Table of Contents. Steam Plant...13 UND s Fuel Use: University Fleet, Aviation School, & Misc. Fuel Use...15 Refrigerants...17 Fertilizer...

Transcription

1

2

3 Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS... 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 2 BACKGROUND... 4 INVENTORY METHODOLOGY... 6 CAMPUS OVERVIEW... 8 LOOKING FORWARD... 9 EMISSION RESULTS Scope Trends Over Time...11 Scope I Emissions Steam Plant...13 UND s Fuel Use: University Fleet, Aviation School, & Misc. Fuel Use...15 Refrigerants...17 Fertilizer...18 Scope II Emissions Electricity Sources...19 Scope III Emissions Indirect Transportation: Commuting, Financed Travel, & Study Abroad...21 Waste Management: Solid and Wastewater...23 Other Emission Sources...25 PEER INSTITUTIONS SUMMARY ATTRIBUTION FOR COVER PAGE REFERENCES... 29

4

5 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Implementation Liaison: Larry Zitzow, Director of Facilities Management Images: Courtesy of Chuck Kimmerle, UND University Relations office Technical Coordinator& Author: Randall Bohlman; CEM, CMVP, CDSM Technology Advancement Coordinator, Dept. of Facilities The Spirit Eagle statue of UND. One of UND s better known statuaries on campus. We would like to acknowledge support from the following people: Earth System Science & Policy (ESSP), Dept. of ESSP 501 Graduate Study Program Cherie New, Class 2010 Sergey Molodtsov, Class 2011 Brent Silvis, Class 2013 Facilities Management, Department of Larry Zitzow, Director Randy Bohlman, Tech. Advancement Coordinator Janice Hallin, Assistant to Director Diane Fugleberg, Utility Accountant Craig Berntsen, Space Manager Vern Anderson, Systems Supervisor Laura Thoreson, Business Services Debbie Merrill, Administrative Assistant Bill Gerszewski, Heating Plant Manager John D. Odegard School of Aerospace Science Frank Argenziano, Assistant Dir., Flight Operations Accounting Services Allison Peyton, Director of Accounting Services Office of International Programs Duplicating Services Transportation, Department of Mary L. Metcalf, Manager Biology Greenhouse UND Golf Course Dustin Hetletved University of North Dakota 1

6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY UNDERSTANDING UND S CARBON FOOTPRINT Scope II III Scope III Scope I Figure 1: Graph summarization of UND s 2013 GHG emissions; color coded by scope. BACKGROUND The University of North Dakota (UND) is dedicated to preserving the environment and minimizing its impact on the natural world. Therefore, in January 2008 former President Charles Kupchella signed the American Colleges and University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) pledge. UND s current President, Robert O. Kelley, has affirmed his continuing support of this pledge. As part of this pledge, UND has been over the years committed to the development of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) inventory reports and Climate Action Plans (CAPs). This is UND s third GHG inventory report and updates its GHG emissions profile. UND s first CAP was dependent on the results of the University s first GHG inventory report which was released in May UND is using these reports and action plans to develop better ways for the University to reduce its GHG emissions with the goal of being a climate neutral campus (a campus with no net GHG emissions) Greenhouse Gas Inventory TIME FRAME This report covers fiscal years (FYs) , and all calculations were based on data collected in These data were then added to previous information for time trend comparisons through 1993 when possible. UND s fiscal year is July 1 to June 30. BOUNDARIES The areas included in this report are UND s main campus along with several satellite facilities. These satellite facilities are: the Aviation buildings and Flight School, the Bismarck & Minot Centers for Family Medical, the Medical Educational Center of Fargo, and assorted other leased buildings. In FY 2013, the square footage for all of these facilities combined was 6.58 million square feet. The UND campus population used for this report was 18,114 in FY A breakdown by category for population can be found in the Campus Overview section of this report.

