OFCOM Final report. Carbon Audit 2012/2013. [Type text]

Transcription

1 OFCOM Final report Carbon Audit 212/213 [Type text]

2 Disclaimer Best Foot Forward has prepared this report for the sole use of the client and for the intended purposes as stated in the agreement between Best Foot Forward and the client under which this report was completed. Best Foot Forward has exercised due and customary care in preparing this report but has not, save as specifically stated, independently verified information provided by others. No other warranty, express or implied, is made in relation to the contents of this report. The use of this report, or reliance on its content, by unauthorised third parties without written permission from Best Foot Forward shall be at their own risk, and Best Foot Forward accepts no duty of care to such third parties. Any recommendations, opinions or findings stated in this report are based on facts and circumstances as they existed at the time the report was prepared. Any changes in such facts and circumstances may adversely affect the recommendations, opinions or findings contained in this report. Best Foot Forward, 213

3 OFCOM Carbon Audit 212/213 Prepared for: Ofcom Riverside House 2a Southwark Bridge Road London SE1 9HA Amanda Chow amanda.chow@ofcom.org.uk Website: Tel: Prepared by: Best Foot Forward Ltd. The Future Centre, 9 Newtec Place, Magdalen Road, Oxford, OX4 1RE mail@bestfootforward.com Quality Assurance Analysis: Kevin Lewis 24 th July 213 Report: Bethany Field 24 th July 213 Client comments incorporated: 21/8/213 Report approved by: Signature Best Foot Forward, 213

4 BEST FOOT FORWARD Best Foot Forward (BFF) is an award-winning sustainability consultancy which specialises in carbon and ecological footprinting. The company offers advice on sustainability metrics, software solutions, strategy and communications. It helps organisations to cost-effectively reduce their environmental impact in a world of limited resources. Best Foot Forward has been leading international developments in footprinting methodologies and tools since The core textbook on ecological footprinting, 'Sharing Nature's Interest', was co-written by the company s founders and its team advised on the development of PAS25, as well as several protocols from the World Resources Institute and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development. Best Foot Forward has unrivalled experience, having helped hundreds of clients spanning government bodies, multinational corporations, SMEs and the third sector. It has calculated thousands of footprints for products, organisations, regions and events, from carrots to county councils, from wine bottles to Wimbledon. The company s mission is to help organisations, regions and communities to reduce their footprint. In 212, it was awarded the Environment Product/Service Award at the Environment and Energy Awards for its Product Portfolio Footprinting service, which helps multinational corporations to tackle their supply chain footprint. Best Foot Forward, 213

5 tco2e Executive summary This report estimates the GHG emissions of Ofcom s operations in the financial year 212/13. A comparison is provided with the results of past audits as well as the initial baseline (26/7) to determine whether the organisation has met its reduction target of 25% over the period. Key results: In the 212/13 financial year Ofcom s greenhouse gas emissions were equivalent to 3,878 tco2e. This includes annually recurring emissions as well as emissions from one-off purchases occurring in the financial year but which vary between years. The annually recurring emissions account for 3,546 tco 2 e (91% of the total emissions) while the one-off emissions account for 332 tco 2 e or 9% of the total emissions. Figure: Breakdown of GHG emissions for FY 212/13 Utilities 43% Publications <1% Off Site Servers 7% Waste 1% One-off 8% Stationery 1% Food and drinks 1% Refrigerants <1% Capital Purchases 5% Commuting 18% Business Travel 12% Computing Materials 3% Furniture <1% Compared to the baseline (26/7) emissions in 212/13 were lowered by 3%. They were reduced from 5,525 tco2e to 3,878 tco2e. More importantly annually recurring emissions have been reduced by 31% to 3,546 tco2e. This means that Ofcom has exceeded its carbon reduction target. Figure: Presentation of carbon reduction successes against the baseline 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 One-off Refrigerants Food and drinks Stationery Publications Waste Off Site Servers Utilities Commuting Business Travel Best Foot Forward, 213

6 tco2e Key successes: The greatest contribution to the overall emissions reductions was achieved by reducing the energy consumption at Ofcom s premises - over the study period the reduction achieved was 38% (1 tco2e). Reducing the energy consumption of off-site servers was also important (4 tco2e) in addition to the emissions of business travel (27 tco2e). Proportionally the largest reduction in emissions was achieved in publications (96%), stationery (67%), drinks (58%) and business travel (36%). Key challenges: Of all the analysed emissions sources it is clear that commuting and waste were the greatest challenges to reduce and they both increased since the base year. Presentation of carbon reduction successes against the baseline , -1,2 Annually recurring emissions One-off emissions Key recommendations: 1. Best Foot Forward recommends Ofcom should assess the GHG emissions reduction potential that can be achieved in the next 3 years and evaluate the costs savings of different options. Best Foot Forward can support Ofcom to adopt cost-effective reduction options and thus build a business case for carbon management; especially because future reductions can be much more difficult to achieve. 2. The reduction opportunities should focus on where the biggest wins can be made; although waste and commuting are challenge areas they may not present the biggest wins and there may be further opportunities to reduce utilities for example. This can be decided in further more in-depth work on evaluating reduction opportunities, both in terms of feasibility and cost savings; and also evaluation of behaviour change in the office environment. 3. Evaluation of reduction opportunities can also be used to inform and set future reduction targets (e.g. by 22) which can be further monitored against a new baseline set using data from the 212/13 audit. 4. Innovation analysis researching current best practice within similar organisations to understand where the biggest wins could be; in the context of the hot spots and successes highlighted in this report and further reduction opportunities identified. Assessment of innovations should include analysis of return on investment. 5. Finally, we recommend Ofcom should begin to explore use of other environmental metrics (e.g. water) and incorporate them into a comprehensive environmental strategy. Best Foot Forward, 213

