

Industry a key category1

 and is

this subcategory

sinificant?

Estimate emissions

using the Tier 2b 

method.

Box 3: Tier 2b

Estimate emissions

using the Tier 1

method.

Box 1: Tier 1

Yes

Note:

1. See Volume 1 Chapter 4, Methodological Choice and Identification of Key Categories (noting Section 4.1.2 on limited resources), for 

discussion of key categories and use of decision trees.

Collect activity and

emissions data from

electronics companies.

Are

national data available

on annual electronics production 

capacities by substrate area

(e.g., silicon or 

glass)?

Yes

No

Yes

Do

reporting companies

track FC gas usage by process 

type (i.e., CVD clean

and etch)?

Do

companies that

report use process-specific 

emission factors?

Develop or obtain

data on annual

production capacity

by substrate area for

each sector.

Estimate emissions

using the Tier 2a

method.

Estimate emissions

using the Tier 3

method.

Box 2: Tier 2a

Box 4: Tier 3

Yes

No

Yes

No

No

TIER 1 METHOD – DEFAULT 

The Tier 1 method is the least accurate estimation method and should be used only in cases where companyspecific data are not available. The Tier 1 method, unlike the Tier 2 or 3 methods, is designed to give an 

aggregated estimate of FC emissions although its methodology appears to produce gas-specific emissions. 

Estimates are made simultaneously for all gases as listed in Table 6.2 and can only be used if reported as a 

complete set. 

The calculation of emissions relies on a fixed set of generic emissions factors. The members of the set differ 

depending on the sector (or class) of electronic products being manufactured (semiconductors, TFT-FPDs or PVcells). Each member of a set, which is a gas-specific emission factor, expresses an average emissions per unit of 

substrate area (e.g., silicon, TFT-FPD panel or PV-cell) consumed during manufacture. For any class of 

electronic products, the factors (members of the set) are multiplied by the annual capacity utilisation (Cu, a 

fraction) and the annual manufacturing design capacity (Cd, in units of giga square meters (Gm2

)) of substrate 

processes. The product (Cu • Cd) is an estimate of the quantity of substrate consumed during electronics 

manufacture. The result is a set of annual emissions expressed in kg of the gases that comprise the set for each 

class of electronic products. Because the use of FCs varies widely during PV manufacture, a third factor to 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.9 

account for the proportion of PV manufacture that employs FC is needed to estimate FC emissions from the PV 

cells manufacturing. The Tier 1 formula is shown in Equation 6.1. 

EQUATION 6.1 

TIER 1 METHOD FOR ESTIMATION OF THE SET OF FC EMISSIONS

{ } FC { } EF C C [C ( )] (i n) i i u d PV = • • • • + 1− = 1,K, n n δ δ

Where: 

{FCi}n = emissions of FC gas i, mass of gas i 

Note: { }n denotes the set for each class of products (semiconductors, TFT-FPD or PV-cells) and n

denotes the number of gases included in each set (six for semiconductors, three for TFT-FPD 

manufacture and two for PV-cells. See Table 6.2.). The estimates are only valid if made and reported 

for all members of the set using this Tier 1 methodology. 

EFi = FC emission factor for gas i expressed as annual mass of emissions per square meters of substrate 

surface area for the product class, (mass of gas i)/m2

Cu = fraction of annual plant production capacity utilisation, fraction 

Cd = annual manufacturing design capacity, Gm2

of substrate processed, except for PV manufacturing 

which is Mm2

CPV = fraction of PV manufacture that uses FCs, fraction 

δ = 1 when Equation 6.1 is applied to PV industry and zero when Equation 6.1 is applied to either 

semiconductor or TFT-FPD industries, dimensionless 

This method does not account for differences among process types (etching versus cleaning), individual 

processes, or tools. It also does not account for the possible use of atmospheric emission-control devices. 

In using Tier 1, inventory compilers should not modify, in any way, the set of the FCs assumed in Table 6.2. 

Inventory compilers should not combine emissions estimated using Tier 1 method with emissions estimated 

using the Tier 2 or 3 methods. Neither may inventory compilers use, for example, the Tier 1 factor for CF4 to 

estimate the emissions of CF4 from semiconductors and combine it with the results of other FC gases from a Tier 

2 or Tier 3 method. (See also Section 6.2.2.1.) 

TIER 2a METHOD – PROCESS GAS-SPECIFIC PARAMETERS 

This method calculates emissions for each FC used on the basis of company-specific data on gas consumption 

and on emission control technologies. It uses industry-wide default values for the ‘heel’ or fraction of the 

purchased gas remaining in the shipping container after use (h), the fraction of the gas ‘used’ (destroyed or 

transformed) in the semiconductor or TFT-FPD manufacturing process, and the fraction of the gas converted into 

CF4 or C2F6 during the process. To use the Tier 2a method inventory compilers must have direct communication 

with industry (e.g., annual emissions reporting) to gather data and ensure that emission control technologies are 

installed and in use. 

Total emissions are equal to the sum of emissions from the gas FCi used in the production process plus the 

emissions of by-product CF4, C2F6, CHF3 and C3F8 resulting from use of the gas FCi., as shown in Equations 6.2, 

6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.6. Unlike the Tier 3 and 2b methods that are explained later in this section, the Tier 2a 

method does not distinguish between processes or process types (etching versus cleaning), individual processes 

or tools. The default emission factors represent weighted averages (based on expert judgments of weights), 

formed separately for each gas, over all etch and CVD processes. 

As discussed below in the section on emission factors, the Tier 2a method uses the emission factor for the 

process type (CVD or etch) in which the individual FC is most frequently used in the particular electronics sector. 

This method reflects a current trend where individual FCs tend to be used predominantly in particular process 

types (CVD or etch) throughout each industry. However, in countries with companies or plants that depart 

significantly from the industry-wide pattern of usage (e.g., by using a gas primarily in etch while others 

primarily use it in CVD), inventory compilers should evaluate the potential to introduce error by using the Tier 

2a method rather than the Tier 2b method. 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.10 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

EQUATION 6.2 

TIER 2a METHOD FOR ESTIMATION OF FC EMISSIONS

( ) ( ) ( ) Ei h FCi Ui ai di = 1− • • 1− • 1− •

Where: 

Ei = emissions of gas i, kg 

FCi = consumption of gas i,(e.g., CF4, C2F6, C3F8, c-C4F8, c-C4F8O, C4F6, C5F8, CHF3, CH2F2, NF3, SF6), 

kg 

h = fraction of gas remaining in shipping container (heel) after use, fraction 

Ui = use rate of gas i (fraction destroyed or transformed in process), fraction 

ai = fraction of gas i volume used in processes with emission control technologies (company- or plantspecific), fraction 

di = fraction of gas i destroyed by the emission control technology, fraction 

EQUATION 6.3 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF CF4

( ) ( ) 4, 4, 4 1 1 CF i CF i i i CF BPE = − h • B • FC • − a • d

Where: 

BPECF4,i = by-product emissions of CF4 from the gas i used, kg 

BCF4,i = emission factor, kg CF4 created/kg gas i used 

dCF4 = fraction of CF4 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology, fraction 

EQUATION 6.4 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF C2F6

( ) ( ) 2 6, 2 6, 2 6 1 1 C F i C F i i i C F BPE = − h • B • FC • − a • d

Where: 

BPEC2F6,i = by-product emissions of C2F6 from the gas i used, kg 

BC2F6,i = emission factor, kg C2F6 created/kg gas i used 

dC2F6 = fraction of C2F6 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology, fraction 

EQUATION 6.5 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF CHF3

( ) ( ) BPECHF3,i 1 h BCHF3,i FCi 1 ai dCHF3 = − • • • − •

Where: 

BPECHF3,i = by-product emissions of CHF3 from the gas i used, kg 

BCHF3,i = emission factor, kg CHF3 created/kg gas i used 

dCHF3 = fraction of CHF3 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology, fraction 

EQUATION 6.6 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF C3F8

( ) ( ) 3 8, 3 8, 3 8 1 1 C F i C F i i i C F BPE = − h • B • FC • − a • d

Where: 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.11 

BPEC3F8,i = by-product emissions of C3F8 from the gas i used, kg 

BC3F8,i = emission factor, kg C3F8 created/kg gas i used 

dC3F8 = fraction of C3F8 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology, fraction 

After estimating the emission of gas i (Ei) and the CF4, C2F6, CHF3 and C3F8 by-product emissions for each gas 

(BPECF4,i, BPEC2F6,i, BPECHF3,i and BPEC3F8,i), inventory compilers or companies should sum these emissions 

across all gases to estimate the total aggregate FCemissions. 

