De Montfort University. Carbon Management Plan

Transcription

1 De Montfort University Carbon Management Plan 1

2 Date: January 2011 Version number: Version BoG Approval Owners: Karl Letten (Estates), Leticia Ozawa-Meida (IESD) Approval Date: February

3 Table of Contents Glossary of Terms... 6 Abbreviations Executive Summary Introduction Strategic Themes Strategic approach Monitoring, targeting and reporting Policy review Embedding activities on carbon savings Strategic Investment HEFCE Carbon Reduction Measures and Requirements for Carbon Management Plans Emissions Protocol and Scopes Carbon Management Policies and Drivers for Change Current relevant policies and drivers for change HEFCE Carbon Reduction Target for the HE Sector Policies and Drivers for Change Summary Responsibilities for Carbon Management at DMU Staff and student of DMU Sustainable Development Task Force (SDTF) Estates Department Information Technology and Media Services (ITMS) Institute of Energy & Sustainable Development (IESD) Student Services Procurement services Responsibility for reporting and monitoring progress of the CMP Emissions Baseline and Forecasts Introduction Base Year Analysis of GHG emissions from 2005/06 to 2008/ Scope 1 and 2 emissions Scope 3 emissions private halls of residence Scope 3 emissions staff and student commute

4 Scope 3 emissions business travel Scope 3 emissions student trips to study at DMU Scope 3 emissions visitors to DMU Scope 3 emissions Supply chain emissions from procurement Total emissions: scope 1, 2 and Carbon Management Matrix and Status Carbon Management Projects Value at Stake Energy, CO 2 and other assumptions Business as Usual (BaU) scenario Reduced emissions scenario (RES) Reporting and Monitoring of Carbon Emissions at DMU Annex A: Calculation of GHG emissions in DMU A. Data collection International students B. Emission factors C. Emission estimations and assumptions C1. Scope 1 direct emissions C2. Scope 2 indirect emissions from purchased electricity C3. Scope 3 indirect emissions from Private Halls of Residence C4. Scope 3 indirect emissions from Staff and Student Commuting C5. Scope 3 indirect emissions from Business Travel C6. Scope 3 indirect emissions from student travel to study at DMU International students United Kingdom Students C7. Scope 3 indirect emissions from procurement Annex B: Cost assumptions

5 Table of Figures Figure 1: Base year GHG emissions (2005/06) by generic source [tonnes of CO 2 equivalent]... 8 Figure 2: Base year GHG Emissions (2005/06) by scope [tonnes CO 2 equivalent]... 9 Figure 3: Base year GHG Emissions (2005/06) by detailed source [tonnes of CO 2 equivalent] Figure 4: Carbon Reductions from Carbon Projects in CMP Scope 1 and Figure 5: Scope 1 and 2 emissions: 2005/ /10 [tonnes of CO 2e ] Figure 6: Base year GHG emissions (2005/06) by scope [tonnes of CO 2 equivalent] Figure 7: Scope 1 and 2 emissions: 2005/ /09 [tonnes of CO 2 e] Figure 8: Scope 3 emissions associated to the private halls of residence [tco 2 e] Figure 9: Modes of transport used by staff respondents to the travel survey [% of distance travelled] Figure 10: Modes of transport used by student respondents to the travel survey [% of distance travelled] Figure 11: Scope 3 emissions associated with business travel Figure 12: Scope 3 emissions from UK and international students travels to/from DMU Figure 13: Scope 3 emissions from procurement activities Figure 14: DMU Carbon Emissions 2005/ /09 Scope 1, 2 and 3 Sources Figure 15: DMU emissions related energy, travel and procurement 2005/ / Figure 16: Carbon Reductions from Carbon Projects within CMP Figure 17: Business as Usual Approach (Tonnes for all Scope 1 and 2 Sources) based on 0.7% annual increase in energy consumption Figure 18: Business as Usual Approach ( 000s) for Scope 1 and 2 Emissions based on 0.7% annual increase in energy consumption Figure 19: Carbon Value at Stake (Tonnes) for Scope 1 & 2 Sources Figure 20: Value at Stake ( 000s) for Scope 1 & 2 Sources Figure 21: Carbon Value at Stake (tonnes CO2e) using past consumption as a guide for future consumption

6 Glossary of Terms Within the field of carbon management and within this document there are a number of technical terms and expressions which require definition. This glossary of terms aims to define these expressions within the context of the University s Case for Action. Business As Usual (BaU) Reduced Emissions Scenario (RES) Carbon Emissions Value At Stake (VAS) Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 ) Methane Carbon Management Greenhouse Gases The University Carbon Dioxide Equivalent (CO 2 e) The costs associated with the use of energy without implementation of a carbon management and energy efficiency programme. The potential savings identified through the use of energy with an implementation of a carbon management and energy efficiency programme The term carbon emissions within this document relate to emissions of carbon dioxide and the carbon equivalent emissions of other greenhouse gases such as methane. The value at stake for the University is deemed to be the cost difference between full implementation of a carbon management and energy efficiency programme and taking no action. The most significant greenhouse gas. A greenhouse gas with a warming potential 21 time greater than carbon dioxide The management of carbon dioxide emissions. Gases emitted when fossil fuels are burnt during combustion processes such as boiler plant, standby generators, etc. De Montfort University, including senior management, staff and students. CO 2 equivalent (CO 2 e) is the concentration of CO 2 that would cause the same level of radiative forcing or warming as a given type and concentration of greenhouse gas. When carbon is discussed in this document it relates to carbon dioxide equivalents. 6

7 Abbreviations BaU BiTC BREEAM CO 2 CO 2 e CH 4 CHP CIF CMP DECC Defra DMU DSU DTI EE-IO FT GHG GWP HECM HEFCE HEI ICT IESD IPCC ITMS IT N 2 O PIR pkm PT PV RES SDTF SIC tco 2 e VAS WRI Business As Usual Business in the Community Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology Carbon dioxide Equivalent carbon dioxide or carbon dioxide equivalent Methane Combined Heat and Power Capital Investment Framework Carbon Management Plan Department for Energy and Climate Change Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs De Montfort University De Montfort Students Union Department of Trade and Industry (currently BIS Department for Business, Innovation and Skills) Environmentally Extended Input-Output Full time Greenhouse gas Global Warming Potential Higher Education Carbon Management Higher Education Funding Council for England Higher Education Institution Information and Communication Technologies Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Information Technology and Media Services Information Technologies Nitrous oxide Passive Infrared passenger kilometre Part time Photovoltaic Reduced emissions scenario Sustainable Development Task Force Standard Industrial Classification metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent Value at Stake World Resources Institute 7

8 1. Executive Summary This document is De Montfort University s (DMU) Carbon 1 Management Plan (CMP). The CMP sets out the University s strategic direction on carbon management until 2020 against a baseline year of 2005 in line with guidance from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and the Carbon Trust. HEFCE have signalled their intent to ensure that HEIs address carbon emissions from their organisations by linking future capital allocation to progress on adopting and implementing carbon management plans. This is being achieved through the Capital Investment Framework (CIF2) which is ensuring that HEIs have a CMP in place by 31 st March HEFCE have produced guidance on how and what HEIs should include in their Carbon Management Plans and this CMP follows the structure of that guidance and similar guidance from the Carbon Trust. The guidance also states that HEI s carbon management plans are required to include a carbon baseline for 2005 that covers all scope 1 and 2 emissions. 2 This CMP sets out the steps, projects, responsibilities, resources and initiatives that DMU will undertake to meet this carbon reduction target. Figure 1 below shows the breakdown of DMU s greenhouse gas emissions from energy use, transport and procurement for the baseline year 2005/06. Figure 1: Base year GHG emissions (2005/06) by generic source [tonnes of CO 2 equivalent] 1 In this document carbon is used as a short hand for carbon equivalents CO2e unless stated 2 The World Resource Institute (WRI) developed a classification of emission sources around three scopes. Scope 1 is direct emissions that occur from sources that are owned or controlled by the organisation, for example emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles; scope 2 accounts for emissions from the generation of purchased electricity consumed by the organisation; scope 3 is all other indirect emissions which are a consequence of the activities of the company, but occur from sources not owned or controlled by the organisation for example, commuting and procurement. 8