7 Table of contents 1 Introduction Methodology Carbon Footprint Scope and boundaries of the study Variability in factors over the period of the Ofcom carbon strategy Results Overview Comparison against base year and interim audit Carbon reductions against the baseline Comparison across individual categories Data Quality Emissions categories Recommendations and next steps Data Data quality Benchmarking study Utilities benchmark Waste benchmark Appendix A: Definition of emissions scopes Appendix B: Input Data and Assumptions Best Foot Forward, 213

8 Table of figures Figure 1: Variability in transport GHG emission factors... 4 Figure 2: Breakdown of GHG emissions FY 212/ Figure 3 Breakdown of GHG emissions FY 212/13 by scope... 7 Figure 4: Breakdown of GHG emissions across study years... 8 Figure 5: Breakdown of GHG emissions per FTE across study years... 8 Figure 6: % reduction in CO2e per FTE... 8 Figure 7: Presentation of carbon reduction successes against the baseline... 9 Figure 8: Breakdown of GHG emission sources across years... 1 Figure 9: Breakdown of business travel CO 2 e emissions over the analysed period Figure 1: Breakdown of commuting distances for different modes of transport Figure 11: Breakdown of utilities CO 2 e emissions for FY212/ Figure 12: Breakdown of electricity consumption for each office over the analysed period Figure 13: Electricity consumption per m2 of floor area for the latest financial year Figure 14: Gas consumption for each office in over the analysed period Figure 15: Gas consumption per m2 floor area for FY212/ Figure 16: Breakdown of waste data consumption for the latest financial year Figure 17: GHG emissions from publications Figure 18: GHG emissions from stationery over the period... 2 Figure 19: Riverside House GHG emissions from stationery over the period... 2 Figure 2: GHG emissions from drinks for the assessed periods Figure 21: GHG emissions from computing equipment analysed years Figure 22: GHG emissions from furniture for over the period Figure 23: Benchmarking of GHG emissions of utilities (in tco2e) per m2 of office space Figure 24: Benchmark of water use (in litres) per staff member Figure 25: Benchmarking of waste produced per headcount Table of tables Table 1: Emissions sources... 3 Table 2: Variability in electricity emission factors... 4 Table 3: Ofcom annual GHG emissions for FY212/ Table 4: Ofcom annual GHG emissions for FY212/13 by scope... 6 Table 5: Comparison of Ofcom s GHG emissions over the assessment period... 7 Table 6: Detailed results of reductions achieved over the assessment period... 9 Table 7: Comparison of business travel carbon footprint Table 8: Comparison of commuting carbon footprint Table 9: Comparison of commuting carbon footprint (cont.) Table 1: Comparison of utilities carbon footprint Table 11: Comparison of off-site server carbon footprint Table 12: Comparison of waste carbon footprint Table 13: Comparison of publications carbon footprint Table 14: Comparison of stationery carbon footprints Table 15: Comparison of drinks carbon footprint... 2 Table 16: Carbon footprint of capital purchases in the latest financial year Table 17: Comparison of computing equipment carbon footprint Table 18: Furniture carbon footprint Table 19: Data gaps and proxies Best Foot Forward, 213

9 1 Best Foot Forward, 213

10 1 Introduction Ofcom is the independent regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries. Ofcom is dedicated to understanding the impact of its operations on the environment and as such measured a baseline carbon footprint in 26/7 and set reduction targets to be achieved by March 213. Ofcom has commissioned this footprint report to assess the carbon footprint of the organisation for the financial year April 212 to March 213 and to compare results with the baseline year in order to determine whether Ofcom has met its 25% reduction commitment. The study shows where the most significant reductions have occurred and identifies the organisation s hotspots. The results of the exercise can help guide further reduction measures. 2 Best Foot Forward, 213

11 2 Methodology 2.1 Carbon Footprint This carbon footprint is the result of an analysis which measures the GHG emissions associated with Ofcom s organisational activity. GHG emissions occur during the everyday operations of an organisation, business or enterprise; and include energy use, material flows, and transportation to and from the workplace. The emissions from products, also called embodied carbon, refer to the amount of GHG produced in the manufacture and supply of the product to the point of use. Individual or household emissions refer to the GHG generated by the daily lives of people. The shorthand term carbon footprint originates from the fact that CO 2, released primarily from fossil fuel burning (oil, diesel, petrol, coal, natural gas, etc.), makes up the bulk of most GHG analyses (8% of total EU GHG emissions in 2 1 ) and is the main contributor to global climate change. Increasingly new research is allowing footprint studies to include the impact of other GHG, such as CH 4 and N 2 O, which have higher global warming potentials (GWP) than CO 2 and therefore contribute significantly to climate change, even if emitted in small quantities. This study includes the impacts of GHG other than CO 2, and so CO 2 e units are used throughout this report. 2.2 Scope and boundaries of the study This study focuses on the greenhouse gas emissions associated with Ofcom s operational activities over the financial year 212/13 for eight Ofcom offices throughout United Kingdom. The organisational boundary therefore covers the organisation s head office, Riverside House, in London and its regional offices (Baldock, Belfast, Birmingham, Cardiff, Glasgow, Haydock, Project Park 2 ). The key emissions sources analysed in this study are presented in the table below. Table 1: Emissions sources 1. Annual recurring emissions sources 2. One-off emissions sources Utilities Capital purchases Off-site servers Computing materials Business travel Furniture Commuting Waste Publications Stationery Drinks Refrigerant and other gases The study covers all scope 1 and 2 emissions and a selection of scope 3 emissions as defined by the GHG Protocol. See Appendix for description of scope categories. 2.3 Variability in factors over the period of the Ofcom carbon strategy Emission factors for a number of emissions sources, such as electricity, fuels and modes of transport are published on an annual basis by Defra/DECC for the purposes of reporting greenhouse gas A number of offices included in the previous assessments including the baseline exercise have been closed. 3 Best Foot Forward, 213