TIER 2b METHOD – PROCESS TYPE-SPECIFIC PARAMETERS 

The Tier 2b method requires data on the aggregate quantities of each gas fed into all etching processes and all 

cleaning processes (FCi,p). Thus, it distinguishes only between broad process types (etching vs. CVD chamber 

cleaning), but it does not distinguish among the many possible individual processes or small sets of processes.

Industry-wide default values can be used for any or all of the following: 

• the fraction of the gas remaining in the shipping container after use termed the ‘heel’ (h); 

• the fraction of the gas ‘used’ (destroyed or transformed) per process type (Ui,p); 

• the emission factor for CF4 by-product emissions in the process type (BCF4,i,p); 

• the emission factor for C2F6 by-product emissions in the process type (BC2F6,i,p); 

• the emission factor for CHF3 by-product emissions in the process type (BCHF3,i,p)); and 

• the emission factor for C3F8 by-product emissions in the process type (BC3F8,i,p). 

Defaults are also presented (see Table 6.6) for the fraction of the gas destroyed by the emissions control 

technology by process type (di,p, dCF4,p, dC2F6,p, dCHF3,p and dC3F8,p). Unless emission control technologies are 

installed, the default value for ai,p, the fraction of gas volume fed into processes with emission control 

technologies, is zero. The default values for Ui,p, BCF4,i,p, BC2F6,i,p, BCHF3,i,p and BC3F8,i,p represent simple 

unweighted averages, formed separately for each gas, over all etch processes and over all CVD processes. 

Company or plant-specific emission factors may be substituted for default values when available. The equations 

account for the plant-specific use of emission-control devices, but do not account for differences among 

individual processes or tools or among manufacturing plants in their mix of processes and tools. Thus, Tier 2b 

estimates will be less accurate than Tier 3 estimates. Also, note that the Tier 2b method is applicable to 

semiconductor and TFT-FPD manufacture. 

Emissions resulting from the use of a specific FC (FCi) consist of emissions of FCi itself plus emissions of CF4, 

C2F6, CHF3 and C3F8 created as by-products during use of FCi. The following calculation should be repeated for 

each gas for each process type: 

EQUATION 6.7 

TIER 2b METHOD FOR ESTIMATION OF FC EMISSIONS

= ( ) − • ∑[ ] • ( )( ) − • − • p

i i p i p i p i p E h FC U a d , , , , 1 1 1

Where: 

Ei = emissions of gas i, kg 

p = process type (etching vs. CVD chamber cleaning) 

FCi,p = mass of gas i fed into process type p (e.g., CF4, C2F6, C3F8, c-C4F8, c-C4F8O, C4F6, C5F8, CHF3, 

CH2F2, NF3, SF6), kg 

h = fraction of gas remaining in shipping container (heel) after use, fraction 

Ui,p= use rate for each gas i and process type p (fraction destroyed or transformed), fraction 

ai,p = fraction of gas i volume fed into process type p with emission control technologies (company-or 

plant-specific), fraction 

di,p = fraction of gas i destroyed by the emission control technology used in process type p (If more than 

one emission control technology is used in process type p, this is the average of the fraction 

destroyed by those emission control technologies, where each fraction is weighted by the quantity of 

gas fed into tools using that technology), fraction 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.12 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

EQUATION 6.8 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF CF4

= ( ) − • ∑[ ] • • ( ) − • p

CF i CF i p i p i p CF p BPE h B FC a d 4, 4, , , , 4, 1 1

Where: 

BPECF4,i = by-product emissions of CF4 converted from the gas i used, kg 

BCF4,i,p = emission factor for by-product emissions of CF4 converted from gas i in process type p, kg CF4

created/kg gas i used 

dCF4,p = fraction of CF4 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology used in process type p

(e.g., control technology type listed in Table 6.6), fraction 

EQUATION 6.9 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF C2F6

= ( ) − • ∑[ ] • • ( ) − • p

C F i C F i p i p i p C F p BPE h B FC a d 2 6, 2 6, , , , 2 6, 1 1

Where: 

BPEC2F6,i = by-product emissions of C2F6 converted from the gas i used, kg 

BC2F6,i,p = emission factor for by-product emissions of C2F6 converted from gas i in process type p, kg 

C2F6 created/kg gas i used 

dC2F6,p = fraction of C2F6 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology used in process type p

(e.g., control technology type listed in Table 6.6), fraction 

EQUATION 6.10 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF CHF3

= ( ) − • ∑[ ] • • ( ) − • p

CHF i CHF i p i p i p CHF p BPE h B FC a d 3, 3, , , , 3, 1 1

Where: 

BPECHF3,i = by-product emissions of CHF3 converted from the gas i used, kg 

BCHF3,i,p = emission factor for by-product emissions of CHF3 converted from gas i in process type p, kg 

CHF3 created/kg gas i used 

dCHF3,p = fraction of CHF3 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology used in process type p

(e.g., control technology type listed in Table 6.6), fraction 

EQUATION 6.11 

BY-PRODUCT EMISSIONS OF C3F8

= ( ) − • ∑[ ] • • ( ) − • p

C F i C F i p i p i p C F p BPE h B FC a d 3 8, 3 8, , , , 3 8, 1 1

Where: 

BPEC3F8,i = by-product emissions of C3F8 from the gas i used, kg 

BC3F8,i,p = emission factor for by-product emissions of C3F8 converted from gas i in process type p, kg 

C3F8 created/kg gas i used 

dC3F8,p = fraction of C3F8 by-product destroyed by the emission control technology used in process type p

(e.g., control technology type listed in Table 6.6), fraction 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.13 

Note that in certain etching or cleaning recipes, multiple FC precursors can be used concurrently and emissions 

of CF4, C2F6, CHF3 or C3F8 as by-products may originate from each of the individual FC precursor 

decomposition. In such cases, emissions of CF4, C2F6, CHF3 or C3F8 by-products should be reported as 

originating from the FC gas with the largest mass flow. 

TIER 3 METHOD – PROCESS-SPECIFIC PARAMETERS 

The Tier 3 method also uses Equations 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10 and 6.11. However, this method requires companyspecific or plant-specific values for all the parameters used in these equations for each individual process or for 

each of small sets of processes (e.g., silicon nitride etching or plasma enhanced chemical vapour deposition 

(PECVD) tool chamber cleaning). Therefore, when using Equations 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10 and 6.11, inventory 

compilers need to interpret ‘p’ in these equations as a specific ‘Process’ (e.g., silicon nitride etching or plasma 

enhanced chemical vapour deposition (PECVD) tool chamber cleaning), not as ‘Process type’. 

For purposes of transparency and comparability, the values used for these emission parameters should be well 

documented (see Section 6.2.2). 

CF4 formation from C-containing films during semiconductor manufacturing 

The Tier 2a, Tier 2b and Tier 3 methods account for CF4 emissions formed during removal via etching of 

carbon-containing low dielectric constant (k) materials or cleaning CVD reactors containing low k or carbide 

films during semiconductor manufacture. CF4 may be formed even if the FC precursor does not contain carbon 

or if the FC precursor is not a greenhouse gas. 

For example, cleaning low k CVD reactors with NF3 will produce CF4 as a by-product. In these cases, Equation 

6.7 should be used to report NF3 emissions and the result of Equation 6.8 should be used to reflect emissions of 

CF4 from the process. In those situations where F2, COF2, or ClF3 is used in chamber cleaning, CF4 may also be 

formed. In this case, CF4 emissions are estimated using Equation 6.8 and the results added to the total CF4

emissions obtained from Equation 6.7. In both cases, BCF4,i,p should be measured as the fraction of the mass of 

CF4 produced over the mass of clean or etch gas introduced in the reactor. 

After estimating emissions of each FC gas and emissions of CF4, C2F6, CHF3 and C3F8 as by-products, inventory 

compilers or companies should sum these emissions across all gases to arrive at an estimate of aggregate FC

emissions from a particular process. 