9 From Figure1 it can be seen that there is an even split in the amount of greenhouse gas emissions that come from these three sectors. The emissions from procurement account for 31% of DMU s total emissions and therefore highlight the importance of including procurement emissions within our baseline figures. A further breakdown of these sectors is shown later in this summary. The assessment of DMU s greenhouse gas emissions for 2005/06 was completed by staff from the Estates department and from the University s Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development (IESD). Information was also taken from the carbon footprint report on procurement emissions at DMU 3. The report was completed by DMU and Arup. Arup are an independent firm of designers, planners, engineers and technical specialists whose work includes carbon accounting. The assessment included all emissions from scopes 1, 2 and 3 and a breakdown of the emissions from these sources can be seen in Figure 2. This assessment included emissions from the six major greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide. Figure 2: Base year GHG Emissions (2005/06) by scope [tonnes CO 2 equivalent] The greenhouse gas emissions from scopes 1, 2 and 3 sources for DMU in 2005/06 were 47,192 tonnes. Of this total 13,217 tonnes are from scope 1 and 2 sources. A detailed breakdown of the different sources of these emissions is shown in Figure 3. In terms of carbon dioxide emissions the emissions from scope 1 and 2 sources in the baseline year are 13,150 tonnes CO 2. Based on its 2005/06 baseline emissions DMU will aim to cuts its scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions by:- 12% by % by 2017 and 43% by 2020 These targets are in line with the HEFCE targets for the HE sector as a whole. 3 Carbon Footprint Study of De Montfort University, Arup;

10 In order to achieve the carbon target identified above a range of different approaches will need to be taken across the University. These approaches are identified within this document as strategic themes. These themes are:- Strategic approach Monitoring, targeting and reporting Policy review Embedding activities on carbon savings Strategic investment Figure 3: Base year GHG Emissions (2005/06) by detailed source [tonnes of CO 2 equivalent] The baseline assessment for DMU in 2005/06 includes emissions from scope 3 sources including staff commute, student commute, international student travel to study at DMU, UK student travel to study at DMU, business travel, visitors travel to DMU, waste treatment and disposal, water use and emissions from private halls of residence. Details of the trends for these emission sources are contained in section 6 of this document. Future emissions from these sources will be affected by a number of factors including changes to the demographic of the student population at DMU. A move to recruit more international students will increase emissions from international student travel while recruiting more part time students from the local area may also increase emissions from student commuting as a result of more car journeys to DMU. It will be important to monitor and report these underlying factors in relation to carbon emissions through the annual progress reporting of the CMP. The baseline also includes emissions arising from DMU s procurement activities i.e. emissions from the products and services that it buys. This information has been developed through a recent study which also highlighted potential intervention opportunities through sustainable procurement measures to reduce emissions, mainly from scope 1 and 2 sources. This comprehensive approach 10

11 ensures that all the main sources of carbon emissions have been considered within the baseline for the CMP. However this Carbon Management Plan does not contain targets for scope 3 emissions. HEFCE have committed to measuring all scope 3 emissions by 2012 and have committed to setting sector targets in particular for procurement by December This Carbon Management Plan will be revised later in 2011/12 to include carbon reduction targets for scope 3 emissions. DMU has identified a number of different carbon reduction projects relating to the strategic themes and the implementation of these projects will aim to deliver the carbon reduction targets (see Figure 4) outlined within this document. A detailed breakdown of these projects is shown in section 8 of this document. Progress has already been made in reducing DMU greenhouse gas emissions from the baseline year through a mixture of changes to the University estate and space management as shown in Figure 5. These changes have included the transfer of the Bedford campus which accounts for the drop in emissions from 2005/06. Further details of this trend can be found in section 6 of this document. Figure 4: Carbon Reductions from Carbon Projects in CMP Scope 1 and 2 11

12 Figure 5: Scope 1 and 2 emissions: 2005/ /10 [tonnes of CO 2e ] 12

13 2. Introduction 2.1. Strategic Themes Strategic approach Carbon emissions at DMU need to be seen as the responsibility of the whole university rather than specific and individual departments. Taking a strategic approach to carbon management and ensuring that actions on carbon emissions are considered within key strategic documents will build ownership of the issues amongst faculties and departments in DMU Monitoring, targeting and reporting Monitoring our progress on reducing carbon emissions and reporting this to management, staff and students will play an important part in reducing carbon emissions. Similarly setting carbon reduction targets for individual buildings and reporting on this will also build ownership of the issue Policy review DMU has a number of policies in place that are relevant to reducing our carbon footprint, including our Environmental Policy and Energy Policy. We will review our policies with the intention of ensuring that the policies support and sustain the reduction in CO 2 emissions Embedding activities on carbon savings DMU aims to embed carbon reduction throughout the organisation as part of its aim to become a sustainable organisation. This would include the development of key performance indicators at University and operating unit level Strategic Investment DMU is committed to investing in new technology to achieve reductions in carbon emissions. This investment will encompass energy efficiency; better design; and, where possible, renewable technologies HEFCE Carbon Reduction Measures and Requirements for Carbon Management Plans From 2011, HEFCE capital allocations will be linked to carbon reduction. This will be achieved through the Capital Investment Framework 2 (CIF2). The qualifying criteria for CIF2 have been amended to include questions relating to carbon management and the adoption of carbon management plans. Qualifying questions also focus on past performance in reducing carbon emissions. Higher education institutions (HEIs) in England are required to develop individual carbon reduction strategies, targets and associated carbon management plans. As part of the changes to the capital allocations HEFCE require HEIs carbon management plans to include: a. A carbon management policy or strategy this could be part of a wider environmental/sustainability policy. b. A carbon baseline for that covers all scope 1 and 2 emissions 5. Institutions are encouraged to measure a baseline for scope 3 emissions and in the longer term we will expect these to be included. 4 All baselines mentioned in this report are measured on an academic year. For example, a 1990 baseline measures emissions from August 1990 to July 1991 and a 2005 baseline measures emissions from August 2005 to July

14 c. Carbon reduction targets. These must: cover scope 1 and 2 emissions, although institutions may choose to set additional targets for wider aspects under scope 3 be set against a 2005 baseline. Institutions may choose to set their reductions in context by setting additional targets against an alternative baseline year be set to 2020, inline with interim government targets. be publicly available. d. An implementation plan to achieve absolute carbon emission reductions across scopes 1, 2 and 3 including timescales and resources. These may cover capital projects and actions to embed carbon management within the institution, for example, through corporate strategy, communication and training. e. Clear responsibilities for carbon management. f. A commitment to monitor progress towards targets regularly and to report publicly annually. g. The carbon management plan and targets must be signed off by the governing body. The CMP for DMU follows these guidelines and meets these requirements. 3. Emissions Protocol and Scopes The World Resource Institute (WRI) developed a classification of emission sources for greenhouse gases based around three scopes or sources. The three scopes developed by the WRI are:- scope 1 is direct emissions that occur from sources that are owned or controlled by the organisation, for example emissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, furnaces, vehicles scope 2 accounts for emissions from the generation of purchased electricity consumed by the organisation scope 3 is all other indirect emissions which are a consequence of the activities of the company, but occur from sources not owned or controlled by the organisation for example, commuting and procurement. Guidance from HEFCE relating to the production of carbon management plans has suggested that HEIs follow the same methodology for the measuring and reporting of carbon emissions. As a result the methodology used in this document follows that of the WRI. 4. Carbon Management Policies and Drivers for Change 4.1. Current relevant policies and drivers for change The UK Government has demonstrated a growing commitment to sustainable development and climate change in recent times. In November 2008 the Government passed the Climate Change Act in an effort to improve carbon management and provide a strong UK lead the UK is the first country in the world to set legally binding targets. The legislation contains ambitious targets for 5 The World Resource Institute developed a classification of emission sources around three scopes. See section 3 for further details. 14

