Low Carbon Transition Plan Progress Report

Transcription

1 Low Carbon Transition Plan Progress Report Progress report no. 3 (October 2012) Owner: Gavin Hodgson Progress bar: Carbon dioxide emissions reduction since November /10 Scope 1 &2 emissions 14,640 tonnes 2013 (20% reduction) 2015 (30% reduction) 2018 (40% reduction) 2020 Scope 1 &2 emissions target 7,257 tonnes 2020 (50% reduction) 0% 50% 7% (Actual) Present scope 1 & 2 emissions Present scope 3 emissions Carbon saved to date Value of projects financed to date Financial savings achieved to date Tonnes per year 13,669 (actual based on FY 2011/12, 2013 target=11,610 tonnes/yr) 37,020 tonnes KgCO 2 /m 2 /yr 85 (for information only, no target has been set) (no update against target at present as Scope 3 emissions are only calculated at the end of each calendar year) 971 tonnes/yr (7%) (actual based FY 2011/1) For more information please see Page 4 Page 5 Page 7/8 576k Page 8 Energy Efficiency projects: 126k per year (predicted) Bill validation: 80k Page 8 Circulation Review and comment Wider distribution following review and comment Richard Monk (Director of Estates and Facilities Management) Harriet Waters (Sustainability Manager) Members of sustainability team Charlotte Lewis (Space Planner Manager) David Warrack (Senior Management Accountant) Jo Jones (Director of Finance) Gillian Almond (Commercial Director) Bill Sturman (Chief Information Officer) Neil Smith (Purchasing Manager) Members of EPSG (Environmental Policy Sub-Group) Members of CRSG Progress report will be made available online.

2 Contents 1. Purpose of this report Carbon emissions and utilities spend overview Projects undertaken since November Enabling works Overview Project progress reports Project 1: Financial and Carbon Management Project 2: Metering and Energy Display Project 3: Surveying and Analysis Project 4: Behavioural Change Project 5: Renewables Appendix Gavin Hodgson Page 2 of 2

3 1. Purpose of this report This progress report provides: o o An overview of o Carbon emissions o Financial spend (on utilities and energy efficiency improvements) o Savings achieved o Projects that are planned to be delivered Information on our programme of Enabling Works Oxford Brookes Low Carbon Transition Plan received approval from the Executive Board and the Carbon Trust in March 2011 and is publicly available for download from the Brookes website. The plan sets out strategic options of how Brookes can achieve the objective of reducing carbon emissions by 50% by Three options were presented to the Executive Board that were designed to achieve this ambition: Option A: Energy efficiency improvements to our building stock alone Option B: Energy efficiency improvements supported by the roll out of photovoltaics Option C: Provision of two large scale wind turbines at Harcourt and a limited amount of energy efficiency improvements. The Executive Board committed to provide 250k of funding to enable detailed surveys to be undertaken so that strategic option B could be worked up to an investment grade business case proposal. These Enabling Works are the first phase of delivering our low carbon transition plan; the second phase is the delivery of physical improvements to the Universities buildings based upon the investment grade business proposal produced as a result of the enabling works. The Enabling Works are being financed directly by Oxford Brookes and is separate to the Salix revolving green fund which the University has utilised to deliver energy efficiency improvements. The enabling works detailed within this progress report are considered as part of the University s Estates Strategy. Gavin Hodgson Page 3 of 3