12 kgco2e/km* emissions. These factors change over time and are out of Ofcom s direct control, but do have an effect upon the trend in Ofcom s carbon footprint. For example, the composition of the UK s mains electricity generation capacity changes over time, as new capacity comes on stream and old power plants are decommissioned. Table 2 shows the electricity emission factors used in the four carbon audits conducted for Ofcom. The reduction in GHG emissions associated with electricity consumption between the base year and 212/13 was due to both a reduction in the consumption and a reduction in the emissions per kwh for the UK. Table 2: Variability in electricity emission factors Electricity kgco2e/kwh 26/ / / / Figure 1 shows the variation in a selection of transport emission factors since the first Ofcom carbon audit in 26/7. The average car emission factor has not changed significantly as the composition of car size and type on the UK roads has not been changed drastically. The rail travel carbon footprint has been fairly stagnant. The emissions associated with short haul flights decreased significantly between 26/7 and the 28/9 audit. This was due to changed methodology and improved occupancy rates amongst budget airlines and a general improvement in the fleet efficiency. Figure 1: Variability in transport GHG emission factors /7.1 28/9.5 21/11 212/13. Average Car Rail Domestic Flights Short Haul Flights Long Haul Flights Tube *Average Car vehicle km, others passenger km 4 Best Foot Forward, 213

13 3 Results 3.1 Overview Over the financial year 212/13 Ofcom s greenhouse gas emissions generated 3,878 tco2e. The annually recurring emissions alone accounted for 3,546 tco 2 e or 91% of the total emissions, while one-off purchases occurring in the financial year contribute the remaining 9%. In the financial year 212/13, Ofcom s greenhouse gas emissions were equivalent to 3,878 tco2e. The carbon footprint is split into the annual recurring emissions and the emissions from one-off purchases occurring in the financial year studied but vary between years. The annually recurring emissions account for 3,546 tco 2 e (91% of the total emissions) while the one-off emissions account for 332 tco 2 e or 9% of the total emissions. Table 3 and Figure 2 provide a further breakdown of the emission sources for the FY 212/13. The majority of the Ofcom carbon footprint (43% of the total) is attributed to utilities, which includes electricity, gas, oil and water consumption. Travel covering commuting and business travel is the second largest source of emissions accounting for 3% of the total. Waste accounts for 1% of the total and off-site servers for 7%. Other emissions sources including purchased goods are responsible for less than 5% of emissions. Table 3: Ofcom annual GHG emissions for FY212/13 Normalised GHG Total GHG emissions emissions tco2e % kgco2e/fte Total 3,878 1% 4,958 Annual Recurring Sub Total 3,546 91% 4,533 Business Travel 48 12% 614 Commuting % 884 Utilities 1,66 43% 2,122 Off-site servers 265 7% 338 Waste 379 1% 484 Publications 3.1% 4 Stationery 31 1% 4 Food and drinks 25 <1% 32 Refrigerants 13 <1% 16 One-off activities Sub Total 332 9% 424 Capital Purchases 2 5% 256 Computing Materials 122 3% 156 Furniture 1 <1% 13 5 Best Foot Forward, 213

14 Figure 2: Breakdown of GHG emissions FY 212/13 Utilities 43% Publications <1% Off Site Servers 7% Waste 1% One-off 8% Stationery 1% Food and drinks 1% Refrigerants <1% Capital Purchases 5% Commuting 18% Business Travel 12% Computing Materials 3% Furniture <1% Table 4 and Figure 3 provide a breakdown of absolute emissions by scope according to the scopes defined by the GHG Protocol. Scope 1 includes direct emissions controlled by Ofcom; Scope 2 includes purchased electricity; and Scope 3 includes all other supply chain emissions that are not direct emissions but relate to purchases and services acquired. Table 4: Ofcom annual GHG emissions for FY212/13 by scope tco2e % Total 3,878 1% Total Scope % Gas consumption 21 5% Oil consumption 23 1% Owned transport 211 5% Process emissions % Fugitive emissions 12.6 % Total Scope 2 1,426 37% Purchased electricity 1,426 37% Total Scope 3 2,4 52% Business Travel 269 7% Commuting % Off site server electricity 265 7% Waste 379 1% Capital Purchases 2 5% Computing equipment 122 3% Furniture 1 % Drinks 25 1% Stationery 31 1% Publications 3 % Water 1 % 6 Best Foot Forward, 213