15 greenhouse gas emission reductions, notably carbon dioxide, through action in the UK and abroad of at least 80% by 2050, and reductions in CO 2 emissions of at least 34% by 2020, against a 1990 baseline. The Climate Change Act impacts upon all sectors of society, and universities are no exception; indeed, there is an expectation that HEIs should offer a lead. In 2008 the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) argued that the sector should become: a major contributor to society s efforts to achieve sustainability through the skills and knowledge that its graduates learn and put into practice, and through its own strategies and operations. 6 Furthermore HEFCE have signalled their intent to encourage HEIs to adopt and progress carbon management plans by making a direct link between progress of these plans and future capital funding allocations, which will be introduced from The Government is introducing the CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme (formerly known as the Carbon Reduction Commitment) which is a UK wide emissions trading scheme for organisations not already covered by previous arrangements such as Climate Change Agreements and the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. The CRC aims to provide a financial incentive to reduce emissions by placing a price on carbon dioxide. Participants in the scheme must purchase allowances equivalent to their own emissions each year. The overall emissions reduction target is achieved by means of a cap on the total number of allowances available to the group of participants. However, within that overall limit, individual participants can determine the most cost-effective means to reduce their emissions. In addition, the better an organisation performs in terms of reducing its emissions, the higher it will appear in the annual performance league table Government will publish, showing the comparative performance of all participants. This in turns provides an added benefit in terms of reputation for those organisations which appear at or near the top of the league table. The league table will be published and available to public scrutiny. Pressure to adopt a low carbon approach is also coming from the University s customers. A Future Leaders survey carried out in 2007 by the Forum for the Future and UCAS highlights the growing awareness and expectations amongst students (2007/8). 7 The survey asked a series of sustainability related question to all UCAS applicants in 2007 and received over 25,000 responses. It found that a third of all respondents said they had received no information from their chosen institution on its environmental and social policies or performance. 42% said they would like to receive more information than they currently do, whilst nearly two-thirds of the sample wanted to see more about sustainable development in their course curriculum. 42% believed that such knowledge will help them to get a job after leaving university or college. The environmental performance of universities and colleges is also gaining a higher profile and this will have an impact upon the reputation of DMU. The detailed Environment Index is run as part of the Universities that Count programme by Business in the Community (BiTC). The Index benchmarks the performance of HEIs on their identification and management of their environmental impacts and on their environmental performance. Currently 60 HEIs are taking part in the programme but this is expected to expand and its profile raised further as HEIs begin to understand the benefits that benchmarking environmental and sustainability issues can bring. The Environment Index has a section devoted to the carbon management process and how much progress the institution is making in reducing its emissions. The Green League, run by People & Planet, is already published in the Times Higher Education (THE) supplement and is a very high profile display of university performance. Whilst not as detailed as the Universities that Count Environment Index it too has a section on carbon management and the 6 HEFCE (2008). Sustainable Development in Higher Education, HEFCE. 7 The Future Leaders Survey: A report by UCAS and Forum for the Future. (2007/8) 15

16 performance of the institution in question on reducing its carbon dioxide emissions. In the Green League 2010 DMU was placed 34 th out of 133 institutions an increase of 21 places on the previous year. De Montfort University has produced a Sustainability Strategy which sets out the overall direction for the organisation in terms of sustainable development. The strategy was agreed and adopted by the Board of Governors in February Under the Built Environment theme of the strategy is an objective To reduce our environmental impact on the environment and be an exemplar of best practice. This objective is underpinned by a target To agree carbon reduction targets (inc. renewable energy). The University is also part of the 10:10 Campaign, which is an international campaign to encourage organisations, institutions, businesses and individuals to reduce their emissions by 10% in For universities the aim is to reduce emissions from gas use, electricity use, owned vehicle use and flights. DMU is using 2009/10 as the base year from which to measure reductions in emissions and 2010/11 will be the action year when we will be implementing projects to reduce emissions. Some of the projects which will contribute to the 10:10 campaign are contained within this plan HEFCE Carbon Reduction Target for the HE Sector HEFCE have acknowledged that the higher education sector needs to play its part in meeting national targets for carbon reduction. As such HEFCE have set targets for the HE sector as a whole on carbon reduction, which are linked to the national UK targets on carbon reduction. The targets that HEFCE have set are:- A reduction in scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions of 34% by 2020 against a 1990 baseline; A reduction in scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions of 80% by 2050 against a 1990 baseline; A series of milestones to measure progress against the sector-level target. To recognise growth in the sector since 1990, these are a 1 per cent increase by 2012 and a 18 per cent reduction by 2017 against a 1990 baseline. These are equivalent to a reduction of 12 per cent by 2012 and 29 per cent by 2017 with a target of 43 per cent by 2020 against a 2005 baseline. Aspirations to achieve reductions beyond the sector targets A commitment to undertake work to assess what is required in order to monitor and report scope 3 emissions HEFCE have stated as part of the work to produce the sector target that institutions are to set their own targets based on their own situation and ambition. 16

17 4.3. Policies and Drivers for Change Summary Generic category Driver Areas of impact Nature of impact Importance (high, medium, low) Consequences / opportunities / issues for carbon management Legislative. EU Building Energy Performance Directive Estates All campus buildings >1000m2 carry energy label. Increased costs of certification High. Higher visibility of carbon and energy performance by all building users Regulation. Building regulations Part L and Part F Estates Air tightness of new buildings/conservation of heat and power High. Less draughts, Improved thermal comfort for building occupants, reduced boiler ratings to save fuel running costs. Political. HEFCE sustainability strategy. Estates Sustainability in construction projects and refurbishments. High. Failure to comply may be reflected in reduced funding from HEFCE. Economic. Rising and volatility in utility costs. Reduced funding through restrictions of CIF2 The University The University. Increased utility costs may lead to reduced funding for core University activities. Reduced funding from HEFCE due to restrictions applied through CIF2 High. High Opportunities for energy efficiency to reduce utilities expenditure. Opportunity to ensure that CMP is adopted by senior management of the University and that carbon management is given a high priority at DMU and embedded within strategic documents. Competition /brand. Market position, increasing appeal to future students. The University. Sending out the right messages may have a beneficial impact on the University s environmental credentials. High. To be seen to take a leading role in relation to carbon and energy management issues, may improve student recruitment and retention. Aspirational. Vision to become or maintain a position of environmental leadership. The University. Improved image and reputation. High. To be seen to take a leading role in relation to carbon and energy management issues will enhance the University s image and reputation. Operational. Provision of healthier and more comfortable learning environments to improve learning productivity (for example through appropriate ventilation strategies, avoidance of overheating, etc). The University. Improved image and reputation. High. The provision of more comfortable learning environments will enhance the University s reputation and reduce fuel running costs. Legal Compliance. Carbon Reduction Commitment The University. Legal action for noncompliance. High. Adverse publicity and reputational damage for non-compliance and low position in CRC league table 17

18 5. Responsibilities for Carbon Management at DMU 5.1. Staff and student of DMU Ultimately the responsibility for reducing carbon emissions and saving energy falls to the individual staff member and student and the University as a whole. The community of DMU have a collectively responsibility to reduce emissions from our activities. Clearly this responsibility will need to be supported through awareness raising events and training as well as the implementation of key carbon reduction policies and projects Sustainable Development Task Force (SDTF) The Sustainable Development Task Force was set up in 2007 to establish DMU as a leader in the field of Sustainable Development. The task force comprises representatives from across the university community. It is chaired by the Pro Vice Chancellor and meets on a regular basis to discuss sustainability and environmental issues. Representatives on the task force includes the Estates Department, Institute of Energy and Sustainable Development (IESD), De Montfort Students Union (DSU), university Faculties, External Relations, Student Services and other support departments Estates Department The Estates Department at DMU is responsible for energy management within the university and the development and implementation of the university s Travel Plan. Based within the Estates Department are the Energy Manager and Energy Officer, the Post & Porterage manager who is responsible for recycling, the Environmental & Sustainability Officer and the Travel Plan Coordinator. The Estates Department is also responsible for the design and commissioning of new buildings and the refurbishment of the existing building stock. Carbon management within this process is guided by the University s Energy Policy which requires that all new builds and refurbishments will meet the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM) Very Good standard as a minimum Information Technology and Media Services (ITMS) ITMS are the University s IT department and are responsible for maintaining the IT systems and equipment. The department is responsible for the maintenance and supply of IT equipment for DMU including laptops, PCs, printers, audio & visual services, and video conferencing. The department is also home to the Print Centre through which the majority of printing and copying for the University occurs Institute of Energy & Sustainable Development (IESD) IESD is a world renowned research institute within the University specialising in research into low energy and low carbon technologies. Whilst predominantly a research institute the IESD also plays a key role in developing DMU s approach to sustainability and is a key member of the SDTF. Based within the institute is the Director of Sustainability for DMU and two research fellows who play a key role in monitoring carbon emissions and developing sustainability projects at DMU Student Services Student Services are responsible for providing support to the student community during their transition to student life. Student services are also responsible for providing student accommodation to students. Student Services currently manage a number of student halls but 18