4 2. Carbon emissions and utilities spend overview The following figures are based on CEDAR entries and HEFCE carbon accounting guidance: Historical Targets Financial Year Costs for academic buildings and halls of residence (incl. VAT) Carbon emissions (tonnes) 1 Gas Electric Total 05/06 731k 1,250k 1,981k 14,439 06/07 685k 1,377k 2,013k 14,169 07/08 612k 1,337k 1,989k 14,581 08/09 1,025k 2,232k 3,257k 14,375 09/10 720k 1,619k 2,339k 14,526 10/11 843k 1,441k 2,284k 14,267 11/12 954k 1,682k 2,636k 13, /12 2 1,116k 1,945k 3,061k 13, /14 11, /16 10, /19 8, /21 7,257 Comment on Scope 1 & 2 emissions/spend for 2011/12 are provided below: Electricity The emissions figure of 8,504 tonnes for electricity is largely based on actuals, but includes estimates for Harcourt Library, Kennett House and College Close houses - the overall accuracy for the emissions, accounting for the use of these estimates, is 98%. Please note that the known emissions relating to the NLTB development works (crane, porta-cabins and welfare blocks) and the Leadbitter development works for the Westminster Halls (Temp Offices and Site Supply) have both been excluded from our basket of emissions because we are recovering the cost of electricity relating to these Lang O'Rourke and Leadbitter controlled sites which are outside of our operational boundary. The reduction in electricity related carbon dioxide emissions represents a 4% year on year drop. This is a good result especially considering the fact that emissions at Clive Booth/Morrell increased last year due to the two combined heat and power plants not functioning during the period (this is rectified now that a maintenance contract is in place). Please note that the following risks have been identified which may affect the results next year. These risks have been flagged up to HEFCE: 1 Based upon HEFCE methodology used for Oxford Brookes Low Carbon Transition Plan 2 Please note that the 2011/12 financial budgets where produced prior the signing of our new gas and electricity contracts, so do not yet reflect the cheaper unit prices which the university has been able to secure. Gavin Hodgson Page 4 of 4

5 1. Presently HEFCE and HESA use 'Grid rolling average' Total GHG emissions which are lower than the Grand Total GHG emission factors which include electricity losses associated with distribution. HEFCE/HESA may decide to move to 'Grand Total GHG emissions' next year which would result in our overall emissions rising by 12% (if this were to be applied all higher education institutions would increase by a similar amount). 2. DEFRA Guidance on company reporting of carbon emissions states that the latest emission factors for electricity should be retrospectively applied (gas emissions remain unaffected). HEFCE/HECA may decide to follow this guidance which would result in emissions changes in the baseline figures. Gas Emissions due to gas for FY2011/12 are 5,166 tonnes, this represents a 5% decrease year on year. This reduction is almost exclusively due to milder weather during the last financial year. This was to be expected as electricity reduction improvement measures have been prioritised due to their shorter payback period. There are a significant number of estimations used to calculate the emissions relating to gas, particularly with regards to Gipsy Lane and Wheatley as there have been a number of meter switches, corrector changes and additions - the lack of historical data also makes it very difficult to estimate. There will likely be further change next year due to the improved accuracy of the new AMR meters being installed. It should be noted that it is a requirement for the disposal/demolition of buildings in-line with the estates strategy to occur as soon as NLTB is operational to prevent overall emissions increasing next year. In addition to this significant investment in the projects identified in the Investment Grade Report will be required for us to maintain progress towards our 2013 interim target of a 20% reduction. Scope 3 The low carbon transition plan focuses mainly on scope 1 & 2 emissions, however the recent availability of HEFCE s methodology for calculating scope 3 emissions has allowed for additional information to be provided. A full breakdown of the Scope 3 targets and activities is available in the last version of this progress report, an update on Scope 3 emissions and progress against our targets is not presently possible as the Proc-HE data necessary to calculate the emissions is only produced at the end of each calendar year. The university is targeting a 14% overall reduction in CO2 emissions relating to scope 1,2 and 3 emissions by Gavin Hodgson Page 5 of 5

6 Utilities Contracts Gas contract: Our previous contract with British Gas was due to expire on 31 st July 2012 and was extended by 3 months to bring it in-line with the end date for our electricity contract. The unit cost rate secured for the additional three month period to 31 st September 2012 are: o pence per kwh for our major supply s o previous contract was pence per kwh pence per kwh for our smaller sites previous contract was 3.99 pence per kwh The new contract for gas supply for the period 1 St October st September 2013 was awarded to British Gas. The unit cost for all properties is pence per kwh. Electricity contract: The new contract for the period 1 St October 31 st September 2013 was awarded to SSE the contract type is a fully delivered one and the unit prices are between and pence per kwh. o Previous contract was based on a Delivered price plus TRIAD pass through so it is not directly possible to compare unit costs, however analysis by our energy brokers (Energy Purchasing Associates) has indicated that a saving of 144k for the contract period may be achieved based on the university s present annual consumption profile. Oxford Brookes is presently seeking to recover the following sums due to utilities used onsite by third parties: 132k is due to be recovered for the past 6 years worth of electricity consumed by the mobile phone repeater stations which are located on the roof of the Abercrombie building and the Tower Block at Wheatley. This opportunity to recover these amounts was identified by the university s energy manager as we are legally entitled to pass through our costs to O2, Vodafone etc who consume electricity as a part of their agreement to lease roof space from us. Recovery of the 132k is pending completion of the renewal of contracts which Robin Hoare. 64k is due to electricity used by the cranes and Quad temporary buildings operated by Lang O Rourke as a part of the NLTB development. This amount covers the start of NLTB development works through to June k is being recovered from Leadbitter for their electricity consumption during the delivery of the new Westminster Halls of Residence. Money recovered due to bill validation: 3k was recovered in September 2012 due to incorrect meter reads used by British Gas. This occurred as the result of a corrector change to Gipsy Lane Gas meter MPRN: Gavin Hodgson Page 6 of 6