15 t CO2e Figure 3 Breakdown of GHG emissions FY 212/13 by scope 4,5 4, 3,5 3, 2,5 2, 1,5 Scope 3 Scope 2 Scope 1 1, 5 FY: 212/ Comparison against base year and interim audit From 26/7 to 212/13 GHG emissions were reduced by 3% from 5,525 tco2e to 3,878 tco2e. Annually recurring emissions have been reduced by 31% to 3,546 tco2e. This indicates that Ofcom has exceeded its carbon reduction target. Compared to the baseline (26/7) emissions in 212/13 were lowered by 3%. They were reduced from 5,525 tco2e to 3,878 tco2e. More importantly annually recurring emissions have been reduced by 31% to 3,546 tco2e. This means that Ofcom has exceeded its carbon reduction target. Table 5 shows Ofcom s annual greenhouse gas emissions for all years when the audits were performed. Figure 4 shows the breakdown of the greenhouse gas emissions for the four study years. The chart highlights the gradual reduction in total organisational carbon footprint. Table 5: Comparison of Ofcom s GHG emissions over the assessment period Carbon Footprint FY 26/7 7 Best Foot Forward, 213 Compared to the baseline (baseline) FY 28/9 FY 21/11 FY 212/13 tco2e tco2e tco2e tco2e % Total 5,525 4,716 4,368 3,878-3% Annually recurring 5,163 4,524 4,149 3,546-31% Business Travel % Commuting % Utilities 2,668 2,84 2,44 1,66-38% Off-site Servers % Waste % Publications % Stationery % Drinks % Refrigerants % Other Gases <.1 < One-off activities % Capital Purchases % Computing Materials % Furniture %

16 % tco2e/fte tco2e Figure 4: Breakdown of GHG emissions across study years 6, 31% reduction in recurring emissions 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, One-off Refrigerants Food and drinks Stationery Publications Waste Off Site Servers Utilities Commuting Business Travel 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Figure 5 presents GHG emissions per FTE which also indicate emissions reduction over the period. The reductions achieved since the baseline are presented in Figure 6 and stand at 28%. Figure 5: Breakdown of GHG emissions per FTE across study years /7 28/9 21/11 212/13 One-off Refrigerants & other gases Food and drinks Stationery Publications Waste Off Site Servers Utilities Commuting Business Travel Figure 6: % reduction in CO2e per FTE Carbon footprint per FTE /7 28/9 21/11 212/13 8 Best Foot Forward, 213

17 tco2e 3.3 Carbon reductions against the baseline Over the assessed period emissions reductions were achieved across all annually recurring emissions sources except commuting and waste. The greatest reductions were achieved in utilities, off-site servers and business travel. Figure 7 and Table 6 present the total carbon emissions reductions that were achieved over the assessment period. Emissions were reduced across a majority of emissions sources which demonstrates a significant organisational effort at reducing environmental impact. Figure 7: Presentation of carbon reduction successes against the baseline , -1,2 Annually recurring emissions One-off emissions The greatest contribution to the overall emissions reductions was achieved by reducing the energy consumption at Ofcom s premises - over the study period the reduction achieved was 38% (1 tco2e). Reducing the energy consumption of off-site servers was also important (4 tco2e) in addition to the emissions of business travel (27 tco2e). Proportionally the largest reduction in emissions was achieved in publications (96%), stationery (67%), drinks (58%) and business travel (36%). Of all the analysed emissions sources it is clear that refrigerant, commuting and waste were the greatest challenges to reduce and they increased since the base year. Table 6: Detailed results of reductions achieved over the assessment period Reduction (%) compared to the baseline tco2e % Total Annually recurring emissions Business Travel Commuting Utilities Off-site servers Waste Publications 6-96 Stationery Drinks Best Foot Forward, 213

18 tco2e Refrigerants -12 6,391 One-off emissions 3-8 Capital Purchases Computing Materials Furniture Figure 8 shows the breakdown of the greenhouse gas emissions for the four study years. The majority of reductions were achieved by reducing the energy consumption (utilities). Figure 8: Breakdown of GHG emission sources across years 3, 2,5 2, 1,5 1, 5 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 It is important to note that the commuting data for the base year and the financial year 28/9 were taken from surveys conducted by Transport for London (TFL) which did not give specific journey distances; rather it was based on journey time. It has been assumed that commuting patterns are unlikely to have changed significantly since the 28/9 audit therefore the 28/9 data has been used and scaled for the staff numbers in 212/13. In the following chapters more detailed results are provided for individual categories. 3.4 Comparison across individual categories Business Travel Business travel was responsible for 48 tco2e or 12% of overall carbon footprint in the financial year 212/13. Compared to 26/7 emissions were reduced by 36%. Emissions reductions were achieved across all business travel categories bar car travel, which increased by 4%. The majority of overall reduction emissions of this component were due to a 39% reduction in fleet fuel emissions and a reduction in flight emissions. For example over the period a 31% and 54% reduction in combined domestic - short haul flight 3 and long haul flight emissions was achieved, respectively. Table 7 and Figure 9 provide more detail on the business travel footprint. 3 Domestic and short haul flights were combined as it was not possible to separate these in the base year assessment. 1 Best Foot Forward, 213