19 the majority of student accommodation is provided by private halls of residence. DMU had an agreement whereby any new student attending DMU is guaranteed a place for their first year in a hall of residence. This may be either in a hall which is managed by DMU or managed by a private organisation. This agreement was reviewed in 2010 and the guarantee no longer offered Procurement services Procurement Services is part of the Finance Department and is responsible for sourcing materials, products and services for the University. This includes working with contractors and developing tenders and contracts Responsibility for reporting and monitoring progress of the CMP Progress against the targets and objectives within this CMP will be monitored by Estates and the IESD. Details of annual emissions from scopes 1, 2 and 3 will be reported on an annual basis to the Sustainable Development Task Force and senior management at DMU. The results will be published to staff and students at DMU and made available to the public via the University s website. 6. Emissions Baseline and Forecasts 6.1. Introduction In order to be able to take a more strategic viewpoint on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at De Montfort University and reduce these emissions, it is relevant to understand and measure the activities and processes which generate these emissions. An emissions baseline survey was completed by staff from IESD, the Estates Department and complemented with Arup s study on procurement emissions to provide a starting point from which to measure future progress on reducing GHG emissions at DMU. As part of this assessment it was decided that a comprehensive approach to assessing and detailing the University s emissions were needed. This approach was taken to reflect the desire of the University to be seen as a leader in this field. This section details the University s GHG emissions profile in the base year (2005/06), the emissions trends in the period 2005/ /09, and potential emission scenarios up to The data and methodologies used to estimate the GHG emissions as well as the assumptions and uncertainties in the calculations are described on Annex A Base Year The base year for the calculation is the 2005/06 academic year. Emissions for the University were calculated using a modified version of the Carbon Trust s spreadsheet for HEIs and the DEFRA carbon emissions spreadsheet. The academic year of 2005/06 was selected following the requirements of HEFCE as set out in Carbon management strategies and plans: A guide to good practice. The base year emissions estimations comprise the following emission sources: Scope 1 Direct on-site combustion emissions from gas use in academic buildings Direct on-site combustion emissions from gas use in DMU owned residential buildings Combustion emissions from diesel use in University owned vehicles Scope 2 Emissions from the use of purchased electricity in academic buildings Emissions from the use of purchased electricity in DMU owned residential buildings Scope 3 Business travel emissions 19

20 Travel emissions associated to staff and student commute International student travel emissions to study at DMU UK students travel emissions to study at DMU Travel emissions associated with visitors to DMU Energy (gas and electricity) and water use in private residential halls buildings which provide accommodation on DMU s behalf Supply chain emissions associated with procurement, including waste disposal and recycling as well as water supply and wastewater treatment Estimates for scope 1 and 2 emissions are highly reliable because these are based on half-hourly metering data. Further work is being conducted to improve the accuracy of scope 3 emissions from the above mentioned sources. Further details related to data collection, emission factors and assumptions are explained on Annex A. The University s total GHG emissions in the base year accounted for 47,192 tonnes CO 2 equivalent (tco 2 e). Scope 1 and 2 emissions accounted for 13,217 tco 2 e (28%), while Scope 3 emissions were 33,975 tco2e (72%) see Figure 6. These figures highlight the importance of considering scope 3 emissions within the baseline year and therefore within the carbon management plan. Figure 6: Base year GHG emissions (2005/06) by scope [tonnes of CO 2 equivalent] As illustrated in Table 1, the largest contributors of GHG emissions from DMU activities are related to procurement (31.1%), staff and student commuting (22.7%) and the use of electricity and gas in DMU buildings (18.6% and 9.4% respectively). Although reporting of scope 3 indirect emissions is not mandatory under the HEFCE guidelines and these emissions are not covered in the proposed sector-level target, it is highly advantageous to report them in order to monitor progress on related mitigation measures, such as green travel plans, waste recycling schemes, energy and water efficiency initiatives, and sustainable procurement. Section 6.3 explains the emissions trends for the different sources and activities in the period 2005/ /09. 20

21 Table 1. Base year GHG emissions (2005/2006) by emission sources Emission sources 2005/2006 Scope 1 (Direct emissions) Stationary sources DMU Academic buildings (gas on-site combustion) [t CO 2 e] 3,698.7 (7.8%) DMU Residential buildings (gas on-site combustion) [t CO 2 e] (1.6%) Mobile sources DMU vehicles [t CO 2 e] 4.9 (0.0%) TOTAL SCOPE 1 [t CO 2 e] 4,448.9 (9.4%) Scope 2 (Indirect emissions from purchased electricity) DMU Academic buildings (electricity) [t CO 2 e] 7,674.7 (16.3%) DMU Residential buildings (electricity) [t CO 2 e] 1,093.1 (2.3%) TOTAL SCOPE 2 [t CO 2 e] 8,767.8 (18.6%) Scope 3 (Other Indirect emissions) Private Halls of Residence (based on data from DMU halls) Gas consumption [t CO 2 e] (1.4%) Electricity consumption [t CO 2 e] 3,510.3 (7.4%) Water use (water supply and wastewater treatment) [t CO 2 e] 67.6 (0.1%) Sub-total Private halls of residence [t CO 2 e] 4,230.3 (9.0%) Staff and student commuting Staff commuting [t CO 2 e] 2,089.2 (4.4%) Student commuting [t CO 2 e] 8,616.6 (18.3%) Sub-total commuting [t CO 2 e] 10,705.7 (22.7%) Student Trips from home to DMU Residence International students (air travel) [t CO 2 e] 2,166.2 (4.6%) UK students home trips (car / rail / air) [t CO 2 e] (1.9%) Sub-total student trips home [t CO 2 e] 3,040.2 (6.4%) Visitor travel to DMU DMU visitor travel [t CO 2 e] (0.4%) Business travel DMU Business travel [t CO 2 e] 1,094.0 (2.3%) Supply chain emissions from procurement (SIC carbon intensities EEIO analysis) Construction [t CO 2 e] 4,175.0 (8.8%) Business services [t CO 2 e] 3,698.0 (7.8%) Other manufactured products [t CO 2 e] 2,380.0 (5.0%) Information and Communications technologies [t CO 2 e] 1,848.0 (3.9%) Waste products and recycling [t CO 2 e] (1.3%) Paper products [t CO 2 e] (0.7%) Food and catering [t CO 2 e] (0.6%) Manufactured fuels, chemicals and glasses [t CO 2 e] (0.6%) Water and sanitation [t CO 2 e] (0.8%) 21

22 Emission sources 2005/2006 Other procurement [t CO 2 e] (1.4%) Sub-total procurement [t CO 2 e] 14,696.0 (31.1%) TOTAL SCOPE 3 [t CO 2 e] 33,975 (72.0%) TOTAL SCOPE 1, 2 AND 3 [t CO 2 e] 47, Analysis of GHG emissions from 2005/06 to 2008/09 This section examines the trends of DMU s GHG emissions by scope and emission sources from 2005/ /09. For scope 1 and 2 sources data is available from 2005/06 to 2009/10 and this is reported in the CMP. This analysis aims to understand the different factors that have influenced the emissions in recent years Scope 1 and 2 emissions Scope 1 are direct emissions from stationary and mobile sources that are owned or controlled by the University, while Scope 2 accounts for the indirect emissions related to the generation of purchased electricity that is consumed by the University. Scope 1 and 2 include emissions from 33 academic buildings in the Leicester City Centre Campus, 8 4 academic buildings in the Leicester Charles Frear Campus, 9 9 academic buildings in the Bedford Campus, 10 4 residential buildings in the Leicester Campus, 11 and 4 residential buildings in the Bedford Campus. 12 Scope 1 emissions from stationary sources are generated from the combustion of natural gas mainly in boilers for the purpose of space heating in DMU academic and residential buildings, while emissions from mobile sources consider the use of diesel vehicles used for waste management purposes and security. Scope 2 emissions are related to the use of purchased electricity for lighting and other electrical appliances, such as computers, printers, audio and video equipment, faxes, kettles, and microwaves among other equipment. Energy and gas consumption is measured on a half-hourly basis through a permanent automatic meter reading linked to a DataBird radio-based communication system, which is automatically connected to a central database at DMU (see Annex A). Diesel consumption for vehicles is recorded internally by the Estates Department. As shown in Figure 7, scope 1 emissions decreased 26.6% from 4,448.9 tco 2 e in 2005/06 to 3,266 tco 2 e in 2009/10, while scope 2 emissions reduced by 1.6% from 8,767.8 tco 2 e in 2005/06 to 8,626 tco 2 e in 2009/10. Significant structural changes in the University have influenced these emissions: The merger of DMU s Faculty of Education and Contemporary Studies at the Bedford campus into the University of Luton to create a new university for Bedfordshire in Closure or demolition of residential buildings: Lawrence Kershaw Halls of Residence (2005) and the William Rowlett Halls of Residence. Acquisition and construction of new academic buildings: Institute of Creative Technology (2006), Performing Arts Centre for Excellence (2007) and Hugh Aston Building (2009) Castle View, 12 The Newark, 30 Grasemere Street, 5 Castle View, 53 Oxford Street, Bosworth House, Business & Law, Campus Centre, Chantry Building, Clephan Building, Crown Building, Elfed Thomas Building, Eric Wood Building, Estates Services Building, Fletcher Building, Gateway House, Graduate Business School, Hawthorn Building, Innovation Centre, Institute of Creative Technology, John Sandford Sports Centre, Kimberlin Libray, SU Building, Performance Arts Centre of Excellence (PACE), Portland Building, Queens Building, Southgate House, Student Health Centre, Trinity House, Gateway College, Cardingan Building, Hugh Aston Building and the Chaplaincy. 9 Charles Frear Main Buildings, Heron House, Mallard House and the Mary Seacole Centre. 10 Lansdowne Road, 7/9 Landsdowne Road, Alexander Sport Centre/Physiology, Beverly Grove Pavillion, Bowen West Theatre, Dynevor Plantation, Polhill 54/60 Caves Lane, Polhill Avenue Site and Warwick Avenue. 11 Bede Hall, New Wharf Hall, Lawrence Kershaw Halls of Residence and William Rowlett Halls of Residence. 12 Lansdowne Road, 7/9 Landsdowne Road, Polhill Avenue Site and Warwick Avenue. 22