BOX 6.1 

EXAMPLE FOR SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURE

For example, if a source used NF3 (for chamber cleaning and etch), CHF3 (etch) and CF4 (etch), 

the total emissions, if low k films were used, are estimated using Equation 6.7 for NF3, CHF3 and 

CF4 and Equation 6.8 for the formation of CF4 formed when removing low k films with NF3. In 

equation form, the total is: 

Total FC emissions = ENF3 + ECHF3 + ECF4 + BPECF4,NF3

6.2.1.2 HEAT TRANSFER FLUIDS

There are two methods for estimating emissions from the use of heat transfer fluids. The choice of methods will 

depend on the availability of activity data on the use of heat transfer fluids, and is outlined in the decision tree 

(see Figure 6.2, Decision Tree for Estimation of FC Emissions from Heat Transfer Fluids, and see Section 1.5 of 

Chapter 1, Choosing between the Mass-Balance and Emission-Factor Approach). 

TIER 1 – HEAT TRANSFER FLUIDS 

Tier 1 is appropriate when company-specific data are not available on heat transfer fluids. It is the less accurate 

of the two methods for estimating emissions from losses of heat transfer fluids. The method, unlike the Tier 2 

method, gives an estimate of aggregate emissions - a weighted average emission across all liquid FCs that is 

expressed as the mass of C6F1410. The calculation relies on a generic emission factor that expresses the average 

 

10 In the absence of GWP estimates, the appropriate GWP for C6F14 has been used as a proxy (to derive the default emission 

factor). (See the Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas and Sinks: 1990-2003, the footnote to Table 4-58, page 166. (U.S. EPA, 

2005)) 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.14 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

aggregate emissions per unit of silicon consumed during semiconductor manufacturing. The formula is shown in 

Equation 6.12. 

EQUATION 6.12 

TIER 1 METHOD FOR ESTIMATION OF TOTAL FC EMISSIONS FROM HEAT TRANSFER FLUIDS

FCliquid total EFl Cu Cd = • • ,

Where: 

FCliquid, total = total FC emissions as expressed as the mass of C6F14, Mt C6F14

EFl = emission factor (aggregate FC emissions per Gm2

 of silicon consumed during the period expressed 

as the mass of C6F14 (See Table 6.2.)), Mt C6F14/Gm2

Cu = average capacity utilisation for all semiconductor manufacturing facilities in the country during the 

period, fraction 

Cd = design capacity of semiconductor manufacturing facilities in the country, Gm2 

TIER 2 METHOD – HEAT TRANSFER FLUIDS 

There is one Tier 2 method for estimating actual emissions from the use of each FC fluid. This method is a massbalance approach that accounts for liquid FC usage over an annual period. It is appropriate when companyspecific data are available. Over the course of a year, liquid FCs are used to fill newly purchased equipment and 

to replace FC fluid loss from equipment operation through evaporation. The Tier 2 method neglects fluid losses 

during filling new or existing equipment or when decommissioning old equipment (which is reasonable for these 

costly fluids).11 Inventory compilers should obtain from companies the chemical composition of the fluid(s) for 

which emissions are estimated. The method is expressed in Equation 6.13. 

EQUATION 6.13 

TIER 2 METHOD FOR ESTIMATION OF FC EMISSIONS FROM HEAT TRANSFER FLUIDS

FC [I ( )l P (l) N (l) R (l) I (l) D (l)] i i i,t 1 + i,t − i,t + i,t − i,t − i,t = • ρ −

Where: 

FCi = emissions of FCi, kg 

ρ i = density of liquid FCi, kg/litre 

Ii,t-1(l) = the inventory of liquid FCi at the end of the previous period, litres 

Pi,t(l) = net purchases of liquid FCi during the period (net of purchases and any returns), litres 

Ni,t(l) = total charge (or nameplate capacity) of new installed, litres 

Ri,t(l) = total charge (or nameplate capacity) of retired or sold equipment, litres 

Ii,t(l) = inventory of liquid FCi at end of the period, litres 

Di,t(l) = amount of FCi recovered and sent offsite from retired equipment during the period, litres 

 

11 Prices for heat transfer fluids vary from $55 – 130/litre. 3M, a manufacturer of a popular heat transfer fluid estimates that a 

vintage 2 000 manufacturing plant may loose 1 900 litres/year via evaporation. Manufactures of testing equipment that use 

heat transfer fluids report loss rates of approximately 30 litres/year/system for newer designs that reduce evaporative losses 

and 50 litres/year/system for older designs. 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.15 

Figure 6.2 Decision tree for estimation of FC emissions from HT fluid loss from 

electronics manufacturing 

Are heat transfer fluid

 loss data available from electronics 

manufacturing companies?

Start

Estimate emissions using

the Tier 2 method.

Box 2: Tier 2

Yes

Is Electronics

Industry a key category and is

this subcategory

significant? 1

No

Collect liquid FC use

data from companies. Yes

Estimate emissions using the

Tier 1 method.

No

Box 1: Tier 1

Note:

1. See Volume 1 Chapter 4, Methodological Choice and Identification of Key Categories (noting Section 4.1.2 on limited 

resources), for discussion of key categories and use of decision trees

6.2.2 Choice of emission factors12

6.2.2.1 ETCHING AND CVD CLEANING FOR SEMICONDUCTORS,

LIQUID CRYSTAL DISPLAYS, AND PHOTOVOLTAICS

TIER 1 

The default emission factors for the Tier 1 method is presented in Table 6.2 below. 

In using Tier 1, it is not good practice to modify, in any way, the set of the FCs or the values of the emission 

factors assumed in Table 6.2. Inventory compilers should not combine emissions estimated using Tier 1 method 

with emissions estimated using the Tier 2 or 3 methods. For example, inventory compilers may not use the Tier 1 

factor for CF4 to estimate the emissions of CF4 from semiconductors and combine it with the results of other FC 

gases from a Tier 2 or Tier 3 method. It should be also noted that the Tier 1 FC emission factors presented in 

Table 6.2 should not be used for any purpose other than estimating annual FC-aggregate emissions from 

semiconductor, TFT-FPD or PV manufacturing for compilation of the national greenhouse gas inventory. 

 

12 Sources and methods for developing emissions factors, if not explicitly provided in Chapter 6, can be found in Burton 

(2006). 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.16 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

TABLE 6.2 

TIER 1 GAS-SPECIFIC EMISSION FACTORS FOR FC EMISSIONS FROM ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING

Emission Factor (EF) (Mass per Unit Area of Substrate Processed) Electronics Industry Sector 

CF4 C2F6 CHF3 C3F8 NF3 SF6 C6F14

Semiconductors, kg/m2 0.9 1. 0.04 0.05 0.04 0.2 NA 

TFT-FPDs, g/m2 0.5 NA NA NA 0.9 4. NA 

PV-cellsa, g/m2 5 0.2 NA NA NA NA NA 

Heat Transfer Fluidsb, kg/m2 NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.3 

a

 EFs adapted from unpublished work of Fthenakis, Alsema and Agostinelli. (Fthenakis ,2005) Note that factor is applicable only to 

silicon-specific technologies and is applied for abatement. 

b

 EF assumes HTFs have the same GWP and C6F14 represents a suitable proxy. The origin of this factor is described in Burton, 2004, 

and is based in part on the work of Tuma and Tousignant (2001). 

TIER 2 

As discussed above, emissions factors based on simple electronics production variables are not adequate to 

account for all of the factors that influence emissions. Data for each of the following parameters are necessary to 

prepare a reliable estimate: 

• The gases used; 

• The process type (CVD or etch) used; 

• The brand of process tool used; 

• Emission reduction technology. 

Default values have been developed for the parameters used in Tier 2a and 2b methods (See Figure 6.1) on the 

basis of direct measurements, literature, and expert judgement (see Tables 6.3, 6.4, and 6.5 Tier 2 Default 

Emission Factors for FCs Emissions from Semiconductor12, TFT-FPD13, and PV12 Manufacturing respectively). 

Given the difficulty in representing the diverse production conditions within the electronics industry, default 

emission parameters are inherently uncertain. While accuracy can be improved with larger sets of measured data 

and where factors are applied to similar processes using similar or identical chemical recipes, developing default 

factors necessarily involves some form of averaging across all of the data. 

Electronics industry specialists expect that rapid technical innovation by chemical and equipment suppliers and 

electronics manufacturers will result in major emission reductions in the future (i.e., 2006 onwards). As a result, 

emission factors for these categories should evolve to reflect these changes. The semiconductor and TFT-FPD 

industries have established mechanisms through the World Semiconductor Council and the World LCD Industry 

Cooperation Committee, respectively, to evaluate global emission factors. The PV industry may be considering 

establishing a mechanism for tracking its PFC emissions during PV manufacture. (Fthenakis, 2006) 

FC-use during PV manufacture may or may not increase. Existing evidence suggests that, should FC-use in this 

industry grow, efforts will be made to control their emissions (Agostinelli et al., 2004; Rentsch et al., 2005). 