7 3. Projects undertaken since November 2011 The following table summarises the discrete physical improvement projects that have been undertaken and will continue to achieve savings throughout there lifespan (which will also include associated savings in maintenance costs not shown here). Description Funded by Completion Project Cost Predicted Savings date (incl. VAT) /yr tco 2 /yr Fitting of Vending Miser to vending machines and open fronted coolers on all campuses Salix (SERS) July ,160 4, replacement LED lights to Wheatley Post-Grad Lecture Theatre 63 replacement LED lights to Harcourt Hill Refectory Uninterruptable Power Supply Replacement in Abercrombie Datacentre Cold Aisle Containment in Abercrombie Datacentre Combined Heat and Power extension at Harcourt Replacement of w Candle lamps with LED lamps in Headington Hill Hall Fitting of PIR sensors at Crescent and Warneford PIR sensors around campus LED lighting upgrades LED shaver light replacement at Clive Booth Salix (SERS) Salix (SERS) Salix (SERS) Salix (SEELS) Internally financed Internally financed Internally financed Salix (SERS) Salix (SERS) Salix (SERS) August 2011 August 2011 October 2011 October ,898 1, ,494 1, ,660 9, ,000 17, (TBC) 88,000 20, September 2011 January 2012 September 2012 Still underway 2, ,555 7, ,039 38, ,898 15, ,221 2, Totals to date 575, , Total tco 2 saving required to achieve interim 20% cut by tco 2 saving still required to achieve interim 2013 target 2075 % tco 2 savings towards final 2020 target 9.1% 3 This is based on historical information and assumes that consumption has not risen since last year, it also ignores the possibility of potential rebound effects occurring. Gavin Hodgson Page 7 of 7

8 Please note that the predicted saving of 9.1% is the percentage progress against our targeted reduction in emissions of 7,182 tonnes (which is the reduction required to achieve a 50% CO 2 cut). The 9.1% figure should be achieved within the next financial year due to the projects undertaken, the 7% reduction (actual figure for the last financial year) as shown on the front page of this progress report does not include a full year of savings due to projects undertaken. There are also a number of ongoing improvement works that property services undertake as a matter of course which are not included or quantified. The argument behind not including these savings is that maintenance and improvement works activities have always occurred and historical information on our carbon emissions suggests that this has helped the university to maintain relatively stable carbon dioxide emissions, as opposed to seeing year-on-year creep in emissions in an upward direction. Ongoing activities such as behavioural change (e.g. student-switch off) are also not reported within the above figures for similar reasons. The Student Switch-Off campaign run in our Halls of Residence over Sept to May for the last financial year achieved an estimated 1.8% reduction in electricity consumption. It is also being run this again this financial year. Salix funding Total Salix Revolving Green Fund (RGF) fund now stands at 500k, with an additional 45k SEELS loan. As present only 10k is available to spend within Salix s 1 st April-12 to 31 st March-13 financial year from the RGF pot a request has been made via David Warrack if a new SEELS loan of 500k can be taken out by the university this money will be used to take forward the new opportunities as identified into the investment grade report. SEELS differs from RGF in the fact that it is an interest free loan over 4 years, which does not require a contribution from Brookes. Payments to the Salix revolving green fund are presently made from a central Oxford Brookes fund. Gavin Hodgson Page 8 of 8