23 Figure 7: Scope 1 and 2 emissions: 2005/ /09 [tonnes of CO 2 e] The divestment of the Bedford Campus in 2006 drove down scope 1 emissions (related to gas consumption) by 44.2% from 4,448.9 tco 2 e in 2005/06 to 2,485.3 tco 2 e in 2006/07 and scope 2 emissions (related to electricity consumption) by 13.7% from 8,767.8 tco 2 e to 7,566.6 tco 2 e. Following this divestment and considering only DMU buildings in Leicester, gas consumption and scope 1 emissions increased by 29% in the period 2006/7 to 2009/10 which is an average growth rate of approximately 10% per year. Electricity consumption and scope 2 emissions grew by 13% and 14% respectively in the period 2006/2007 to 2009/2010. Changes in scope 1 emissions from 2006/2007 may be due to an expansion of the gross internal area (GIA) in academic buildings for conducting University s activities and the increased requirement for space heating as well as variations in the ambient temperature. As to scope 2 emissions, its lower average annual growth rate for electricity consumption may be due to the use of more energy efficiency equipment and better energy management practices. It is important to note that these emissions are also influenced by the fuel mix used for power generation delivered by the national electricity grid (see Annex A). It is important to note that DMU has an Energy and Water Saving Policy as well as Energy and Water Efficiency Standards at the Estates Department. These documents can be found at: 23

24 Scope 3 emissions private halls of residence Private halls of residences provide accommodation to first-year and international students on behalf of DMU. This was previously as part of the University s commitment to find a place in halls for all first year students although this commitment was withdrawn in 2010/11. Around 3,000 university-sourced rooms are available in 9 modern halls of residences within a walking distance to the City Campus. 13 These halls are managed by private providers and the University allocates rooms on the students behalf. Emissions from the private halls of residences are associated to the electricity and gas consumption as well as water use by students living in these residences. Due to the lack of measured data, emissions were initially estimated according to the number of students allocated in these halls of residence and an average electricity, gas and water consumption per student (based on measured per capita average consumption at DMU residence buildings) (see Annex A for further details). Figure 8 illustrates the GHG emissions associated to the private halls of residence. It can be observed that around 83% of the emissions relate to electricity consumption, 15.4% to gas consumption, and 1.6% to emissions associated with the water supply and wastewater treatment. Data for private halls has been derived from data for DMU halls and extrapolated for all private halls. Figure 8: Scope 3 emissions associated to the private halls of residence [tco 2 e] Scope 3 emissions staff and student commute More than 2,000 staff and 22,000 students commute to work and study to the University everyday. The emissions associated with staff and student commuting are also classified under scope 3, because the emissions are generated in private vehicles or modes of transport (bus, train, taxi) operated by individuals or private companies, in which the University was little or no control. These 13 For the academic year 2009/10, the following private halls of residence provide accommodation to DMU students: Waterway Gardens (90 rooms), Gosling Court (112 rooms), Grosvenor House (270 rooms), Kingfisher Court (113 rooms), Liberty Park (566 rooms), Newarke Point (653 rooms), Victoria Hall (398 rooms), Filbert Village (664 rooms) and Benjamin Russell Court (150 rooms). 24

25 emissions are also a consequence of the activities of the University, which can be reduced through a wider use of public transport, car shares or through the promotion of walking and cycling. DMU encourages the use of sustainable modes of transport through its Green Travel Plans 14 to support walking, cycling and the use of public transport and shuttle buses (e.g. Hospital Hopper); encourages multiple occupancy of vehicles and the avoidance of duplication of journeys; and where vehicles are hired, leased or purchased by the University, it favours the use of small, efficient, lowemission engines, including where possible electric vehicles. Information on commuting to the university was obtained from the Annual staff and student travel to work surveys. These surveys are used to estimate the total annual distance travelled by staff and students, the type of transport used to make their journeys and the associated GHG emissions. Survey results regarding distance travelled are scaled to match up with the entire staff and student population. Whilst the response rate from staff to the survey has been relatively high (around 20%), the response rate from students has been particularly low (around 3%). It is also important to mention that data from the annual travel survey are available for 2004/05 (including the Bedford Campus), 2006/07, 2007/08 and 2008/09. Due to the lack of data for 2005/06 (base year), emissions were estimated using extrapolated data of distance travelled by staff and students for this particular academic year. Please refer to Annex A for more details in the estimations. Figures 9 and 10 show the percentages of different modes of transport related to the total distance travelled by staff and students that responded the travel surveys. Table 2 depicts the GHG emissions associated with staff and student commuting according to the mode of transport. The largest contribution of these emissions derived from car use (around 80%), particularly from single occupancy cars. The annual travel surveys indicates that a large number of staff respondents travel by car (around 55%). However, the percentage of single occupancy cars is being reduced while staff is increasingly sharing cars for their journeys as drivers or passengers. Other large portion of staff respondents use trains as their main form of public transport (around 30%), while few staff use the Hospital Hopper (around 0.4%) or other buses (around 5%). The percentage of staff using trains has slightly increased, while the average distance travelled per person has fairly decreased. Only around 6% of the staff respondents walk to the University and around 3% cycle. The main modes of transport used by students respondents were: walking or running (around 34% of the respondents), by car (around 31%) and by train (around 23 %). Survey responds suggest that students travelling by car, train and bus are increasing, while those walking are decreasing. The percentage of students travelling by car and bus are increasing, while the average distance travelled is decreasing. Emissions from train users are rising due to both an increased number of students commuting by train and longer average distances travelled. These emissions represent the second largest emission source in the University, around 31.5% of scope 3 emissions and around 22.7% of total emissions (see Table 1). Within these emissions, the largest source is related to the use of cars among both, staff and students. Due to the large uncertainties associated with student commuting, which can under- or overestimate emissions considerably due to a scaling from 2-3% response rate, particularly when the sample surveyed is skewed towards a specific mode of transport. A top-down analysis using National Travel Survey (NTS) data was conducted in order to assess the significance of the potential errors behind the estimates. This is explained on Annex A. 14 Available at: 25

26 Figure 9: Modes of transport used by staff respondents to the travel survey [% of distance travelled] Figure 10: Modes of transport used by student respondents to the travel survey [% of distance travelled] 26