19 tco2e The emissions from the fleet fuel and flight emissions were achieved through the following measures: Purchase of a new greener car fleet - Spectrum Engineering and Enforcement. Upgrading video conferencing equipment to connect Riverside House with national and regional offices with an aim to reduce business travel. Enforcement of policies to ensure that business travel is only undertaken where necessary and is carried out in a co-ordinated manner. Ofcom s expenses policy states that colleagues must consider cost and carbon footprint by evaluating the need to travel and also the potential of using other less expensive and lower carbon travel alternatives such as , audio or video conferencing. Air travel around the UK is not permitted if train is an available option and is a more appropriate method of travel. Table 7: Comparison of business travel carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e % diff Car 338, , , , % Rail 414, , , , % Taxi 78, , , , % Domestic & Short Haul Flights 1,19, ,354, , ,146, % Long Haul Flights 1,79, ,594, , , % Fleet Fuel 13, , , , % Total 3,232, ,795, ,176, ,36, % Figure 9: Breakdown of business travel CO 2 e emissions over the analysed period /7 28/9 21/11 212/13 5 Car Rail Taxi Domestic & Short Haul Flights Long Haul Flights Fleet Fuel Commuting Commuting accounted for 691 tco2e (18% of the overall carbon footprint) in the financial year 212/13. This represents an increase in carbon footprint of 6% compared to the baseline. Over the period there has been a slight increase in the emissions from all modes of transport (see Table 8). The exception is train travel - by far the largest source of emissions - which increased significantly by 45% while car travel experienced a 6% emissions reduction over the period. A note worth considering is tube travel which has experienced a 15% increase in the distance travelled but the emissions have increased by 58%. This is attributed to the increase in the London Underground emission factor which has increased from.53kgco 2 e in 26/7 to.72kgco 2 e in 212/ Best Foot Forward, 213

20 km Although overall emissions have increased due to increases in distances travelled; there have been successes through an increase in cycling and walking to work and a reduction in travel by car. This has been achieved through: Provision of extensive cycling facilities for colleagues to promote sustainable commuting secure cycle racks, changing rooms, lockers, shower facilities and cycle maintenance equipment. Working closely with Better Bankside, a local organisation which has conducted a number of bespoke bike repair workshops for colleagues. On-going communications to colleagues to promote walking and cycling to work. Table 8: Comparison of commuting carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e Car (veh-km) 1,196, , , ,72 94 Motorbike (vehkm) 365, , , ,35 46 Train (Pass-km) 5,163, ,194, ,913, ,474, Tube (Pass-km) 1,17, ,4,9 11 1,352, ,277, Bus (Pass-km) 234, , , , Walk (km) 371, , ,837-59,499 Cycle (km) 221,23-492, , ,474 Total Table 9: Comparison of commuting carbon footprint (cont.) Change (%) GHG emissions Distance travelled Car (veh-km) -62% -6% Motorbike (veh-km) 172% 138% Train (Pass-km) 4% 45% Tube (Pass-km) 58% 15% Bus (Pass-km) 27% -8% Walk (km) 37% Cycle (km) 13% Total -6 Figure 1: Breakdown of commuting distances for different modes of transport 9,, 8,, 7,, 6,, 5,, 4,, 3,, 2,, 1,, Car (veh-km) Motorbike (vehkm) Train (Pass-km) Tube (Pass-km) Bus (Pass-km) Walk (km) Cycle (km) 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 As stated previously, it is important to note that the commuting data were taken from surveys conducted by TFL which did not give specific journey distances; rather it was based on journey time. It has been assumed that commuting patterns are unlikely to have changed significantly since the 12 Best Foot Forward, 213

21 28/9 when the survey was updated for the last time and therefore this data has been used and scaled for the staff numbers in 212/13. For future performance measurement it is recommended that a dedicated commuting survey is conducted as it can enable much more precise measurement of reductions Utilities The utilities were the biggest source of emissions in the financial year 212/13 contributing 42% of the total (1,659 tco2e). Over the period, emissions have been reduced by 38%. The utilities comprise electricity, gas, oil and water consumption. Table 1 shows the contribution of each emissions source to the total. Reductions have been achieved across all categories, but the greatest contribution to overall reduction is down to reduced emissions from electricity which were reduced by 4% over the period. Reductions in emissions from utilities have been achieved through the following initiatives: Monitoring of Riverside House energy data to inform optimal settings e.g. monitoring and adjusting temperature set points in summer and winter. A number of low cost measures to optimize and reduce energy consumption within Riverside House including: solar reflective film being fitted onto the windows of the building and installing motion sensors to control electric lighting, introducing daylight dimming on perimeter lighting, installing e-cubes into refrigerators, new doors within the Reception area at Riverside House to conserve heat, replacing the cooling system in the computer room at Riverside House with evaporative cooling, installing a heat retaining lining onto ceiling tiles, optimising the fans, motors and variable speed drives of our Air Handling Units. Installation of two voltage optimisers at Riverside House. Housekeeping rules provided to regional offices to reduce energy consumption. Figure 11: Breakdown of utilities CO 2 e emissions for FY212/13 Oil Water Gas 1% 1% 12% Electricity 86% Table 1: Comparison of utilities carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e Water (m3) 12, , , ,454 1 Electricity (kwh) 4,452,692 2,389 3,388,264 1,844 3,367,857 1,767 2,74,553 1,426 Gas (kwh) 1,136, , ,185, , Oil (litres) 12, 34 13, , ,5 23 Total 2,668 2,84 2,44 1, Best Foot Forward, 213