7 SCOPES The GHG protocol divides GHG emissions into three main categories called scopes based on their source. Scope I includes all direct emissions from the University. Scope II emissions are from purchased utilities. Scope III covers all indirect emissions from the institution and is broken down into 15 sub-categories. A more thorough description of all three scopes is listed within the Inventory Methodology section of this report. METHODOLOGY UND s emissions were calculated following the procedures outlined by ACUPCC and using the Clean Air-Cool Planet Campus Carbon Calculator program as the primary tool. Detailed procedures can be found in the Inventory Methodology section of this report. RESULTS UND s results for the 2013 GHG inventory report show that the University was responsible for the consumption of 2,758,347 MMBtu (one million British Thermal Units) of energy and the emission of 140,388 MTCDE (metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents) in 2013 (Table 1, Figure 1). The major sources of UND s emissions are UND s Steam Plant, with 53 percent of the emissions, and purchased electricity, with 14 percent of the emissions. These two sources combined equal 67 percent of the emissions for UND with the rest mostly from Scope III sources. More detailed information regarding scopes and sources can be found in their respective sections of this report. PEER COMPARISON For peer comparisons, the MTCDE was normalized per 1000 square feet and per full-time student equivalent (FTE). UND s emissions are higher than the calculated average emissions of the eight selected institutions compared. Of these eight, the calculated average MTCDE per FTE is 6.9, compared to UND s 7.6 and the average MTCDE per 1000 square feet for is 16.8, compared to UND s More detailed information can be found in the peer comparison section. FUTURE INVENTORIES In 2011, new guidelines for Scope III were released. Following these guidelines required new data collecting for University construction, leased buildings, dining services purchasing, and information on UND s Endowment Fund. While collecting data for the new guidelines, it was learned that UND does not have a direct endowment fund. It is held by the Alumni Association and therefore does not fit within the new guidelines for Scope III. The other additional data collecting would require considerable labor and it is believed that they would have a minimal impact on total emissions. Therefore, it was decided not to include those sections into this report. If possible, these sections may be added to a future report. NEXT STEPS Following this report, the next step for UND will be to release a revised CAP with updates on the actions UND has taken to reduce its GHG emissions and what it plans to do in the future to continue reducing GHG emissions Greenhouse Gas Inventory Summary Scope Emission Source MTCDE % Co-gen Electricity % Co-gen Steam 75, % Scope I Other On-Campus Stationary 2, % Direct Transportation 10, % Refrigerants & Chemicals % Agriculture % 62.84% Scope II Purchased Electricity 20, % 14.39% Faculty / Staff Commuting 4, % Student Commuting 13, % Directly Financed Air Travel 4, % Scope III Study Abroad Air Travel % Solid Waste 6, % 22.76% Wastewater % Scope 2 T&D Losses 1, % Paper Purchasing % Total 140, % Table 1: Table summarizing UND s 2013 GHG emissions; color coded by scope. *Per new Scope III protocols in 2011, Construction, Leased Buildings, Dining Services Purchasing, and Endowment Fund (which is not held under UND) were not included within report due to believed low emissions impact or not valid per protocol guidelines. University of North Dakota 3

8 BACKGROUND EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE ON NORTH DAKOTA AND UND S COMMITMENT TO REDUCE ITS EMISSIONS EFFECTS OF CLIMATE CHANGE Climate change is defined by the EPA as any significant change in climate parameters such as temperature, precipitation, or wind, lasting for an extended period, meaning decades or longer. 6 It can be caused by an increase in the concentrations of heat-trapping GHGs in the atmosphere (Figure 4). Climate change is evident in the current observations of the Earth s atmosphere because there is a clear increase in global average temperature since 1850 (IPCC, AR5; Figure 3). 5 Other indicators of climate change are the warming of the oceans, a decrease in the amount of snow and ice, and a rise in sea level. According to the IPCC s (International Panel on Climate Change) most recent assessment report (AR5), the cause of climate change is over 95 percent likely due to anthropogenic (manmade) emissions of GHGs. 5 Figure 2: Graph of the observed change in CO 2 concentration from 1950 to The IPCC concluded that the change was due to manmade emissions of greenhouse gases. These human contributions to the atmospheric concentration of GHGs (Figure 2) is reflected in the recent warming of the climate, changes in precipitation, more extreme climate regimes, and a rise in sea level. 5 The detailed description of physical basis for climate change is provided by the IPCC reports and can be found at CLIMATE CHANGE IMPACTS ON NORTH DAKOTA Some regions are more vulnerable to climate change than others. Very steep temperature and precipitation gradients make the territories of the Upper Midwest, particularly North Dakota, very susceptible to changes in their local climate. In addition, North Dakota is a very important agricultural state and climate change impacts could cause severe losses in this sector. 8 Figure 3: Graph of the observed globally averaged combined land and ocean surface temperature anomaly , IPCC Greenhouse Gas Inventory U.S. corn production losses due to the excess of heavy precipitation under climate change may double during the next thirty years, causing additional damages which are estimated at $3 billion per year. 10 The occurrence of large and extreme floods may be intensified under rapid climate change. 7 And in the Red River Valley, floods under climate change conditions can occur