9 4. Enabling works 4.1. Overview The Executive Board agreed to support the development of strategic option B (building energy efficiency and photo-voltaics) as presented within the Low Carbon Transition Plan. The packages of enabling works, as detailed in this section, have resulted in an investment grade business proposal being produced which contains details of the projects needed to be financed (available separately). The package of enabling works also enables improved management and identification of additional savings moving forward. Activity Budget Invoiced to date 1. Financial and Carbon 25.5k 25.5k Management Software 2. Automatic Metering 92k 0 3. Surveying and analysis works 126k 98k 4. Behavioural change Renewables feasibility 6k 6k RAG status Total (max spend 250k incl. VAT) 249.5k COMPLETE means that the action has been fully completed or is not receiving funding GREEN means that the action is on track and should be completed by the target date AMBER means there is a possibility of some slippage but the issues are being dealt with RED means that it is not considered feasible to meet the completion date Please note that the budget allocation for Behavioural Change activities as highlighted in the first progress report has now been removed from the above table. Behaviour change activities are still underway (see Behaviour change section ) but the small expenditures relating to this are being funded via the Salix management fund and not the 250k as originally allotted for the enabling works. This does not affect our progress against the required outcomes for the Executive board who agreed to provide the funding on the basis for further developing strategic option B Energy efficiency and renewables. Gavin Hodgson Page 9 of 9

10 4.2. Project progress reports Further information on each of the planned enabling activities is provided below: Project 1: Financial and Carbon Management Project aim CEDAR Job No: YAAA/CCA/FA RAG Status The aim of this project is to purchase and commission new energy management software to enable correct financial management and reporting of carbon emissions. Project overview The existing AES energy tracker software offered reasonable ability to undertake financial accounting; however it does not offer the necessary functionality to track progress in reducing our carbon emissions. For this reason further work has not been undertaken in implementing financial management and reporting of utility bills until a new software package has been installed. Several software providers have been consulted including RUMM, Siemens, Greenstone, Trend, IMServ, TEAM and Optima. TEAM and Optima software solutions contain the necessary functionality including: Electronic billing (EDI), ability to model the future impact of changes to building stock and delivery of energy efficiency improvements, custom reporting and exceptions management. The reporting functions and ability to model future changes in the Optima Energy solution are superior, so this is the solution which has been procured. Moving to EDI is something not presently offered by our current system, it has the key advantage of us being able to receive invoices up to one month in advance of the existing paper based system. EDI will also reduce data entry effort to an absolute minimum and remove any risk of typographic errors in transposing information from paper bills. Electronic billing information can also be used to historically populate the system, saving several weeks of data entry work. Done: Evaluated all software providers and have tentatively decided on Optima Energy Management Suite. Initial discussion on how electronic billing will function between directorates (Gavin, Geoff Handley and David Warrack). Purchase software package Pre-install meeting with staff involved (e.g. systems team, NLTB project team, OBIS systems team and finance & legal services) Define management procedures To do: Software is now available to Brookes and is presently being populated this is expected to take another 4-8 weeks before the system is fully operational. Training (provided in-house as a part of the software purchase) Gavin Hodgson Page 10 of 10

11 Key contacts Risks/Issues Project Sponsor: Gavin Hodgson Project Manager: Gavin Hodgson Delivery team/consultant: Optima Energy Rollout timescale is reliant upon AMR (Project 2) and associated constraints. Project duration 8 months (April Nov 2012) Budget allocation 25.5k Project 2: Metering and Energy Display Project aim CEDAR Job No: YAAA/CCA/FA RAG Status Re-commissioning of the existing system as appropriate and further rollout of automatic metering at building level to allow for improved management and targeting. Automatic metering at building level is a key component to allow live energy information to be provided to building occupants as stated in Oxford Brookes Energy Strategy. Project overview AMR system contract is to be awarded to Siemens. The delivery will consist for two phases: Phase 1: AMR to be specified to all fiscal gas and electric meters. Phase 2: AMR will be specified to all buildings over 1,000m 2 excluding Wheatley. AMR on our water meters has not been progressed; this is partly due to funding constraints and also the fact that Thames Water will not support the attachment of AMR to its meters (they also have their own compulsory AMR rollout to be completed by 2020). Project scope was also amended so that only buildings over 1,000m 2 are covered for phase 2 and that Wheatley will not receive sub-metering of buildings. A threshold of 1,000m 2 was decided upon because this assists with the production of display energy certificates. This package is sufficient to provide the required level of carbon and financial management, but the rollout of further AMR to cover the remaining buildings will be proposed within investment grade proposal. Done: Existing AMR coverage has been mapped. Contacted British Gas and SSE regarding ability to bill at building level. Have held meeting with ESTA approved meter installers: Schneider, Gazprom,Trend, Bglobal, IMServ and Siemens regarding AMR to help define tender spec. To do: Delivery of Phase 2. Gavin Hodgson Page 11 of 11