Inventory compilers may wish to periodically consult with the industry to better understand global and national 

circumstances. 

Tables 6.3 and 6.4 include two entries for NF3: Remote-NF3 and NF3. The first refers to a cleaning method in 

which the film cleaning-agents formed from NF3 (F-atoms) are produced in a plasma upstream (remote) from the 

chamber being cleaned. The last, denoted as simply NF3, refers to an in-situ NF3 cleaning process that is 

analogous to the process for other cleaning gases like C2F6 and C3F8. 

The default value for the fraction of gas remaining in the shipping container (heel) is 0.10. 

 

13 The emissions factors (EFs) for TFT-FPD manufacturing are simple (unweighted) averages developed from gas- and 

process-specific values published by Nishida et al. (2005). 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.17 

TABLE 6.3 

TIER 2 DEFAULT EMISSION FACTORS FOR FC EMISSIONS FROM SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING

 Greenhouse Gases with TAR GWP Greenhouse Gases 

without TAR GWP 

Non-GHGs 

Producing FC 

By-products‡

Process Gas 

(i) 

CF4 C2F6 CHF3 CH2F2 C3F8 c-C F4 8 NF3

Remote

NF3 SF6 C4F6 C5F8 C4F O F 8 2 COF2

Tier 2a 1-Ui 0.9 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.02 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 NA NA BCF4 NA 0.2 0.07 0.08 0.1 0.1 0.02† 0.09 NA 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.02† 0.02†BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA 0.1 NA NA NA 0.2 0.04 NA NA NA BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.04 NA NA Tier 2b Etch 1-Ui 0.7* 0.4* 0.4* 0.06* NA 0.2* NA 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 NA NA NA CVD 1-Ui 0.9 0.6 NA NA 0.4 0.1 0.02 0.2 NA NA 0.1 0.1 NA NA Etch BCF4 NA 0.4* 0.07* 0.08* NA 0.2 NA NA NA 0.3* 0.2 NA NA NA Etch BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA 0.2 NA NA NA 0.2* 0.2 NA NA NA CVD BCF4 NA 0.1 NA NA 0.1 0.1 0.02† 0.1† NA NA 0.1 0.1 0.02† 0.02†CVD BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.04 NA NA 

Notes: NA denotes not applicable based on currently available information ‡ The default emission factors for F2 and COF2 may be applied to cleaning low-k CVD reactors with ClF3. * Estimate includes multi-gas etch processes † Estimate reflects presence of low-k, carbide and multi-gas etch processes that may contain a C-containing FC additive 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.18 

TABLE 6.4 

TIER 2 DEFAULT EMISSION FACTORS FOR FC EMISSIONS FROM LCD MANUFACTURING

 Greenhouse Gases with TAR GWP Greenhouse Gases 

without TAR GWP 

Non-GHGs 

Producing FC 

By-products

Process Gas 

(i) 

CF4 C2F6 CHF3 CH2F2 C3F8 c-C F4 8 NF3

Remote

NF3 SF6 C4F6 C5F8 C4F O F 8 2 COF2

Tier 2a 1-Ui 0.6 NA 0.2 NA NA 0.1 0.03 0.3 0.6 NA NA NA NA NA BCF4 NA NA 0.07 NA NA 0.009 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA BCHF3 NA NA NA NA NA 0.02 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA BC2F6 NA NA 0.05 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Tier 2b Etch 1-Ui 0.6 NA 0.2 NA NA 0.1 NA NA 0.3 NA NA NA NA NA CVD 1-Ui NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.03 0.3 0.9 NA NA NA NA NA Etch BCF4 NA NA 0.07 NA NA 0.009 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Etch BCHF3 NA NA NA NA NA 0.02 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Etch BC2F6 NA NA 0.05 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BCF4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Notes: NA denotes not applicable based on currently available information 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.19 

TABLE 6.5 

TIER 2 DEFAULT EMISSION FACTORS FOR FC EMISSIONS FROM PV MANUFACTURING

 Greenhouse Gases with TAR GWP Greenhouse Gases without 

TAR GWP 

Non-GHGs 

Producing FC 

By-products 

Process 

Gas (i) 

CF4 C2F6 CHF3 CH2F2 C3F8 c-C4F8 NF3

Remote

NF3 SF6 C4F6 C5F8 C4F O F 8 2 COF2

Tier 2a 1-Ui 0.7 0.6 0.4 NA 0.4 0.2 NA 0.2 0.4 NA NA NA NA NA BCF4 NA 0.2 NA NA 0.2 0.1 NA 0.05 NA NA NA NA NA NA BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA 0.1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Tier 2b Etch 1-Ui 0.7 0.4 0.4 NA NA 0.2 NA NA 0.4 NA NA NA NA NA CVD 1-Ui NA 0.6 NA NA 0.1 0.1 NA 0.3 0.4 NA NA NA NA NA Etch BCF4 NA 0.2 NA NA NA 0.1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Etch BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA 0.1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BCF4 NA 0.2 NA NA 0.2 0.1 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Notes: NA denotes not applicable based on currently available information 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.20 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

TABLE 6.6 

TIER 2a & 2b DEFAULT EFFICIENCY PARAMETERS FOR ELECTRONICS INDUSTRY FC EMISSION REDUCTION 

TECHNOLOGIESa,b,e

Emission Control Technology CF4 C2F6 CHF3 C3F8 c-C4F8 NF3

f SF6

Destructionc 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.9 0.95 0.9 

Capture/Recoveryd 0.75 0.9 0.9 NT NT NT 0.9 

a Values are simple (unweighted) averages of destruction efficiencies for all abatement technologies. Emission factors do not apply to 

emission control technologies which cannot abate CF4 at destruction or removal efficiency (DRE) ≥ 85 percent when CF4 is present as 

an input gas or by-product and all other FC gases at DRE ≥ 90 percent. If manufacturers use any other type of emission control 

technology, its destruction efficiency is 0 percent when using the Tier 2 methods. b Tier 2 emission control technology factors are applicable only to electrically heated, fuelled-combustion, plasma, and catalytic devices 

that 

• are specifically designed to abate FCs, 

• are used within the manufacturer’s specified process window and in accordance with specified maintenance schedules and 

• have been measured and has been confirmed under actual process conditions, using a technically sound protocol, which 

accounts for known measurement errors including, for example, CF4 by-product formation during C2F6 as well as the effect 

of dilution, the use of oxygen or both in combustion abatement systems c Average values for fuelled combustion, plasma, and catalytic abatement technologies. d Average values for cryogenic and membrane capture and recovery technologies. e Vendor data verified by semiconductor manufacturers. Factors should only be used when an emission control technology is being 

utilised and maintained in accordance with abatement manufacturer specifications. f

 Use of NF3 in the etch process is typically small compared to CVD. The aggregate emissions of NF3 from etch and CVD under Tier 2b 

will usually not be greater than estimates made with Tier 2a or Tier 1 methods. 

NT = not tested. 

Process tool emission factors 

The procedures for calculating process tool emission factors for Tier 2a and Tier 2b methods are identical. 

Process tool emission factors are defined as the amount of greenhouse gas emitted divided by the amount of 

greenhouse gas used in the process. The emission factors correspond to the ‘(1 – Ui)’ term in the Tier 2 formulas. 

For example, the emission factor of 0.9 for CF4 (see Table 6.3 above, Tier 2a value) means that 90 percent of the 

CF4 used in the process is emitted as CF4. 

By-product emission factors were also calculated. The major by-product emission of significance is CF4. While 

it is generally held that the only gases that emit significant amounts of CF4 as a by-product are C2F6 and C3F8, 

the data provided by tool manufacturers and chemical suppliers showed that CF4 is also formed from mixtures of 

gases (e.g., that contain CHF3 or CH2F2) and c-C4F8. As a result of this discussion, CF4 by-product emission 

factors were calculated for CHF3, CH2F2, C2F6, C3F8, c-C4F8 and C4F8O. For example, a value of 0.1for C3F8

(taken from Table 6.3 above, Tier 2a value) means that 10 percent of the C3F8 used is converted into CF4. 