9 more likely due to increased precipitation events than from snowmelt events. 9 Changes in temperature will also affect the state, which can lead to a dramatic impact on its agriculture production. Under different warming scenarios there is a potential of severe crop yield losses. 11 However, there are continued debates on the climate change effects on agriculture, and it is conceivable that these changes could actually result in longer growing seasons in North Dakota. 12 AMERICAN COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTS' CLIMATE COMMITMENT Twelve college and university presidents who recognized the importance of addressing climate change drafted and signed the ACUPCC in The signatories to the commitment, which number 677 schools at the time of this report, are located in all 50 states, and have pledged to eliminate their campuses GHG emissions in a reasonable period of time as determined by each institution. 2 By signing the commitment, a president commits the institution to developing a comprehensive plan Figure 4: Graph of the greenhouse effect by the IPCC, EPA, Okanagan University College, and University of Oxford. to achieve climate neutrality as soon as possible, initiating two or more actions specified by the commitment while the comprehensive plan is being developed, and making publicly available the action plan, inventory, and periodic progress reports. 2 It is expected that the inventory of all GHG emissions be completed within one year of signing the document, and that an institutional action plan for becoming climate neutral will be developed within two years. 2 UND SIGNS CLIMATE COMMITMENT In January 2008, President Kupchella signed the ACUPCC, and UND became the first institution in North Dakota to sign the commitment. Currently, only two other colleges in North Dakota have become ACUPCC members. At the time of signing, President Kupchella said it was important to take the steps now to set into motion a process by which the University might model positive corporate behavior. To date, UND has fulfilled nearly all of the requirements of the ACUPCC commitment. Immediately after signing the commitment, Kupchella created and appointed a core group to sit on the Council on Environmental Stewardship & Sustainability (CESS). The next step was the initial GHG emissions inventory report and then the development of the CAP, both of which UND has completed. Now an updated GHG inventory report is due every other year. This is UND s third biennial report. UND s current president, Robert Kelley, has expressed his continued support of the ACUPCC and signed the 2010 CAP. University of North Dakota 5

10 INVENTORY METHODOLOGY THE GREENHOUSE GAS PROTOCOLS PROTOCOLS AND DATA COLLECTING UND s GHG emissions for FYs were calculated based on the data collected in 2013 from various departments across campus. Calculations followed the procedures outlined by ACUPCC, using the Clean Air-Cool Planet Campus Carbon Calculator program which is a free Excel workbook designed to facilitate these tasks (Figure 6). 4 It is based on workbooks provided by the IPCC on climate change for national-level inventories and is adapted for use at institutions like a college or university. 3 The calculator also includes all six primary GHGs: carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), methane (CH 4 ), nitrous oxide (N 2 O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF 6 ). Because carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is the most common GHG, emissions are reported in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (MTCDE), unless otherwise stated. A metric ton is equal to 2205 lbs. or 1.1 short tons (a short ton is the common measurement for a ton in the United States, equal to 2,000 lbs. or metric tons). 4 FYs data were added to data from previous reports that go back to July 1, The data collected for this report used the newly updated (2011) Scope III GHG protocols. Because of this change in methodology and data collection, there will be variations in some time trend data. When this occurs, these differences will be pointed out within the time trend data. Details concerning each section s methodology can be found within that section of the report. Figure 5: Graphical listing of the upstream and downstream activities per scope that is needed for a GHG emissions report as of the updated 2011 Scope III protocols. ( Greenhouse Gas Inventory

11 INPUTS CALCULATIONS RESULTS GRAPHS Step 1: Enter your data Input_InflAdg Adjust budget figures for inflation Input Main dataentry sheet Input_Commuter Optional - Enter data on commuters S_CO 2 CO 2 emissions by source S_CH 4 CH 4 emissions by source S_N 2 O N 2 O emissions by source S_CO 2_ Sum Total CO 2 emissions by sector S_CH 4_ Sum Total CH 4 emissions by sector S_N 2 O_Sum Total N 2 O emissions by sector Step 2: View inventory results S_eCO2_Sum Summary of all emissions by sector and scope Set up and view graphs GraphControl EF_ElectricMap Choose your egrid region CustFuelMix Optional - Specify a custom electricity fuel mix S_Energy Energy use by source S_Energy_Sum Total energy use by sector S_Annual Detailed emissions for each year S_Demo Demographic data e.g. emissions per student. Figure 6: Clean Air-Cool Planet Campus Carbon Calculator spreadsheet map. SCOPES The GHG protocols categorize GHG emissions into three scopes (Figure 5). Each scope is defined by the level of responsibility of the reporting entity and the source of the GHG emissions. Below is a list of the scopes and the categories each scope covers. Scope I: Direct emissions sources 1. On-campus stationary sources (Steam Plant and generators) 2. Direct transportation 3. Fugitive emissions from refrigeration and agriculture. Scope II: Indirect sources owned by UND 1. Purchased electricity 2. Transmission and distribution (T&D) losses Scope III: Sources not owned but financed by UND 1. Purchased goods and services 2. Capital goods 3. Fuel and energy related activities 4. Indirect transportation and distribution 5. Waste generated 6. Business travel 7. Employee commuting 8. Upstream leased assets 9. Downstream transportation and distribution 10. 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 In 2011, the GHG Scope III protocols were updated and this is UND s first inventory report using the new guidelines. New data needed to be acquired and processed to meet the updated guidelines. At the time this report was submitted, not all categories had been completed. Incomplete categories have been noted and those data sets are currently under review for possible future processing. TREND DATA As is the case with most GHG emissions inventories, there were data sets for which complete information since 1993 could not be acquired or was not in the format the calculator used required. This occurred for several categories, but a presentation of a complete picture of UND s emissions over time was deemed important. Therefore, in cases where data were incomplete, methodology was developed to fill in the most likely numbers using procedures approved by the ACUPCC. University of North Dakota 7