27 Table 2. Scope 3 emissions associated with staff and student commuting by mode of travel (scaled for total DMU staff and student population) [tonnes of CO 2 e] 2005/ / / /09 STAFF COMMUTING Single occupancy car [t CO 2 e] 1, , , ,404.8 Car share (driver) [t CO 2 e] Car share (passenger) [t CO 2 e] Bus (Hospital Hopper) [t CO 2 e] Bus (other) [t CO 2 e] Train [t CO 2 e] Bicycle [t CO 2 e] Walk/Run [t CO 2 e] Motorcycle [t CO 2 e] Taxi [t CO 2 e] Other [t CO 2 e] Total Staff commuting [t CO 2 e] 2, , , ,041.2 STUDENT COMMUTING Single occupancy car [t CO 2 e] 5, , , ,215.8 Car share (driver) [t CO 2 e] Car share (passenger) [t CO 2 e] Bus (Hospital Hopper) [t CO 2 e] Bus (other) [t CO 2 e] 1, , , Train [t CO 2 e] , Bicycle [t CO 2 e] Walk/Run [t CO 2 e] Motorcycle [t CO 2 e] Taxi [t CO 2 e] Other [t CO 2 e] Total Student commuting [t CO 2 e] 8, , , , Scope 3 emissions business travel Business travel is required for the attendance to meetings, conferences, workshops or for marketing purposes within the UK and Europe or worldwide. The emissions due to business travel occur on vehicles or modes of transport that are not owned or controlled by the University, and therefore are also classified as scope 3 emissions. These are also a consequence of the activities of the University, which can be reduced through the avoidance of unnecessary journeys and encouraging, whenever practical, the use of tele- or video-conferencing. The University s business travel emissions are calculated based on the expenditure based analysis in the recent Carbon footprint study of De Montfort University. The analysis is based on the amount of University funds spent on travel by mode multiplied by a modal CO 2 e factor. Travel spend data derived from the QLX commodity code financial system, procurement card spend and NYS spend (see also section and Annex A). These emissions represent around 3.2% of scope 3 emissions and around 2.3% of the total emissions (see Table 1). Within these emissions, the largest source is related to long and short international air travel, followed by the use of cars and trains (see Figure 11). 27

28 Figure 11: Scope 3 emissions associated with business travel Scope 3 emissions student trips to study at DMU Approximately 20,000 students travel to study at DMU each year. Some of these students are international students while the majority of students are based within the UK. The emissions associated with these journeys are also classified as scope 3 emissions. The emission figures for international student travel to study at DMU were calculated using the data available on international students at DMU. The calculations were based on the distances from the capital city of their home country to London airports. Distances from the capital city of the country of origin to London were obtained and then multiplied by the relevant conversion factors to calculate the emissions. Emission factors for the international flights were obtained from Defra/DECC 2010 (see Annex A). The number of trips that each student make per calendar year are based on guidance from HEFCE 15 where two round trips per calendar year are attributed to EU-25 nationals and one round trip per calendar year for non-eu-25 nationals. International student travel represents around 4.6% of total GHG emissions for DMU and around 6.4% of scope 3 emissions. For the baseline year of 2005/06 emissions for international travel were 2,166 tonnes CO 2 e and this has gradually increased to 2,946 tco 2 e in 2008/09 (see Figure 12). Student travel from UK residents were calculated using distances from London St. Pancras to Leicester train station, Gibraltar North Front Airport to East Midlands Airport, Ronaldsway Airport on the isle of Man to East Midlands Airport, Belfast City Airport in Northern Ireland to East Midlands Airport, Edinburgh train station in Scotland to Leicester and from Cardiff train station in Wales to Leicester. It was assumed that UK students travel home 3 times per year (one per term), there would 15 Carbon management strategies and plans A guide to good practice; HEFCE

29 be no domestic air flights from Scotland, Wales and England and these journeys would be made by either train or by car (see Annex A for further details on the assumptions). Distances were calculated for students return trips and multiplied by the relevant emission factor. For the baseline year 2005/06 UK student travel accounted for tco 2 e which was 1.9% of total DMU emissions. During the period these emissions have reduced to tco 2 e in 2008 (see Figure 12). Figure 12: Scope 3 emissions from UK and international students travels to/from DMU Scope 3 emissions visitors to DMU Visitors to DMU can include parents or friends visiting the campus, staff and students from other campuses or business people from other organisations. Currently, there is no travel survey data in relation to visitor travel. Anecdotal evidence suggests that visitor travel is not very significant when compared to other travel sectors. For the purposes of producing an estimate for this document, it is assumed that the visitor travel emissions are about 10% of the staff commuting emissions (see Table 3). Table 3. Scope 3 emissions associated with visitor travel 2005/ / / /09 Visitor travel emissions Total Staff commuting [tco 2 e] 2, , , , % taken for visitor travel [tco 2 e)

30 Scope 3 emissions Supply chain emissions from procurement Procurement emissions result from the production and transportation of goods and services purchased by DMU. The emissions arising from DMU procurement activities is calculated by converting DMU s expenditure on goods and services to equivalent emissions, using the 75 Defra Sector CO 2 e carbon intensities given in Defra s 2010 Guidelines to Defra / DECC s Greenhouse Gas Conversion Factors for Company Reporting 16. These supply chain emission factors derived from an environmentally extended input-output (EE-IO) analysis according to the National Accounts sectors (see Annex A). An EE-IO model follows the flow of environmental footprints along supply and production chains in a similar manner that an economic IO model follows the flow of money or costs from production to consumption. This approach involved gathering data on the University procurement spend for the period 2005/ /09 so that emissions from procurement could be included within the 2005 baseline and an understanding of the recent trends in emissions could be obtained. Data on procurement spend derive from several difference sources: The QLX commodity code financial system at DMU Spend from the procurement card NYS travel spend data to calculate business travel (see section 6.3.4) Utility data to use as a cross check against energy usage In order to avoid double-counting, the procurement emissions exclude emissions related with operational energy (gas combustion and purchased electricity) and travel emissions figures. Once a thorough understanding of procurement spend was obtained and results filtered to ensure there was no double counting the spend from the different procurement areas were mapped against the 75 Defra Sector carbon intensity codes. A more detailed analysis of the procurement calculations are contained within the recent Carbon footprinting study for DMU. 17 These emissions represent the largest emission source in the University, accounting for 14,697 tco 2 e, which are around 43.3% of scope 3 emissions and around 31.1% of total emissions in the base year 2005/06 (see Table 1). Procurement emissions increased 31% from 14,697 tco 2 e in 2005/06 to 19,273 tco 2 e in 2008/09 (see Table 4 and Figure 13). The largest contributors to the procurement emissions are: Construction. This sub-sector represented around 30% of the procurement emissions in the base year. However, construction emissions have more than doubled between 2005/06 and 2008/09 due to a significant investment in new buildings. Business services. This sub-sector includes spending on financial, legal and marketing services. Emissions have reduced by around 10% during the analysed period. Despite the fact that this sub-sector is less carbon intensive than construction, the spend remains significant. Other manufactured products. This sub-sector comprises the embodied emissions resulting from the purchase of a range of manufacturing products, most notably furniture, which 16 Carbon intensity values taken from Defra s 2010 Guidelines to Defra / DECC s Greenhouse Gas Conversion Factors for Company Reporting, available at: 17 Carbon Footprint Study of De Montfort University, Arup;

31 accounts for around 25% of spend in this sub-sector. These emissions have decreased in around 29% in the period. Information and communication technologies (ICT). This sub-sector encompasses the embodied emissions associated with manufacture of ICT products purchased by DMU including PCs, monitors, printers and associated consumables (including ink and toner cartridges). Waste products and recycling. Waste-related emissions represent around 4.3% of the procurement emissions. These emissions have decreased from 634 tco 2 e in 2005/06 to 524 tco 2 e in 2008/09. It is important to highlight that DMU has an Estates Waste Management Policy 18 in place as well as a recycling scheme. This scheme was set up in April 2002 and it is operated by the Estates Department, involving all faculties, departments and research institutes of the university. The scheme started with recycling paper and reusing envelopes, and gradually extended to recover different recyclable materials and reduce the amount of waste disposed to landfills. Currently, the materials recovered by this scheme are: batteries, cardboard and cans, CDs and DVDs, computers, fluorescent tubes, ink cartridges, ferrous and non-ferrous metals, mobile phones, different types of paper, plastic and wood. Significant progress of this scheme through the reduction of general waste sent to landfills and the increase of materials recovered and sent to recycling facilities within Leicestershire. Figure 13: Scope 3 emissions from procurement activities Source: Carbon Footprint Study of De Montfort University, Arup; Available at: 31