However, C2F6 may also be emitted from the decomposition of molecules such as C4F6. As described previously, 

CF4 may also be formed when etching or cleaning chambers where carbon-containing films are present. 

In order to calculate the Tier 2b process tool emission factors, data were collected from process equipment and 

gas manufacturers. The data were collected according to process type (either Chemical Vapour Deposition (CVD) 

or etch) and also by type of gas (e.g. C2F6, CF4). The methods used to conduct the emissions testing were real 

time Quadrupole Mass Spectrometry (QMS) and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR), the best 

known methods for measuring process tool emissions. Calibration standards (usually 1 percent mixtures with a 

balance of N2) were used to quantify the results. The measurement protocol and quality control requirements that 

were followed are outlined in the ‘Guidelines for Environmental Characterisation of Semiconductor Equipment.’ 

(Meyers et al., 2001) 14 The emission factors for Tier 2b (see Tables 6.3 and 6.4 above) are the simple 

(unweighted) average of the data collected for each gas for etch and CVD, rounded to one significant figure.12, 16 

In order to determine the Tier 2a process tool emission factors, knowledge of the amounts of gas used in typical 

semiconductor manufacturing processes is required. The Tier 2a emission factors were obtained using weights 

provided by industry experts for the proportion of each gas used in etching and cleaning processes. For example, 

the Tier 2b emission factors for C2F6 (Table 6.3) are 0.5 (etch) and 0.6 (CVD). The distribution of C2F6 usage 

between etching and CVD chamber cleaning processes during semiconductor manufacture is 20:80. Applying 

these weights to each of the emission factors gives 0.6 for the Tier 2a factor for C2F6 to one significant figure. 

 

14 These guidelines have also been adopted by flat panel display manufacturers for measuring FC-emissions during flat panel 

device manufacture. 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.21 

The corresponding distribution of SF6 usage in TFT-FPD manufacture is 50:50, which gives 0.6 for 

corresponding Tier 2a emission factor (Table 6.4).15 

For Tier 3 emission factors, semiconductor manufacturers use company or plant-specific values rather than using 

default values as listed in Table 6.1 above. In order to assure the quality of emission factors, emission testing 

should be conducted in accordance with accredited methods.16 If a third-party supplier conducts the emissions 

testing, the semiconductor manufacturer should make sure that the third-party supplier is capable of meeting all 

of the requirements outlined in Revision 3.0 of the Equipment Environmental Characterisation Guidelines (SIA, 

2000). Semiconductor manufacturers who use emission factors provided by the process tool equipment supplier 

should make sure that the emission factors are applicable to their specific manufacturing process. Manufacturing 

methods with process parameters (e.g., pressure, flow rate) that deviate from centreline conditions may have 

different emission factors than those provided by the tool manufacturer. 

Emission control technology factors for Tier 2 methods 

Emissions control technologies are developing at a rapid pace along with electronics manufacturing technology. 

Default control technology emission factors in Table 6.6 are based on tests of control devices that have been 

optimised for specific processes and tools. Results are expected to vary across tools and gas flow rates. Emission 

factors are not applicable to all tools or processes in semiconductor, liquid crystal display, or photovoltaic 

manufacturing facilities. The Tier 2 default destruction efficiency parameters presented in Table 6.6 are only

applicable when the inventory compiler can demonstrate through communication with facility managers and 

subsequent documentation that emissions control technologies are operated and maintained in accordance with 

manufacturer specifications. If companies use any other type of abatement device, they should assume that its 

destruction efficiency is 0 percent under the Tier 2 a and b methods. 

Assumptions for the emissions control technology emission factors for the Tier 2 (a & b) methods include: 

(i) Specific emissions control technologies are not listed; emission factors for each chemical were 

established based on results achieved during testing of emissions control technologies in 

semiconductor manufacturing applications; 

(ii) Emission factors should only be used when abatement is applied to emissions that fall within the 

operating range specified by the abatement manufacturer to meet or exceed the factors listed in Table 

6.6; 

(iii) Emission factors apply only to that portion of emissions that pass through a properly operating and 

maintained control device; emission factors should not be applied when control device is bypassed, 

not operating according to manufacturer specifications, or not maintained in accordance with 

specifications. 

(iv) Emission factors do not apply to emission control technologies which cannot abate CF4 at a destruction 

removal efficiency (DRE) ≥ 85 percent when CF4 is present as an input gas or by-product and all other 

FC gases at DRE ≥ 90 percent. If manufacturers use any other type of emission control technology, its 

destruction efficiency is 0 percent when using the Tier 2 methods. 

The default Tier 2 emission control factors in Table 6.6, Default Efficiency Parameters for Electronics Industry 

FC Emission Reduction Technologies were calculated from data received from equipment suppliers, abatement 

technology suppliers and electronic device manufacturers. It should be noted that only data from abatement 

devices that were specifically designed to abate FCs were used in the calculation. Data were received from 

combustion abatement devices (all of which used some type of fuel), plasma abatement devices, electrically 

heated abatement devices, and catalytic abatement devices. 

The values presented in Table 6.6, Default Efficiency Parameters for Electronics Industry FC Emission

Reduction Technologies, are the results of all of the data received for optimized technologies and for each input 

gas, rounded down to the next 5 percent (e.g., an average of 98 percent would be rounded down to 0.95). The 

averages were rounded down to reflect that (i) emissions control devices vary in their efficacy depending upon 

what gas they are optimised to destroy, and (ii) the efficacy of emission control devices depends on the type of 

tool they are installed on (150, 200 or 300mm wafers) and the amount of FC gas flown through that particular 

tool, and total exhaust flow through the emissions control device. An emission control device that can destroy 99 

percent of a FC when it is optimised to destroy that FC on a certain tool may destroy less than 95 percent of that 

FC when it is optimised to destroy something else or when it is used on a tool for which it was not designed, or if 

the FC or total exhaust flow exceeds a certain limit. Electronics manufacturers and abatement tool manufacturers 

 

15 The 50:50 SF6 usage rates represent an average for the leading TFT-FPD manufacturing regions of Japan, Republic of 

Korea and Taiwan. That proportion was provided by Nishida (2006) and Kim (2006). 

16 One example of an internationally accredited testing method is Meyers et al. (2001). 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.22 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

should ensure that the abatement system installed is properly sized and maintained and that the emission control 

device can meet or exceed the default emission factor highlighted in Table 6.6. 

6.2.2.2 HEAT TRANSFER FLUIDS

The emission factor for the Tier 1 method is presented in Table 6.2. There is no emission factor for the Tier 2 

method for estimating emissions from evaporation of heat transfer fluids. 

6.2.3 Choice of activity data 

Activity data for the electronics industry consists of data on gas sales and use or the annual amount of electronics 

substrate processed (e.g., m2

 of silicon processed for semiconductors). For the more data-intensive Tier 2 

methods, gas purchase data at the company or plant-level are necessary. For the Tier 1 methods, inventory 

compilers will need to determine the total surface area of electronic substrates processed for a given year. Silicon 

consumption may be estimated using an appropriate edition of the World Fab Watch (WFW) database, published 

quarterly by Semiconductor Equipment & Materials International (SEMI)17. The database contains a list of 

plants (production as well as R&D, pilot plants, etc.) worldwide, with information about location, design 

capacity, wafer size and much more. Similarly, SEMI’s ‘Flat Panel Display Fabs on Disk’ database provides an 

estimate of glass consumption for global TFT-FPD manufacturing. 

The activity data in Table 6.7 reflect design capacity figures. Semiconductor and TFT-FPD manufacturing plants 

are not operated at design capacities for sustained periods, such as a full year. Instead, the capacity fluctuates 

depending on product demand. For semiconductor manufacturing, publicly available industry statistics show that 

the global annual average capacity utilisation during the period 1991 – 2000 varied between 76 and 91 percent, 

with an average value of 82 percent and most probable value of 80 percent. When country-specific capacity 

utilisation data are not available, the suggested capacity utilisation for semiconductor manufacturing is 80 

percent. This should be used consistently for a time series of estimates. For TFT-FPD manufacturing, publicly 

available capacity utilisation data are not available. The TFT-FPD manufacturing industry, like the 

semiconductor manufacturing industry, lowers product prices to maintain the highest practical plant capacity 

utilisation. By analogy, therefore, it is suggested to use 80 percent to estimate substrate glass consumption using 

the design capacities provided in Table 6.7 for country TFT-FPD manufacturers. For PV manufacturing, 

published capacity utilisation data ranges between 77 – 92 percent, with the average for the years 2003 and 2004 

of 86 percent. Therefore, 86 percent is the recommended default figure for Cu (see Equation 6.1) to use. 