12 CAMPUS OVERVIEW CAMPUS HISTORY AND DEMOGRAPHICS HISTORY OF UND UND is located in the city of Grand Forks, ND along the western Minnesota border approximately 75 miles south of the Canadian border. The Red River of the North runs through the downtown, separating the towns of Grand Forks and East Grand Forks, MN. The city of Grand Forks is the county seat of Grand Forks County, with a 2010 population of ~53,000. UND is one of 11 public colleges and universities within the North Dakota University System. The University of North Dakota was founded by the Dakota territorial assembly in 1883 as a public university. UND employed 821 faculty and 2,043 staff in FY 2013, with 15,250 students enrolled (its highest enrollment ever). North Dakota residents make up 43 percent of the students while the rest represent 49 states, nine Canadian provinces and 75 nations. The campus includes 240 buildings (6.58 million square feet) on 548 acres. RESEARCH AT UND UND is classified by the Carnegie Foundation as a doctoral/research-intensive institution. It offers 90 undergraduate majors, 73 undergraduate minors, 54 masters programs, 27 doctoral programs, two professional programs (medicine and law), and one specialist diploma program. UND s operating budget in 2013 totaled $410 million with research expenses totaling $58 million or about 14 percent. The University also operates a number of research units and an aviation school. FLOOD OF 1997 A significant chapter of UND s history happened in April 1997 when the Red River of the North flooded. Water rose eight feet above street level and required the entire cities of Grand Forks and neighboring East Grand Forks to evacuate. Seventytwo University buildings were damaged and had to be rebuilt or renovated. This caused enrollment to temporarily decline. Picture of the flood from 1997 of Grand Forks, ND. U.S. Army Core of Engineers Greenhouse Gas Inventory

13 LOOKING FORWARD WHERE UND IS AND WHERE UND IS HEADED WHERE UND IS NOW At the University of North Dakota, we are proud of our commitment to and significant efforts in sustainability and going green. Our commitment informs and manifests itself in everything that we do, such as planning new buildings that meet the highest LEED (Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design) standards, engaging in research that is focused on protecting the environment, such as the work at the Energy & Environmental Research Center, and developing and implementing academic programs such as the Department of Earth System Science & Policy and programs in areas such as law and physical sciences, said Dr. Robert Kelley, president of the University of North Dakota. INVESTING IN EFFICIENCY UND has invested significantly in energy efficiency projects. Beginning in 2000, UND executed a $3.9 million comprehensive energy efficiency improvement program to reduce electric and steam usage. This currently generates a savings of about $500,000 each year, which is used to pay off the improvement cost. In 2005, an additional $2.1 million facility energy improvement program reducing electrical, steam, natural gas and water usage was begun. These actions were guided by an effort to reduce energy consumption, but were not based on a campus-wide survey of energy consumption or GHG emissions. Since the completion of the GHG report in 2007, a $1 million grant was received for additional energy conservation measures. Years GHG Levels Percent Decrease ,000 Base ,333 7% ,833 51% Table 2: GHG levels for the 1990 baseline and estimated trajectory for 2020 and Walkways provide scenery as well as opportunities to navigate the campus without using cars. COUNCIL ON ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP AND SUSTAINABILITY The CESS continues to work on the commitments made when the ACUPCC was signed in The council helped complete and develop many of the ideas within UND s CAP which was released in May Today CESS continues to use many of the ideas and suggestions within the action plan to help further lower UND s GHG emissions. University of North Dakota 9