22 kwh/m2 kwh Electricity Table 1: Comparison of utilities carbon footprint (cont.) % Change Water (m3) -1% Electricity (kwh) -4% Gas (kwh) -14% Oil (litres) -33% Total -38% Figure 12 highlights the electricity consumption. Riverside House (Ofcom s headqurters) has the most significant electricity consumption compared to other offices. Figure 12: Breakdown of electricity consumption for each office over the analysed period 4,, 3,5, 3,, 2,5, 2,, 1,5, 1,, 5, 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Figure 13: Electricity consumption per m2 of floor area for the latest financial year Figure 14 shows the gas consumption for each of the offices for each study year and Figure 15 shows the gas consumption per m 2 for the current study year. 14 Best Foot Forward, 213

23 kwh/m2 kwh Gas Figure 14: Gas consumption for each office in over the analysed period 1,, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Figure 15: Gas consumption per m2 floor area for FY212/ Belfast Birmingham Haydock Riverside House The data for electricity, gas and oil consumption was complete for all offices and no extrapolation was required Off-site servers In the financial year 212/13 the carbon emissions from off-site servers were 265 tco2e. A reduction of 61% has been achieved over the analysed period. The reduction in emissions from the servers is due to a rationalisation exercise which reduced the number of servers by 57% and also replaced older servers with newer and more energy efficient servers. Energy consumption of off-site servers is presented in the Table Best Foot Forward, 213

24 Table 11: Comparison of off-site server carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e Input tco2e % Change London City 4, , , Toltech 535, , , Sungard 259, , , Telstra 9, ,986 5 Ultima 45, , Woking 247, Hatton Cross 261, Total 1,251, ,2, ,61, , % Waste Waste emissions stood at 486 tco2e in the financial year 212/13. This represents a 88% increase over the baseline. In 212/13 the majority waste arose at Riverside House Office (84% of the total). Over the period waste has increased significantly. For example increase in the quantity of waste generated at Riverside House increased from 47.5 tonnes to 164 tonnes. Waste is traditionally difficult to collect and over the years Ofcom has made a significant progress to maximise data accuracy by developing detailed waste survey system for use at each of its sites. An improved data collection process can be to an extent explain an increase in reported emissions. In response to the waste impact, Ofcom has introduced a No waste to landfill policy in Riverside House; and enforces recycling of paper, cardboard, cans, plastics, glass, batteries, toners and CDs. All disposal of IT equipment complies with the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive (WEEE). Therefore although waste has increased; the reduction in landfill should have an impact on GHG emissions future measurements. Table 12 presents the comparison of the waste footprint between offices and over the entire reporting period; and Figure 16 shows the breakdown of waste consumption data for each of the offices into the general waste and recycled waste components. Materials recycled (excluding toner) at Riverside House in both the base year and the FY 212/13 shows that the recycling rate for paper has more than tripled over the period at Riverside House. Table 12: Comparison of waste carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Input Data Input Input Input % tco (kg) 2 e tco Data (kg) 2 e tco Data (kg) 2 e tco Data (kg) 2 e Change Riverside House -289% Office 47, , , , Riverside House Catering 15, , ,82 2 Baldock 9, , ,33 8 5, % Belfast 1, , ,55 4 1,2 4 3% Birmingham 2, ,57 6 2,46 6 1, % Bristol Cardiff ,33 5 1, , % Caterham 2, ,948 9 Cheshunt 1, Glasgow 2,31 4 1, , , % Haydock 2,4 5 2, , , % Leeds Best Foot Forward, 213

25 kg of waste Nottingham 1, Peterborough Stonehaven Project Park 2, % Total 88, , , , % Figure 16: Breakdown of waste data consumption for the latest financial year 12, 1, 8, 6, 4, 2, Riverside House Office Baldock Belfast Birmingham Cardiff Glasgow Haydock Project Park Recycled kg General kg Publications In the financial year 212/13 Ofcom s carbon emissions from publications stood at 3 tco2e. This represents a 96% reduction compared to the base year. The reduction in the carbon footprint of publications is due to a policy change which has seen a dramatic increase in the number of publications distributed electronically. Although as a percentage of the total Ofcom carbon footprint publications is negligible, this is a very impressive reduction and the effort that went into achieving it should be applauded. Table 13 and 17 Best Foot Forward, 213

26 Figure 17present a comparison of the publications carbon footprint across the reporting years. Table 13: Comparison of publications carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 % Input Data Input Data Input Data Input Data (kg) tco 2 e (kg) tco 2 e (kg) tco 2 e (kg) tco 2 e Change 13gsm Paper 38, , , % 3gsm Paper 1, % Total 39, , , , % 18 Best Foot Forward, 213

27 tco2e Figure 17: GHG emissions from publications Base-Year 28/9 21/11 212/ Stationery The stationery purchases account for 3 tco2e or 1% of the total carbon footprint in 212/13. In the financial year 26/7 Ofcom s carbon emissions from stationery were 94 tco2e and over the period they were reduced by 67%. The GHG emissions and consumption data is presented in the table and chart below. Table 14: Comparison of stationery carbon footprints 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Input (kg) tco2e Input (kg) tco2e Input (kg) tco2e input (kg) tco2e Baldock 2, Belfast Birmingham Bristol Cardiff Caterham Cheshunt Glasgow Haydock Leeds Nottingham Peterborough Riverside House 3, , , Stonehaven Total 33, , , ,452 4, Best Foot Forward, 213