When estimating emissions during PV manufacture, one should account for the fraction of the industry that 

actually employs FCs (CPV in Equation 6.1). Because recent surveys indicate that between 40 – 50 percent of PV 

manufacture actually uses FC, and the usage trend may be increasing, the recommended default value for CPV is 

0.5. 

Table 6.7 summarises the capacity for 2003, 2004 and 2005 for countries, which in total, account for more than 

90 percent of world capacity in 2003. 

 

17 The term ‘fab’ is synonymous with clean room/manufacturing facility. Semiconductor and flat panel display manufacturing 

plants are often called fabrication plants, from which the abbreviation ‘fab’ follows. 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.23 

TABLE 6.7 

COUNTRY TOTAL SILICON (Si) AND GLASS DESIGN CAPACITIES (Mm2

) FOR 2003, 2004 AND 2005

 Annual Si design capacities, Mm2 Annual Glass design capacities, Mm2 

Country Totals 20031 20042 20052 20031 20042 20052 

Australia 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 NA NA NA 

Austria 0.0201 0.0201 0.0201 NA NA NA 

Belgium 0.0040 0.0040 0.0040 NA NA NA 

Canada 0.0041 0.0041 0.0041 NA NA NA 

China 0.1436 0.1982 0.3243 0.0432 0.0432 0.8154 

Czech Republic 0.0057 0.0057 0.0057 NA NA NA 

France 0.0653 0.0674 0.0674 NA NA NA 

Germany 0.1622 0.1622 0.1622 NA NA NA 

China, Hong Kong 0.0059 0.0059 0.0059 NA NA NA 

Hungary 0.0006 0.0006 0.0006 NA NA NA 

India 0.0128 0.0128 0.0128 NA NA NA 

Ireland 0.0175 0.0430 0.0430 NA NA NA 

Israel 0.0310 0.0310 0.0564 NA NA NA 

Italy 0.0431 0.0431 0.0609 NA NA NA 

Japan 0.9091 0.9235 0.9639 4.5746 5.3256 6.9201 

Latvia 0.0019 0.0019 0.0019 NA NA NA 

Malaysia 0.0284 0.0284 0.0284 NA NA NA 

Netherlands 0.0301 0.0301 0.0301 0.0209 0.0209 0.0209 

Republic of Belarus 0.0077 0.0077 0.0077 NA NA NA 

Russia 0.0250 0.0250 0.0325 NA NA NA 

South Korea 0.3589 0.3742 0.3937 5.8789 9.4679 12.4857 

Singapore 0.1730 0.1730 0.1985 0.2821 0.2821 0.2821 

Slovakia 0.0043 0.0043 0.0043 NA NA NA 

South Africa 0.0021 0.0021 0.0021 NA NA NA 

Sweden 0.0019 0.0019 0.0019 NA NA NA 

Switzerland 0.0098 0.0098 0.0098 NA NA NA 

Thailand 0.0000 0.0000 0.0094 NA NA NA 

Turkey 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NA NA NA 

United Kingdom 0.0597 0.0597 0.0936 NA NA NA 

United States of America 0.6732 0.6921 0.7190 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 

Vietnam 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 NA NA NA 

Global Total 3.3206 3.4972 3.8849 15.0572 23.9959 33.7459 

1 Country totals include fab in production 

2 Country totals include fabs under construction and announced. 

NA = not applicable. 

Sources: Extractions from World Fab Watch Database, January 2004 Edition for Semiconductor Manufacturing and Flat Panel 

Display Fabs on Disk Database (Strategic Marketing Associates, 2004a), October 2004 Edition for TFT-FPD Manufacturing 

(Strategic Marketing Associates, 2004b). 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.24 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

TABLE 6.8 

COUNTRY TOTAL PV PRODUCTION CAPACITYa FOR 2003, Mm2

Australia 0.135 

Austria 0.0307 

Canada 0.0154 

Denmark 0.00254 

France 0.162 

Germany 0.817 

Italy 0.100 

Japan 3.72 

Norway 0.0138 

Portugal 0.115 

S. Korea 0.462 

Spain 0.715 

Sweden 0.377 

Switzerland 0.00238 

United Kingdom 0.0269 

United States 1.02 

a

Capacities for all PV manufacturing technologies, includes 

those that may not use FCs during PV manufacture; World 

average capacity utilisation for 2003 = 86%. 

Source: IEA, 2004. PV participating survey countries. 

6.2.4 Completeness 

Complete accounting of emissions from the semiconductor industry should be achievable in most countries 

because there are a limited number of companies and plants. There are four issues related to completeness that 

should be addressed: 

• Other by-products: A number of transformation by-products are generated as a result of FC use for 

chamber cleaning and etching. As highlighted above, formation of CF4 and C2F6 can result from the 

decomposition of other FC gases. Also, CF4 formation has been observed in the cleaning of low k CVD 

chambers. In this case, the Tier 3 method should be used to accurately estimate emissions. 

• New chemicals: Completeness will be an issue in the future as the industry evaluates and adopts new 

chemical processes to improve its products. Industry-wide efforts to reduce FC emissions are also 

accelerating the review of new chemicals. Consequently, good practice for this industry is to incorporate a 

mechanism that accounts for greenhouse gases not listed in the IPCC Third Assessment Report (e.g., C4F6, 

C5F8, FluorinertsTM, and Galdens®). These new FC materials have high GWPs or may produce high GWP byproduct emissions. 

• Other sources: A small amount of FCs may be released during gas handling (e.g. distribution) and by 

sources such as research and development (e.g. university) scale plants and tool suppliers. These emissions 

are not believed to be significant (e.g., less than 1 percent of this industry’s total emissions). 

• Other products or processes: FC use has been identified in the electronics industry in emissive 

applications including: micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS),18 hard disk drive manufacturing, device 

testing (FC liquids), vapour phase reflow soldering,19 and precision cleaning.20

 

18 Emissions from micro-electro-mechanical systems (MEMS) manufacturing may be estimated using methods similar to 

those used for the other electronic sub sectors. Company-specific emission and abatement factors are required. Very small 

amounts of FCs are also used in and research and development laboratories/facilities. 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.25 

6.2.5 Developing a consistent time series 

Use of FCs by the semiconductor industry began in the late 1970s and accelerated significantly beginning in the 

early 1990s. Determining a base year emissions level may present difficulties because few data are available for 

emissions occurring before 1995. If historical emissions estimates were based on simple assumptions (e.g., use 

equals emissions), then these estimates could be improved by applying the methods described above. If historical 

data are not available to permit use of a Tier 3 or 2 method, then the Tier 1 method using default emission 

parameters can be used retrospectively. Both Tier 1 and Tier 2 could then be applied simultaneously for the years 

in which more data become available to provide a comparison or benchmark. This should be done according to 

the guidance provided in Volume 1, Chapter 5. 

In order to ensure a consistent emissions record over time, an inventory compiler should recalculate FC 

emissions for all years reported whenever emissions calculation procedures are changed (e.g., if an inventory 

compiler changes from the use of default values to actual values determined at the plant level). If plant-specific 

data are not available for all years in the time series, the inventory compiler will need to consider how current 

plant data can be used to recalculate emissions for these years. It may be possible to apply current plant-specific 

emission parameters to sales data from previous years, provided that plant operations have not changed 

substantially. Such a recalculation is required to ensure that any changes in emission trends are real and not an 

artefact of changes in procedure. 

6.3 UNCERTAINTY ASSESSMENT 

Use of the Tier 3 method will result in the least uncertain inventory. Given the limited number of plants and the 

close monitoring of production processes at the plant level, collection of data for use in Tier 2b or Tier 3 

methods should be technically feasible. Inventory compilers should seek the advice of the industry on 

uncertainties, using the approaches to obtaining expert judgement outlined in Volume 1, Chapter 3. 

Of all the methods, Tier 1 is the most uncertain. Using a single factor to account for the FC emissions from the 

diversity of semiconductor products is a glaring simplification. The factors presented in Table 6.2 are heavily 

weighted toward the manufacture of advanced vintage-late-1990s memory and logic products, having 3 to 5 

layers, respectively, manufactured on the silicon wafer. The factors for countries that are currently 

manufacturing products at the leading-edge of technology (and are not using measures to reduce FC emissions) 

would be larger, while countries that manufacture products that use older technologies or manufacture simpler 

devices would use the same or an even smaller factor. 