12 Define whether AMR should be processed through BMS or separate. Check licence conditions requiring utility suppliers to provide smart meters by Define tender specifications for further roll out of AMR (Phased inline with Estates Strategy). Prioritise buildings what are more likely to be high energy users. Work out internal capacity to deliver energy information displays and which format this should be in (physical delivery of energy displays is not part of the enabling works, but needs to be considered at this stage). Contract agreed with Siemens Internal management and delivery of project defined. Phase 1 of AMR rollout complete. Key contacts Project Sponsor: Paul Cross Project Manager: Gavin Hodgson Delivery team/consultant: Siemens and Property Services (as defined by Colin Stocker) Risks/Issues Potential disruption to building users Project duration February to November Budget allocation 92k Project 3: Surveying and Analysis CEDAR Job No: Project aim QADU/ASZN RAG Status Detailed surveying of the energy efficiency of our existing buildings and the analysis of the improvement options available to Brookes is required for an investment grade audit to be prepared. Project overview SKM Enviros has been employed via the Carbon Trust to undertake surveying and analysis of all buildings (except those presently at risk due to the estates strategy). A project website has been established which contains CAD Drawings, consumption data, operational records etc for each building. SKM Enviros then undertakes an energy audit survey of the building and using a combination of the data collected produces an energy model which is then validated against the metered data. This is then reviewed with Oxford Brookes and improvement options selected for more detailed analysis and included for costing within the investment grade report. The software being used is IES dynamic simulation software; this is an upgrade from the originally planned adoption of SBEM software so that students can learn and utilise the energy models created. Gavin Hodgson Page 12 of 12

13 In addition to the SKM Enviros the following feasibility studies have also been procured: o Logan Energy regarding the deployment of a fuel cell combined heat and power system (the cost of the feasibility study is included within the budget figure). A fuel cell CHP system is a high CAPEX, low OPEX solution but is a potentially viable way of producing low carbon electricity locally. California State University is presently operating a similar fuel cell unit. o Full review of all systems and management practices in place to enable an ongoing programme of continuous commissioning to be delivered. Done: Investigated whether our own surveys or energy performance contracting is the most appropriate way forward. Produced first draft of survey and analysis requirements. Discussed survey requirements with property services and School of Built Environment. Finalised tender specification with purchasing team. Define procurement route (e.g. Carbon Trust) Appoint consultant Define modelling software Project website established an populated Produce energy models of all buildings Completed additional feasibility studies fuel cell and continuous commissioning. Key contacts Project Sponsor: Paul Cross Project Manager: Gavin Hodgson Delivery team/consultants: To do: Review by EPSG and submission for funding Look at alternative funding options including ESCOs. Publish action plan and make data available for students o SKM Enviros o Logan Energy (fuel cell) o Ecotec (heat pump hot water) o ABS consulting (continuous commissioning) Risks/Issues Timescale for delivery are short Quality of work provided by the consultants employed (risk is being mitigated by regular reviews at key stages and clear requirements within the tender) Project duration August 2011 to October 2012 Budget allocation 126k Project 4: Behavioural Change CEDAR Job No: Project aim N/A RAG Status Undertake audit and awareness raising exercise to enable development of an ongoing programme of behavioural change based onto the traits of staff and students. Gavin Hodgson Page 13 of 13