32 Table 4. GHG emissions related to procurement by category Category 2005/ / / /09 Construction [t CO 2 e] 4,175 7,411 6,479 10,839 Business services [t CO 2 e] 3,698 3,643 4,034 3,324 Other manufactured products [t CO 2 e] 2,380 2,362 1,608 1,690 Information and communication technologies [t CO 2 e] 1,848 1,846 1,585 1,319 Waste products and recycling [t CO 2 e] Paper products [t CO 2 e] Food and catering Manufactured fuels, chemicals and glasses [t CO 2 e] Water and sanitation [t CO 2 e] Other procurement [t CO 2 e] Total Procurement emissions [t CO 2 e] 14,697 17,773 15,912 19,272 Source: Carbon Footprint Study of De Montfort University, Arup; Total emissions: scope 1, 2 and 3 Figure 14 shows all of the emissions data for scopes 1, 2 and 3 to illustrate the trend in emissions from the base year. This graph depicts the relevance of monitoring scope 3 emissions as it represents around 72% of DMU total emissions, where procurement emissions represent around 43% of scope 3 emissions. Figure 14: DMU Carbon Emissions 2005/ /09 Scope 1, 2 and 3 Sources 32

33 From a consumption-based approach, emissions data can also be aggregated in the following primary sectors: Building energy. Energy-related emissions from DMU buildings and equipment. This sector includes emissions from gas and electricity consumption in DMU buildings (scope 1 and 2) and private halls of residence (scope 3). Travel. Transport related emissions associated with the movement of people. This sector comprises emissions from: DMU own vehicles (scope 1), staff and student commute (scope 3), business travel (scope 3), visitor travel (scope 3) and international and UK travel to study at DMU (scope 3). Procurement. Embodied (indirect) emissions of the goods and services consumed by the University. This includes procurement emissions (scope 3) and water-related emissions from private halls of residence (scope 3). Figure 15 illustrates emissions under this classification. It depicts that energy-related emissions represents around 33% of total emissions, transport-related emissions around 32%, while procurement emissions contribute with around 35%. Figure 15: DMU emissions related energy, travel and procurement 2005/ /09 33

34 7. Carbon Management Matrix and Status The Carbon Management Matrix is a self assessment tool to help organisations understand their influence on carbon emissions and their current approach to embedding carbon management within their own organisation. The matrix is used widely by organisations such as the Carbon Trust as part of their Higher Education Carbon Management (HECM) programme. The matrix covers six key areas in relation to carbon management and encourages organisations to score themselves on a scale of one to six depending on progress. The matrix is also a useful tool in relation to understanding the structures and management processes that need to be in place to successful management and reduce carbon emissions. DMU progress on carbon management has been assessed as:- Policy Level 3 - Sustainability / Climate change included in wider policy documents Organisation Level 3 - Sustainability / climate change/ carbon management is part-time responsibility of moderate ranking personnel, e.g. Energy Manager, Sustainability/Environment Officer Information and data Level 4 - CO 2 emissions compiled for all main HEI sources for a baseline year (i.e. buildings, transport and commuting, etc. Data internally reviewed. Communication & Training Level 3 - Ad hoc communication and training delivered to all staff/students on carbon and energy related matters Finance Level 3 - Some internal financing on an ad hoc basis for carbon and/or energy efficiency related projects. Review conducted on applicable external funding sources Monitoring and Evaluation Level 3 - Ad hoc assessment of all aspects of carbon/energy policies/strategies, targets and action plans 34

35 The matrix can be used to establish the status of carbon management in an HEI. POLICY ORGANISATION INFORMATION AND DATA COMMUNICATION AND TRAINING 5 Specific sustainability / climate change policy with targets signed off and implemented. Action plan with clear goals and regular reviews to confirm actions undertaken and targets achieved/being progressed. Accountabilities for sustainability /climate change defined at senior level, e.g. senior Sustainability / climate change responsibilities integrated into responsibilities of relevant people in different departments, e.g. Teaching, Finance, Estates CO 2 emissions compiled for all main HEI sources for a baseline year and regular collation of annual emissions data. Data externally verified. Formalised communication and training plan for all staff on carbon and energy related matters, including integration in induction and other normal training processes. Communication on carbon and energy related matters with the academic and student body and other key business partners FINANCE Use of innovative external funding mechanisms for carbon related projects. Development of internal financing mechanisms, e.g. self sustaining fund, specifically for carbon related projects MONITORING & EVALUATION Management Review of carbon management process by senior management. Regular reviews by core team on progress with carbon management. 4 Specific sustainability / climate change policy with targets developed and signed off, but not implemented Sustainability / climate change responsibilities integrated into responsibilities of relevant people in different departments, e.g. Teaching, Finance, Estates CO 2 emissions compiled for all main HEI sources for a baseline year (i.e. buildings, transport and commuting, etc. Data internally reviewed. Formalised communication and training plan for all staff on carbon and energy related matters, including integration in induction and other training, and awareness raising Strategic plan for developing internal financing mechanisms and obtaining funds from external sources Regular reviews on progress with carbon management (e.g. review of actions, check against emissions profile and targets, addition of new opportunities etc.) 3 Sustainability / Climate change included in wider policy documents Sustainability / climate change/ carbon management is part-time responsibility of moderate ranking personnel, e.g. Energy Manager, Sustainability/Environment Officer CO 2 emissions data compiled for some sources for a baseline year (e.g. buildings) and source data available for other sources (e.g. transport) Ad hoc communication and training delivered to all staff/students on carbon and energy related matters Some internal financing on an ad hoc basis for carbon and/or energy efficiency related projects Review conducted on applicable external funding sources Ad hoc assessment of all aspects of carbon/energy policies/strategies, targets and action plans 2 Sustainability / Climate change as an aspiration in non-policy documents Sustainability / climate change/carbon management is part-time responsibility of low ranking personnel No CO 2 emissions data compiled for any sources but energy data compiled on a regular basis Communication and training to specific groups in the HEI (e.g. environment team) on carbon/energy related matters Some internal financing on an ad hoc basis for carbon and/or energy efficiency related projects Ad hoc reviews of specific aspects of carbon/energy policies/strategies, targets and action plans 1 No sustainability / climate change policy or strategy and no mention of climate change in policy/strategy documents No individual with responsibility for sustainability / climate change issues No CO 2 emissions data compiled for any sources and energy data not compiled on a regular basis No communication or training to staff/students on carbon or energy related matters No internal financing or funding for carbon and/or energy efficiency related projects No monitoring of carbon/energy policies/strategies, targets and action plans 35

36 8. Carbon Management Projects This section details the projects that will be undertaken to meet the carbon reduction target for As part of the annual reporting and periodic review process of the Carbon Management Plan these projects will be reviewed on a regular basis and maybe amended as new projects come forward and are developed. The costs and carbon emissions expected from the projects shown here have been taken from detailed proposals for projects, information from research and guidance, and estimates contained within best practice guides completed by the Carbon Trust. The costs shown here do not include staff time. Current carbon reduction projects with funding already allocated at DMU These projects are already underway at DMU Table 5. Current carbon projects at DMU Project Lead Implementation CO 2 e Years ( ) Saving (t) Green Impact Estates 2, / /11 Student Switch Off Estates 1, / /11 DUALL Project IESD 27, / /11 Energy efficiency as part of the Refurbishment of Bosworth House Estates 4.8m refurbishment Carbon reduction projects with funding already allocated or identified at DMU These projects have been planned in detail with funding allocated or identified Table 6. Planned projects with funding allocated or identified Project Lead Implementation CO 2 e Year ( ) Saving (t) Upgrade of BMS Controls (Queens Building) Estates 250, /10 Campus Centre Air Handling Unit Modification Estates 65, /10 Monitoring and Targeting for individual buildings Estates /11 10:10 Campaign awareness raising campaign with students and staff Estates /11 36