The Tier 1 emissions factors for TFT-FPD manufacturing represents a weighted average of the estimated 

aggregate PFC emissions per unit area of substrate glass consumed during TFT-FPD manufacture for the area 

where data were available (Burton, 2004b). The estimated emissions reported for Japan used Tier 2b factors for 

semiconductor manufacturing from Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National 

Greenhouse Gas Inventories (IPCC, 2000) in semiconductor manufacturing (Nishida et al., 2004). For emissions 

from Taiwan’s TFT-FPD manufacturers, the method for estimating emissions was not reported (Leu et al., 2004). 

However, subsequently Leu (2004) reported an aggregate emission factor having a similar magnitude to that 

developed by Burton (2004b). The uncertainty in the Tier 1 emissions factor for TFT-FPD manufacture is 

probably large, but not known at this time. 

When using Tier 3 method for semiconductor and TFT-FPD manufacturing, the resulting estimates of emissions 

will be more accurate than the Tier 2a, 2b or Tier 1 methods, on the order of ± 30 percent (95 percent confidence 

interval). Uncertainty in the efficacy of emission control technology appears to contribute most to this 

uncertainty, especially the variability in the uptime of emission control devices and in flow rates to emission 

control devices that may exceed device design limits. 

Estimates of emissions from using heat transfer fluids using the Tier 2 method will be more accurate than Tier 1 

method, of the order of ± 20 percent (95 percent confidence interval). 

6.3.1 Emission factor uncertainties 

The uncertainties in the emission factors suggested for the Tier 2b and 2a methods are shown in Table 6.9 for 

semiconductor manufacturing and Table 6.10 for TFT-FPD manufacturing. The factors were developed 

 

19 Emissions from vapour phase reflow soldering may be estimated to equal annual net FC purchases for maintaining vapour 

phase reflow soldering equipment. 

20 Emissions from precision cleaning are to be accounted for in Section 7.2 (Solvents) of this Volume. 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.26 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

specifically for this guidance. For Tier 2b, relative errors for each entry (process and gas in the case of Tier 2b) 

were estimated as the standard deviation of the factors provided by an expert group, normalised to the simple 

(unweighted) average, rounded to one significant figure.12 The estimate for each value was then doubled to 

estimate the 95 percent confidence interval. The same procedure was used to estimate the relative errors for 

product-formation factors (B). The corresponding estimates for the Tier 2a method were derived for the Tier 2b 

estimates, using the estimates of gas usage employed in development of the emission factors (see Section 6.2.2 

Tier 2). 

Tier 1 emission factors will have an uncertainty range that is skewed towards values close to zero extending up 

to 200 percent (95 percent confidence interval for semiconductor and TFT-FPD manufacture). Uncertainty 

estimates for PV manufacturing are not available. 

6.3.2 Activity data uncertainties 

Gas consumption constitutes the unit of activity to estimate emissions during semiconductor, TFT-FPD and PV 

manufacture for the Tier 2a and 2b methods. Gas consumption can be either measured or estimated from data on 

gas purchases, and requires knowledge of h, the unused gas returned to gas suppliers in the shipping containers. 

The uncertainties (95 percent confidence interval) in gas consumption and h, whether measured or estimated 

using expert judgment are shown in Table 6.10, Relative Errors (95 percent confidence interval) for Activity 

Data for Tier 2a and 2b Methods for Semiconductor and TFT-FPD Manufacture. 

For Tier 1 method, the unit of activity is substrate consumption. Uncertainties in the Tier 1 activity data are 

attributed principally to missing data entries in the WFW and FPD databases. An estimate of the reliability of 

entries derived from the WFW in Table 6.7 is ± 10 percent (95 percent confidence interval), which reflects errors 

due to missing and incorrect entries in the database. The 95 percent confidence interval in capacity utilisation 

over the 1991-2000 period is ± 12 percentage points (i.e., from 70 percent utilisation to 94 percent utilisation). 

The corresponding entries for TFT-FPD and PV manufacture are assumed to be similar to those for 

semiconductor manufacturing. 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.27 

TABLE 6.9 

TIER 2 DEFAULT ESTIMATES OF RELATIVE ERRORS (%) FOR EMISSION FACTOR FOR FC EMISSIONS FROM SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING,

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE INTERVALS* 

 Greenhouse Gases with TAR GWP Greenhouse Gases 

without TAR GWP 

Non-GHGs 

Producing FC 

By-products

Process Gas (i) CF4 C2F6 CHF3 CH2F2 C3F8 c-C F4 8 NF3

Remote 

NF3 SF6 C4F6 C5F8 C4F O F 8 2 COF2

Tier 2a 1-Ui 15 30 100 400 20 80 400 70 300 300 80† 40 NA NA BCF4 NA 90 300 200 60 100 200 200 NA 200 100† 80 200 200BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA 200 NA NA NA 200 200 NA NA NA BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 40 NA NA Tier 2b Etch 1-Ui 60 100 100 700 NA 200 NA 300 300 300 200† NA NA NA CVD 1-Ui 10 30 NA NA 0.4 30 400 70 NA NA 30† 40 NA NA Etch BCF4 NA 200 300 200 NA 200 NA NA NA 200 200† NA NA NA Etch BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA 200 NA NA NA 200 200† NA NA NA CVD BCF4 NA 80 NA NA 60 60 200 200 NA NA 60† 80 200 200CVD BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 40 NA NA 

Notes: NA denotes not applicable based on currently available information * Values that exceed 100% imply a distribution that is skewed towards values close to zero extending up to the value given. † Estimate relies on an analogy to c-C4F8 as the data for C5F8 were insufficient to estimate a confidence interval. 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.28 

TABLE 6.10 

TIER 2 DEFAULT ESTIMATES OF RELATIVE ERRORS (%) FOR EMISSION FACTOR FOR FC EMISSIONS FROM LCD MANUFACTURING,

95 PERCENT CONFIDENCE INTERVALS

 Greenhouse Gases with TAR GWP Greenhouse Gases 

without TAR GWP 

Non-GHGs 

Producing FC 

By-products

Process Gas (i) CF4 C2F6 CHF3 CH2F2 C3F8 c-C F4 8 NF3

Remote 

NF3 SF6 C4F6 C5F8 C4F O F 8 2 COF2

Tier 2a 1-Ui 50 NA 8 NA NA 5 70 20 20 NA NA NA NA NA BCF4 NA NA 30 NA NA 40 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA BCHF3 NA NA NA NA NA 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA BC2F6 NA NA 40 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Tier 2b Etch 1-Ui 50 100 8 NA NA 5 NA 60 NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD 1-Ui NA NA NA NA NA NA 70 20 6 NA NA NA NA NA Etch BCF4 NA NA 30 NA NA 40 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Etch BCHF3 NA NA NA NA NA 20 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA Etch BC2F6 NA NA 40 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BCF4 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC2F6 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA CVD BC3F8 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Notes: NA denotes not applicable based on currently available information 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.29 

6.4 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL 

(QA/QC), REPORTING AND 

DOCUMENTATION 

6.4.1 Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) 

It is good practice to conduct quality control checks as outlined in Volume 1, Chapter 6, and an expert review of 

the emissions estimates. Additional quality control checks as outlined in Volume 1 and quality assurance 

procedures may also be applicable, particularly if higher tier methods are used to determine emissions from this 

source category. Inventory compilers are encouraged to use higher tier QA/QC for key categories as identified in 

Volume 1, Chapter 4. 

Additional general guidance for higher tier QA/QC procedures is also included in Volume 1, Chapter 6. Due to 

the highly competitive nature of the semiconductor industry, provisions for handling confidential business 

information should be incorporated into the verification process. Methods used should be documented, and a 

periodic audit of the measurement and calculation of data should be considered. A QA audit of the processes and 

procedures should also be considered. 

6.4.2 Reporting and Documentation 

Care should be taken not to include emissions of HFCs used as ODS substitutes with those used in 

semiconductor manufacturing. It is good practice to document and archive all information required to produce 

the national emissions inventory estimates as outlined in Volume 1, Section 6.11. It is not practical to include all 

documentation in the national inventory report. However, the inventory should include summaries of methods 

used and references to source data such that the reported emissions estimates are transparent and steps in their 

calculation may be retraced. 