14 Project overview Behavioural change activities are now being delivered outside of the 250k enabling works budget (any small budgetary requirements will be met using the Salix management funds where available). As a result of last year s Climate Week it was decided to predominantly focus this year s activities on staff and also pilot an online e-learning tool which has been successful at other universities (e.g. Imperial College London). The Climate Week survey e-learning tool was designed to meet the following aims: Undertake initial engagement with staff and find out how they would like to be engaged/approached Enable communication pathways - staff are aware of what we are doing and know where to go for assistance Staff know what they can do to help reduce carbon emissions and what the responsibilities are Gather information on opportunities Provide baseline data to inform progression against the universities aims and help shape a programme of behavioural change over coming years. A total of 261 people tried the e-learning tool and provided responses to our questionnaire. The data is still to be analysed, but the initial feedback is that staff and students at Brookes feel that you are responsible in their use of energy. They would also like an e-learning tool such as the one provided, but that they need a much greater level of detail for it to be useful - this is a contract to the experience at Imperial College London where more generic advice was requested. Student Switch-Off was successfully completed for FY 2011/12 and is predicted to have reduced electricity use in halls by 1.8% - the student switch-off campaign is being run again within this financial year. Done: Held initial meeting within internal staff and Sheri-Leigh Miles Initial concept of audit and awareness raising campaign has been defined. Have decided to progress with Student- Switch off for 11/12 academic year. Undertaken climate week and student switch off activities in 2012 Key contacts Project Sponsor: Paul Cross Project Manager: Gavin Hodgson Delivery team/consultant: N/A Risks/Issues No risks identified at present. Project duration Ongoing Budget allocation 0k To do: Define action plan for delivering energy information to students (including involvement of students) now that automatic metering is operational. Develop plans for Climate week 2013 Support activity and delivery of Student Switch-off Project 5: Renewables CEDAR Job No: Project aim TBC RAG Status Gavin Hodgson Page 14 of 14

15 Define feasibility of large scale wind at Harcourt and assessment of the large scale rollout of photovoltaics. Project overview Initial feasibility study was completed on the potential rollout of photovoltaics(pv), but the recent review of the Governments Feed in Tariffs (FITs) has meant that wide scale deployment of PV at Brookes is now only likely to be financially feasible for circa 3x50kWp arrays. Further analysis of the applicability of PV will be included in 3. Surveying and Analysis because PV of this size can now be considered to be building integrated. Partnership for Renewables also assessed the potential for large scale wind at Harcourt. At the time they advised that 2 turbines should be acceptable to the MoD at Brize Norton and Benson. It is not unusual for radar operators to accept a few machines. However more recent experience shows that in this area they will not accept any turbines if they are visible to these radars. Earlier studies show that these radars can see down to about 20m+/- 10m above the ground level at Harcourt Hill and so the project originally proposed by Partnership for Renewables is now no longer feasible. Enabling works funds were used to undertake a trial of two innovative integrated heat pump hot water systems which can be potentially used to directly replace all existing electric hot water tanks. Monitoring data is still being gathered. Done: Provellio PV feasibility assessment completed. Contact made with Partnership for Renewables regarding feasibility of wind turbines at Harcourt. PV and other renewable technologies will be considered at the building level within 3.Surveying and Analysis. Key contacts N/A To do: Review monitored data for trial of two heat pump systems. Risks/Issues N/A Project duration N/A Budget allocation 6k Gavin Hodgson Page 15 of 15

16 Appendix The reader may find the following notes of use. All emissions shown within this report have been calculated using the HEFCE reporting methodology (as per the universities Low Carbon Transition Plan). The emissions cover the bulk of our scope 1 and 2 emissions resulting from the operation of our residential and academic buildings (some small properties are omitted). The figures provided are presently sourced from our HECM6 baseline tool. Because our emissions have remained very stable since 2005, we use the 2009/10 CO 2 emissions figures as our baseline. Emission factors of the fuels covered in this report are based upon DECC figures (Gross basis), different emission factors have been used for each year as appropriate. Emission factors being used for the present year are: o Mains Gas: kgco 2 per kwh o Electricity: kgco 2 per kwh Scope 3 emissions factors used are from DEFRA Guidance 4 : o Water: 0.34 kgco 2 per m 3 (supply) and 0.7kgCO 2 per m 3 (treatment) o Waste: see table on page pdf Gavin Hodgson Page 16 of 16