28 tco2e tco2e Figure 18: GHG emissions from stationery over the period Base Year FY 28/9 FY 21/11 FY 212/13 Riverside House is in a class of its own and for this reason stationery emissions have been presented in a separate chart. However, the emissions have been reduced significantly year on year; as presented in Figure 19. Figure 19: Riverside House GHG emissions from stationery over the period Riverside House Base Year FY 28/9 FY 21/11 FY 212/ Drinks Carbon emissions from purchased drinks stood at 25 tco2e in the financial year 212/13. Compared to the base year emissions were reduced by 58%. The main driver was the reduction of the quantity of drinks purchased, especially milk which is much more carbon intensive compared to soft drinks. Table 15: Comparison of drinks carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 change input tco2e input tco2e input tco2e input tco2e % Soft Drinks (litres) 12, ,46 8 9, , % Milk (litres) 47, , , , % Total 6, , , , % 2 Best Foot Forward, 213

29 tco2e Figure 2: GHG emissions from drinks for the assessed periods /7 28/9 21/11 212/13 Soft Drinks Milk Capital Purchases In the financial year 212/13 Ofcom s carbon emissions from capital purchases were 2 tco2e. The emissions from capital purchases cannot be compared directly over time as they do not occur periodically, but depend on the replacement and investment cycles. For comparison these emissions stood at 24 tco2e in the base year and at 23 tco2e and 159 tco2e in 28/9 and 21/11, respectively. Table 16 shows the list of capital equipment purchased in 212/13. The type of materials and its corresponding weights for the majority of equipment were not known, I/O factors have been used to align GHG emissions with expenditure. Table 16: Carbon footprint of capital purchases in the latest financial year Name Value ( ) tco2e Refitting/Buildings Work 114, Calorifier 182, Cars 14, As mentioned above capital purchases can vary considerably on an annual basis depending on the requirements of the different offices and are therefore not considered in great detail. They are also presented separately from the annually recurring emissions in order to distinguish between items that can be directly compared and those that cannot Computing Equipment. The greenhouse gas emissions attributed to the computing equipment purchased by Ofcom in the financial year 212/13 accounted for 122 tco2e or 3% of the total carbon footprint. Computing equipment is classed as one-off purchases as they can vary considerably from year to year depending on requirements and renewal schedules and for this reason they cannot be meaningfully compared across years. Some measures to reduce impact include: 21 Best Foot Forward, 213

30 tco2e Purchase of new desktops and laptops in 212/13 to replace older, less energy efficient pieces of equipment. A printer rationalisation exercise reduced Ofcom s fleet of printers and photocopiers. Secure printing was also introduced so print outs cannot be left uncollected on printers. Significant improvements to remote working capability in order to enable colleagues to work remotely more efficiently. PCs set to go into sleep mode after 2 minutes of inactivity. Table 17: Comparison of computing equipment carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 change Input (kg) tco2e input tco2e input tco2e input tco2e % Desktop Computers 2, , % Laptop Computers Printers 1, % Monitors Servers , % Mobile Phones % Deskphones 44.1 Total % Figure 21: GHG emissions from computing equipment analysed years Baseline FY 28/9 FY 21/11 FY 212/13 2 Desktop Computers Laptop Computers Printers Monitors Servers Mobile Phones Deskphones Furniture In the financial year 212/13 Ofcom s carbon emissions from furniture were 1 tco2e. As capital and computing equipment furniture is classed as one-off item and for this reason direct comparison between years is not meaningful, but for illustrative purposes is presented below. Table 18: Furniture carbon footprint 26/7 28/9 21/11 212/13 change Input (kg) tco2e input tco2e input tco2e input tco2e % Furniture 7, , , Best Foot Forward, 213

31 tco2e Figure 22: GHG emissions from furniture for over the period Baseline FY 28/9 FY 21/11 FY 212/ Data Quality Data quality is of utmost importance for reliable monitoring. Without good quality measurement, action planning is likely not to be targeted, setting of targets not credible and realistic while the progress will be difficult to determine. Most of the data collected was of high quality; however, there were some data gaps in the study which are discussed in more detail in Section 4 on Data. 3.6 Emissions categories The following section focuses on the main emissions categories that contribute to over 8% of the total annually recurring carbon footprint Energy Utilities account for 42% of the total carbon footprint and electricity accounts for 86% of the utilities carbon footprint. As the primary contributor to the Ofcom carbon footprint energy efficiency measures have been high on the agenda for Ofcom for several years. In the future Ofcom should investigate additional measures that could help cut energy consumption and it should incorporate energy efficiency considerations into purchasing policy. Additionally, Ofcom may wish to ensure that all future decisions regarding estates and refurbishment occur with consideration to opportunities for gains in energy efficiency Transport Between the base year and 212/13 Ofcom has achieved a 36% reduction in business travel, a reduction primarily due to fewer flights and lower fleet fuel consumption. The business travel has also seen an increase in car emissions which could potentially be addressed through encouraging alternatives such as train travel. Commuting is estimated to have increased by 13% between the base year and 212/13 although as discussed, there is relatively low confidence in this finding, due to the limitations of the underlying data. The first step would be to undertake a commuting survey. Although outside Ofcom s direct influence, employees can be further encouraged to lower their commuting environmental impact by using different travel modes including cycling. 23 Best Foot Forward, 213

