## 3 Results
### By-Product Emission Factors (\(B_{\text{by-product},i}\))  
For the fluorinated greenhouse gases (F-GHGs) of C\({}_{2}\) or higher, which are widely used in semiconductor and display manufacturing processes, by-product emission factors (\(B_{\text{by-product},i}\)) for each by-product gas that could be generated based on plasma were measured, and by-product emission factors (\(B_{\text{by-product},i}\)) for each by-product gas that could be generated under various conditions are shown in Table 10. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Gas**} & \multirow{2}{*}{**Power Value**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**FT-IR (ppm)**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**By-Product Gas**} \\ \cline{3-8}  & & **Inlet** & **Outlet** & **(\%)** & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**CF\({}_{4}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**C\({}_{2}\)F\({}_{6}\)**} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{**CHF\({}_{3}\)**} \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{C\({}_{2}\)F\({}_{6}\)} & 6.032 & 4273.38 & 1942.31 & 48.48 & 764.32 & - & - \\  & 8.08 & 4331.56 & 1599.53 & 58.14 & 1423.73 & - & - \\  & 10.73 & 4334.33 & 1117.95 & 70.76 & 2333.24 & - & - \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{CHF\({}_{3}\)} & 6.032 & 5150.92 & 1707.59 & 62.40 & 576.91 & 109.88 & - \\  & 8.08 & 5150.92 & 1162.32 & 74.42 & 783.09 & 168.75 & - \\ \cline{1-1}  & 10.73 & 5150.92 & 587.93 & 87.07 & 887.91 & 154.32 & - \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{C\({}_{3}\)F\({}_{8}\)} & 6.032 & 2946.14 & 1602.21 & 38.35 & 1397.89 & 27.13 & 10.03 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 8.08 & 2946.14 & 985.54 & 62.08 & 2214.25 & 179.29 & 6.52 \\ \cline{1-1}  & 10.73 & 2946.14 & 482.12 & 81.45 & 3256.02 & 487.92 & 2.24 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 10: By-product gas emissions generated from a plasma scrubber. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Method 1**} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{**Method 2**} \\ \hline
**Plasma On** & **Plasma Off** & **Use Rate of Gas** & **Injected Volume** & **Plasma On** & **Use Rate of Gas** \\ \hline
**Volume Flow Rate** & **Volume Flow Rate** & **Volume Flow Rate** & **Use Rate (\%)** & **Volume Flow Rate** & **Use Rate (\%)** \\
**(sccm)** & **(sccm)** & **(sccm)** & **(sccm)** & **(sccm)** & **(sccm)** \\ \hline
86,092 & 72,339 & 16.0 & 85,000 & 72,339 & 14.9 \\
85,561 & 73,311 & 14.3 & 85,000 & 73,311 & 13.8 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 9: The use rate of gas (\(U_{i}\)) from N\({}_{2}\)O gas using the CVD process in the display industry. Results on the DRE, Use Rate of Gas (U\({}_{i}\)), and By-Product Emission Factor (B\({}_{by-product,~{}i}\)) Measurements  
According to DRE measurement results, a comparison was performed with the '06 IPCC G/L and '19 IPCC Refinement to the '06 IPCC G/L for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, as shown in Table 11. It was confirmed that DRE showed a large difference in volume flow rate, gas type, and energy consumption data in the manufacturing process. As a result, since DRE coefficients for each gas presented in the IPCC G/L considered and presented only the type of gas, it is necessary to develop coefficients based on various facility conditions in order to apply DRE that is suitable for the site. According to results on the use rate of gas (U\({}_{i}\)) measurements, the EPA 40 U.S. Code of Federal Regulation's (CFR) Part 98 was compared against the '19 IPCC Refinement to the '06 IPCC G/L for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, as shown in Table 12. The use rate of gas showed that the recipes varied depending on the characteristics of each manufacturing process and the product being made. As a result, our analysis showed a large difference based on the input of optimal or excessive gases for each characteristic of product, and then it was found that it was necessary to develop coefficients based on these differences.