Explicit reporting on emissions in this industry would improve the transparency and comparability of emissions. 

As a number of FCs gases are emitted by this industry, reporting by individual gas species rather than by 

chemical type would also improve the transparency and usefulness of this data. Efforts to increase transparency 

should take into account the protection of confidential business information related to specific gas use. Countrylevel aggregation of gas-specific emissions data should protect this information in countries with three or more 

manufacturers. Table 6.11, Information Necessary for Full Transparency of Estimates of Emissions from 

Semiconductor Manufacturing, shows the supporting information necessary for full transparency in reported 

emissions estimates. 

Good practice for Tier 3 is to document the development of company-specific emission factors, and to explain 

the deviation from the generic default values. Given confidentiality concerns, inventory compilers may wish to 

aggregate this information across manufacturers. In cases where manufacturers in a country have reported 

different emission or conversion factors for a given FC and process or process type, inventory compilers may 

provide the range of factors reported and used. 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.30 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

TABLE 6.11 

INFORMATION NECESSARY FOR FULL TRANSPARENCY OF ESTIMATES OF EMISSIONS FROM 

ELECTRONICS MANUFACTURING

Data Tier 1 Tier 2a Tier 2b Tier 3 

Total surface area of electronics substrate processed (e.g., m2 silicon, 

m2

 glass) X 

Capacity utilisation for semiconductor, TFT-FPD and PV 

manufacturing X 

Fraction of PV manufacturing capacity that uses FC gases X 

Emissions of each FC (rather than aggregated for all FCs) X X X 

Sales/purchases of each FC X 

Mass of each FC used in each process or process type X X 

Fraction of each FC used in processes with emission control 

technologies X X X 

Use rate for each FC for each process or process type (This and 

following information is necessary only if default value is not used) X 

Fraction of each FC transformed into CF4 for each process or process 

type X 

Fraction of gas remaining in shipping container X 

Fraction of each FC destroyed by emission control technology X 

Fraction of CF4 by-product destroyed by emission control technology X 
Chapter 6: Electronics Industry Emissions 

2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 6.31 

References 

Agnostinelli, G., Dekkers, H. F. W., DeWolf, S. and Beaucarne, G. (2004). “Dry Etching and Texturing 

Processes for Cystalline Silicon Solar Cells: Sustainability for Mass Production”, presented at the 19th 

European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, Paris, 2004. 

Alsema, E. A., Bauman, A. E., Hill, R. and Patterson, M. H. (1997) “Health, Safety and Environmental Issues in 

Thin Film Manufacturing”, 14th European PV Solar Energy Conference, Barcelona, Spain. 1997. 

Burton, C. S. (2004a). “Uses and Air Emissions of Liquid PFC Heat Transfer Fluids from the Electronics Sector: 

Initial Findings”, report prepared for U. S. EPA’s Climate Change Division, October 2004. 

Burton, C. S. (2004b). “PFC Uses, Emissions, and Trends in FPD Manufacture: An Update”, draft report 

prepared for U. S. EPA’s Climate Change Division, June 2004. 

Burton, C. S. (2006). “Sources and Methods Used to Develop PFC Emission Factors from the Electronics 

Sector”, report prepared for U. S. EPA’s Climate Change Division, February 2006. 

Cowles, D. (1999) “Oxide Etch Tool Emissions Comparison for C5F8 and C4F8 Process Recipes”, presented at 

A Partnership for PFC Emissions Reductions, SEMICON Southwest 99, Austin, TX. October 1999. 

Fthenakis, V. (2005) Personal communication to S. Bartos on 5 February 2005 of data tables quantifying 

historical and current CF4 and C2F6 usage in PV manufacture for U. S. and Europe. 

Fthenakis, V. (2006) Personal communication to S. Burton and S. Bartos explaining proposal to begin 

monitoring FC emissions from European PV industry. Feb. 6, 2006. 

IEA (2004). ‘Trends in Photovoltaic Applications: Survey report of selected IEA Countries between 1992 – 

2003’, Photovoltaic Power Systems Programme (PVPS), International Energy Agency, Report IEA-PVPS 

T1-13:2004, September 2004. 

IPCC (2000). Good Practice Guidance and Uncertainty Management in National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. 

Penman J., Kruger D., Galbally I., Hiraishi T., Nyenzi B., Emmanuel S., Buendia L., Hoppaus R., 

Martinsen T., Meijer J., Miwa K., Tanabe K. (Eds). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 

IPCC/OECD/IEA/IGES, Hayama, Japan. 

ITRS (2004), “International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors” available at

http://public.itrs.net/report.htm 

Kim, D-H., (2006) 9 January 2006 Personal communication to Hideki Nishida identifying the historical average 

(50:50) proportion of SF6 usage for etching and CVD chamber-cleaning in Japanese, Korean and Taiwan 

TFT-FPD manufacture. 

Leu, C-H., (2004) “SF6 Abatement Strategy in Taiwan”, presented at SF6 Power Reduction Partnership for 

Electric Power Systems, Scottsdale, Az., 1-3 December 2004. 

Leu, C-H et al. (2004) “PFC emissions Abatement for TFT-LCD Industry in Taiwan”, available in the 

Proceedings of the 15th Annual Earth Technology Forum, Washington, D. C., 13-15 April 2004. 

Maycock, P. (2005) “PV market update: global PV production continues to increase”, Renewable Energy World, 

Vol. 8 (4), pp 86-99. 

Meyers, J., Maroulis, P., Reagan, B. and Green, D. (2001). “Guidelines for Environmental Characterization of 

Semiconductor Equipment”, Technology Transfer #01104197A-XFR, pub. International SEMATECH, 

Austin, Texas, USA. December 2004, See: www.sematech.org/docubase/document/4197axfr.pdf. 

Nishida, H. et al. (2004) “Voluntary PFC Emission Reduction in the LCD Industry”, available in the 

Proceedings of the 15th Annual Earth Technology Forum, Washington, D. C., 13 – 15 April 2004. 

Nishida, H., Marsumura, K., Kurokawa, H., Hoshino, A. and Masui, S. (2005), “PFC emission-reduction 

strategy for the LCD industry”, J. Society for Information Display, Vol 13, pp. 841-848 (2005). 

Nishda, H. (2006). 7 January 2006 Personal communication to D-H. Kim confirming historical average 50:50 

proportion of SF6 usage for etching and CVD chamber-cleaning in Japan, Korean and Taiwan TFT-FPD 

manufacture. 

Phylipsen, G. J. M. and Alsema, E. A., (1995) “Environmental life-cycle assessment of multicrystalline silicon 

solar cell modules”, report prepared for Netherlands Agency for Energy and the Environment, Report No. 

95057, September 1995. 
Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use 

6.32 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories 

Rentsch, J., Schetter C., Schlemm H., Roth, K. and Preu, R. (2005). “Industrialization of Dry Phosphorous 

Silicate Glass Etching and Edge Isolation for Crystalline Silicon Solar Cells”, Presented at the 20th

European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition, Barcelona, Spain. 6-10 June, 2005. 

Sekiya, A. (2003). “Climate-Friendly Alternative Refrigerant and the Others: New Evaluations for 

sustainability”, The Earth Technologies Forum, Washington, D. C., 23 April, 2003. 

Shah, A., Meier, J., Buechel, A., Kroll, U., Steinhauser, J., Meillaud, F. and Schade, H. (2004). “Toward Very 

Low-Cost Mass Production of Thin-film silicon Photovoltaic (PV) Solar Modules on Glass“, presented at 

ICCG5 Conference in Saarbrucken, Germany, July 2004. 

SIA (2000). “Equipment Environmental Characterisation Guidelines”, Revision 3.0, Semiconductor Induistry 

Association (SIA), San Jose, California, USA, February 2000 

Strategic Marketing Associates (2004a). WORLD FAB WATCH: The Industry’s Encyclopedia of Wafer Fabs 

Since 1994, January 2004 Edition. 

Strategic Marketing Associates (2004b). WORLD FAB WATCH: The Industry’s Encyclopedia of Wafer Fabs 

Since 1994, October 2004 Edition. 

Tuma, P.E. and Tousignant, L. (2001). “Reducing Emissions of PFC Heat Transfer Fluids,” Presented at 

Semicon West, San Francisco, July 2001. 

U.S. EPA (2005). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas and Sinks: 1990-

2003, EPA 430-R-05-003, April 2005.