32 3.7 Recommendations and next steps 1. Best Foot Forward recommends Ofcom should assess the GHG emissions reduction potential that can be achieved in the next 3 years and evaluate the costs savings of different options. Best Foot Forward can support Ofcom to adopt cost-effective reduction options and thus build a business case for carbon management; especially because future reductions can be much more difficult to achieve. 2. The reduction opportunities should focus on where the biggest wins can be made; although waste and commuting are challenge areas they may not present the biggest wins and there may be further opportunities to reduce utilities for example. This can be decided in further more in-depth work on evaluating reduction opportunities, both in terms of feasibility and cost savings; and also evaluation of behaviour change in the office environment. Auditing on certain areas such as energy efficiency and waste could highlight further improvement opportunities. 3. Evaluation of reduction opportunities can also be used to inform and set future reduction targets (e.g. by 22) which can be further monitored against a new baseline set using data from the 212/13 audit. 4. Innovation analysis researching current best practice within similar organisations to understand where the biggest wins could be; in the context of the hot spots and successes highlighted in this report and further reduction opportunities identified. Assessment of innovations should include analysis of return on investment; e.g. through MAC curves which help identify cost-effective opportunities. 5. Finally, we recommend Ofcom should begin to explore use of other environmental metrics (e.g. water) and incorporate them into a comprehensive environmental strategy. Metrics should be chosen depending on the material impacts to the business. A materiality assessment can be performed as part of the pre-work or may already be performed through Ofcom s environmental management system. 24 Best Foot Forward, 213

33 4 Data Data was collated by Ofcom in alignment with three previous carbon audits in order to maintain consistency between the studies. Where data gaps existed suitable proxies and estimates were used to ensure the completeness of the study. 4.1 Data quality The overall data quality is robust enough to enable comparison between years and to ensure the validation of the target is robust. The table below indicates the data quality. Table 19: Data gaps and proxies Emissions source Annual Utilities recurring Off-site servers emissions Business Travel sources: Commuting Waste Publications Stationery Drinks Refrigerants Other gases Data quality Good; predominantly primary data from utility meters Good; primary data provided from providers Flights- good: based on the distances between airports Rail- poor based on the financial spend Fleet vehicles good; based on the actual fuel consumption Car- poor; based on financial spend UK taxi - poor; based on financial spend Overseas travel - poor; based on financial spend Poor based on the estimated from TFL survey Good based on waste audit Good based on the number of pages and the density of paper Poor lots of data gaps, a combination of financial and physical data, and a number of estimates to derive the weight of the products Good based on actual consumption Good based on actual measurement No data was provided One-off emissions sources: Capital purchases Computing materials Furniture Poor based on financial spend and estimated weights Good based on physical weight of purchases Poor a combination of physical and financial data was used. 25 Best Foot Forward, 213

34 litres tco2e 5 Benchmarking study A benchmarking exercise has been completed in order to compare the Ofcom office footprint (current audit for 212/13) with similar organisations from the BFF database. The benchmarks compare emissions associated with energy and water use as well as waste. 5.1 Utilities benchmark Figure 23 presents a comparison of Ofcom with other office-based organisations specifically on energy use relative to floor space; which provides more insight than absolute carbon emissions. The results indicate that Ofcom has a lower energy use than many of the comparable organisations used in the benchmark and is comparable to the best practice identified. Figure 23: Benchmarking of GHG emissions of utilities (in tco2e) per m2 of office space Ofcom BFF'7/8 Office 1 Office 2 Office 3 Office 4 Office 5 Best heating electricity Practice Typical Water consumption per staff member is comparable to typical water consumption and could be improved further to be in line with best practices. Figure 24: Benchmark of water use (in litres) per staff member 2, 18, 16, 14, 12, 1, 8, 6, 4, 2, Ofcom BFF'7/8 Office 1 Office 2 Office 3 Office 4 Office 5 Best Practice Typical 5.2 Waste benchmark Figure 25 presents the waste produced per FTE for Ofcom (current year) and similar office-based organisations. The benchmark indicates that Ofcom has a relatively high waste output; however the 26 Best Foot Forward, 213

35 proportion of the waste recycled is good but more work could be done to a) increase recycling and b) reduce waste. A waste audit is recommended to understand what type of waste is found in the bins and how this can be reduced/recycled. Figure 25: Benchmarking of waste produced per headcount 35 Waste Produced (kg) Recycled Waste (kg) Non-Recycled Waste (kg) 5 Current BFF'7/8 Office 1 Office 2 Office 3 Office 4 Office 5 27 Best Foot Forward, 213

36 Appendix A: Definition of emissions scopes The most widely accepted approach is to identify and categorise emissions-releasing activities into three groups also known as scopes. The GHG protocol defines the following three scopes: Scope 1 (Direct emissions) Activities owned or controlled by the organisation that release emissions straight into the atmosphere. Examples include emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles; emissions from chemical production in owned or controlled process equipment. Scope 2 (Energy indirect) Emissions released into the atmosphere associated with consumption of purchased electricity, heat, steam and cooling. These are a consequence of organisation s activities but which occur at sources not owned or controlled by the organisation. Scope 3 (Other indirect) Emissions that are a consequence of actions, which occur at sources which are not owned or controlled by an organisation and which are not classified as scope 2 emissions. Examples of scope 3 emissions are presented in the table below. Table: Scope 3 emissions Upstream 1. Purchased goods and services 2. Capital goods 3. Fuel- and energy-related activities (not included in scope 1 or scope 2) 4. Upstream transportation and distribution 5. Waste generated in operations 6. Business travel 7. Employee commuting 8. Upstream leased assets Downstream 9. Downstream transportation and distribution 1. Processing of sold products 11. Use of sold products 12. End-of-life treatment of sold products 13. Downstream leased assets 14. Franchises 15. Investments 28 Best Foot Forward, 213