37 Carbon reduction projects planned by DMU as part of Carbon Management Plan These projects will be pursued as part of the CMP. These projects will be taken forward with submissions for internal funding from DMU and applications for external funding where possible. Table 7. Projects requiring funding as part of CMP Project Lead Implementation CO 2 e Year ( ) Saving (t) Building Management System optimisation (schedules, timers, controls Estates 12, /11 etc) Passive Infrared (PIR) sensors in vending machines Estates 4, /11 Switch off campaign including guidance to staff on PC use Estates /11 PC switch off software Estates/ITMS 28, /12 Boiler load controls Estates 31, /12 Energy efficient equipment minimum specifications in line with DMU Energy Estates To be identified /12 Policy Roll out Green Impact to further 15 teams/departments Estates 3, /12 Carbon management included in strategic documents Estates /12 Voltage optimisation Estates 443, /13 Server Virtualisation programme ITMS /13 Replace a number of printers with Multi Functional Devices (MFD) ITMS /13 Lamp/lighting conversion from T8 to T5 Estates 112, /14 Replace a number of PCs with thin client ITMS /14 Passive Infrared (PIR) sensors in toilets Estates 147, /15 Possible Future Carbon Reduction Projects at DMU These potential project areas have yet to be fully defined as individual detailed projects. Table 8. Potential project yet to be fully defined Project Lead Implementation CO 2 e Year ( ) Saving (t) Renewable Energy (mix of PV and wind turbine) Estates 397, /16 Central CHP scheme linked to city network Estates To be identified /19 37

38 Opportunities for the provision of renewable energy technologies across the DMU campus are currently being considered. The opportunities for including renewable energy technologies on the campus arise during refurbishment projects, in the delivering of new buildings or when external funding opportunities appear. There is also the additional option of third party finance for installations on campus which is currently being explored. Leicester City Council is developing a project to extend their existing district heating network which provides heat for a number of their properties. The aim of the project is to link buildings from large organisations into the network to provide more efficient heating. The project already includes the University of Leicester and Leicester Prison. In the first instance the project will use a gas fired CHP unit with the option to switch to biomass fuels. DMU has expressed an interest in this project and as a result the central CHP scheme has been included within the CMP. The timescales for the city council project are towards the end of the period which the CMP covers and as such the project may develop and change over time. Changes to this project will be assessed during the annual review and reporting process for the CMP as set out in section 10. Implementing the projects outlined above should enable DMU to meet its carbon reduction targets for scope 1 and 2 of 12% by % by 2017 and 43% by 2020 based on its 2005/06 baseline emissions DMU. A time series diagram showing the predicted effect on scope 1 and 2 emissions at DMU by the projects listed above is shown below in Figure 16. Figure 16: Carbon Reductions from Carbon Projects within CMP 38

39 9. Value at Stake The Value at Stake (VAS) analysis is the preliminary indicator for the business case for action on carbon management. The calculation of VAS is defined as the difference between doing nothing (a business-as-usual approach) and taking an active approach to Carbon Management as part of a systematic greenhouse gas emissions reduction programme. The aim of the VAS is to identify the potential costs of a business as usual case against an approach that aims to reduce emissions. Therefore the data used in the calculation of the VAS is for those sites and buildings which DMU own and manage. The VAS does not include data and costs for residential halls which are not directly managed by DMU as these are classed as scope 3 emissions. The VAS only covers scope 1 and scope 2 emissions. The VAS can be expressed as either tonnes of carbon equivalent (tco 2 e) or in financial terms and examples of both of these are shown below. The VAS calculation has been taken from the Carbon Trust s Higher Education Carbon Management Programme (HECM) and has used the same assumptions contained within that calculation. The calculation does not include the potential indirect financial benefits of new products and services, new markets or enhanced competitiveness, and the value impacts on marketing as it was felt that that this could not be accurately quantified. For example based on the information from the Forum for the Future student survey what is the financial benefit of being a low carbon university to our customers? However the HECM VAS calculation does provide an opportunity to add these values in. The VAS also does not include the financial implications of the Energy Efficiency Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy, CO 2 and other assumptions Given the volatile nature of energy markets it is difficult to predict the potential impacts of increasing costs and consumption. The University is also currently undergoing changes to its estates in the refurbishment of existing buildings and the construction of new buildings in particular the new Business and Law building. Forthcoming changes to the estate have been included with the VAS where the savings are quantifiable. In the Value at Stake Exercise, a variety of assumptions have had to be made, based on the information available to the University and the assumptions used by the Carbon Trust within their HECM. The assumptions are detailed in the Appendix B and demonstrate the upward trend in both cost and consumption and have attempted to demonstrate the long term potential impacts for this organisation Business as Usual (BaU) scenario The BaU is calculated to show what might occur if no further action were taken to reduce carbon emissions. The BaU has been calculated to cover the period up to This has been set to compare DMU carbon reduction targets with those at the higher education sector which have been set for 2020 with interim targets for 2012 and As detailed in Appendix B a number of assumptions and predictions have been made to complete the BaU and these are detailed below. 39

40 Using these assumptions, within the constraints identified above in Appendix B, it is possible to project forward to gain an understanding of future costs and consumption of energy from gas and electricity use i.e. scope 1 and 2 emissions. Figure 17 below shows the business as usual projection for carbon dioxide emissions from the baseline year of 2005 up to The projections include gas, electricity and DMU owned vehicles. The projection below does not include emissions from non DMU halls of residences. Figure 17: Business as Usual Approach (Tonnes for all Scope 1 and 2 Sources) based on 0.7% annual increase in energy consumption Figure 17 shows that a business as usual approach will increase emissions to 12,344 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tco2e) by 2015 and 12,782 tonnes by From Figure 18 it can be seen that a Business as Usual approach would mean that costs for energy for buildings and fuel for DMU owned vehicles are estimated to be 3,714,000 by 2015 and 4,554,000 by The projections are based on estimates from the former DTi and the Carbon Trust on increases in energy consumption over the next few years. These estimates are an increase in consumption of 0.7% pa for electricity and 0.7% for gas. However if we look at the increases in consumption of electricity and gas since the diverage from Bedford in 2006/07 this shows an annual increase in electricity consumption of 4% per year and an increase in gas consumption of 10% per year. Therefore the value at stake which is represented below may in fact be much larger than estimated. 40

41 Figure 18: Business as Usual Approach ( 000s) for Scope 1 and 2 Emissions based on 0.7% annual increase in energy consumption 9.3. Reduced emissions scenario (RES) To give a comparison of what might be achieved through a structured campaign to reduce DMU s carbon emissions a Reduced Emissions Scenario (RES) has been produced to compare against the Business as Usual situation. The RES is based on a 4.1% per annum reduction in consumption of electricity, a 4.2% per annum reduction in gas consumption and a 2% reduction in diesel consumption. The reduced emissions scenario brings the carbon reduction target in line with HEFCE targets for the HE sector. Value at Stake Comment on reduction assumptions 41 Decrease per annum Reduction per year in electricity consumption 3.6% Reduction per year in gas consumption 3.7% Reduction per year in petrol consumption 2.0% Reduction per year in diesel consumption 2.0% The Value-at-Stake is the gross difference between the BAU and RES: that is, the potential value to be obtained through adopting a Carbon Management approach. The VAS here is shown in two parts firstly for energy used in buildings as the carbon value at stake (see Figure 19) and then as the financial value at stake (see Figure 20).

42 Figure 19: Carbon Value at Stake (Tonnes) for Scope 1 & 2 Sources Figure 20: Value at Stake ( 000s) for Scope 1 & 2 Sources 42

43 The Value at Stake in relation to carbon emissions is the difference between the business as usual approach and the reduced emissions scenario. From Figure 19 its can be seen that at 2020 this may be as much as 5,272 tonnes. The financial Value at Stake in 2020 may be as much as 1,883,000. Note that the reduced emissions scenario does not include costs of investing in new equipment to reduce emissions. It is also worth noting that these estimates are based on the predicted increases in consumption from the former DTi and the Carbon Trust. These are estimated at an annual increase of 0.7% consumption. However over the past three years consumption of energy at DMU has increased by 4% per annum for electricity and 10% per annum for gas. If these increases are used the difference between the Value at Stake and the Reduced Emissions Scenario is more pronounced and this is shown in Figure 21. Figure 21: Carbon Value at Stake (tonnes CO2e) using past consumption as a guide for future consumption This figure shows that the value at stake for carbon emissions using past consumption as a guide for future consumption shows that by 2020 this maybe as much as 14,925 tonnes CO 2 e. If these assumptions are applied to the financial value at stake by 2020 this may be as much as 5,749,000 using the assumptions stated. 10. Reporting and Monitoring of Carbon Emissions at DMU HEFCE guidance requires that HEIs set carbon reduction targets for 2020 to link in with the HE sector target and national carbon reduction targets. The Estates Department and the IESD will be responsible for collating information on carbon emissions arising from DMU operations and activities. Information will be gathered on an annual 43