14 Figure 7: UND s projected trajectory if consistent with current amount of annual investments ($500,000) in efficiency projects. The projected trajectory estimates a 7 percent reduction by 2020 and a 51 percent reduction by The council used UND's GHG emissions report and CAP to establish trajectories to reduce UND's GHG emissions (Table 2, Figure 7). To meet this trajectory, a comprehensive approach is needed to reduce carbon emissions. CESS had identified a total of 106 Sustainability Improvement Measures (SIMs) that could be incorporated throughout the campus, focusing on areas of research, education, energy, procurement, recycling, transportation, and outreach. In preparing the CAP, each SIM was evaluated for the estimated cost, potential annual cost or savings, simple payback over the years of the project, the net primary value after 20 years, and the carbon reduction associated with each action. Most projects are being administered through Facilities Management with funding sources from bonded energy efficiency projects or ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) energy efficiency grants. Currently, UND has been able to stay on track with meeting its trajectory and, with the right funding and support, should continue to do so (Figure 7). For these efforts, UND received the Administrator Award for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy from WAPA (Western Area Power Administration) in This award recognized UND s advances in high-tech energy, which have allowed it to heat more buildings with less energy. Prior to that, UND received a National Energy Award in 1994 from the U.S. Department of Energy for the New Dimension in Boiler and Building Technology project. Research, planning and investment in efficient energy strategies have allowed the University to cut costs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase efficiency. UND will continue to look for ways to enhance efficiency in meeting the needs associated with providing heating, cooling, transportation and electricity for a growing campus Greenhouse Gas Inventory

15 EMISSION RESULTS SCOPE TRENDS OVER TIME EMISSIONS BY SCOPE Figure 9 shows the emissions over time for UND by scope in MTCDE. The highest emission year within the observational period was 2001 with 159,902 MTCDE; and the lowest emission year was 2012 with 128,801 MTCDE. This was partly due to the fact that the winter of 2012 was unusually warm and therefore had an uncommonly low number of Heating Degree Days (HDDs) for the region (Figure 8). HDDs are a quantitative index designed to reflect the demand for energy needed to heat a building. However, emissions for 2012, and the last four years were lower than the cumulative average 145,491 MTCDE for the University Figure 8: Heating Degree Days (HDD) for Grand Forks, North Dakota by year for with the average and the uncommonly low year 2012 given in values. (Figure 9). The cumulative emissions for all three scopes have had a decreasing trend since 1993 (Figure 9). To look at the overall trend per scope, each scope s slope was calculated and summarized in Table 3. A negative slope indicates decreasing emissions. By far the largest improvement is in Scope I. Neither Scopes II nor III showed improvement, and, in fact, had increases in their selected emissions slopes. The increase for Scope II Figure 9: UND s greenhouse gas emission for by scope and the cumulative average. University of North Dakota 11

16 most likely results from UND increasing its purchased energy in recent years. It is possible that without the energy measures that UND has in place now, Scope II s slope would be even higher. Scope III s increase is most likely due to the increase in commuting as a result of the increase in student, faculty and staff populations. Scope Slope (m) I II III Total Table 3: List of UND s GHG scopes and combined totals with their corresponding slopes for the reporting years Slopes were calculated with linear regression. It is a testament to the energy efficiency measures that UND has in place that, even with a rise in both Scope II and III, UND still has an overall decrease in GHG emissions. This is due to the aggressive energy efficiency measures of UND s Facilities Department. The first major funding project for these measures started in 2000, the second in 2005, and a third in The impacts of these projects can now be seen within the total MTCDE output of the University. With continued funding and implementation of additional energy efficiency measures, UND will have the financial support it needs to stay on track by maintaining its projected emissions trajectory and low energy costs. OVERALL EMISSIONS AND EFFICIENCY Total campus efficiency is graphed on Figure 10 and is broken down by total emissions per FTE, total emissions per square foot, and total emissions per HDD; along with their corresponding trend lines and slopes. FTEs are calculated by applying a weight of 1.0 to each full-time student enrolled and 0.5 to each part-time student enrolled. The MTCDE per FTE showed the largest improvement and has decreased 10 units from 17 to 7.6 MTCDE since 1993 (Figure 10). Next, the MTCDE per square foot improved nearly as well, with a decrease of more than eight units from 30 to 21.8 MTCDE since 1993 (Figure 10). There was no real improvement in the MTCDE per HDD which only decreased from 14.3 to 14.1 MTCDE since 1993 (Figure 10). This shows how much UND has improved its energy efficiency since In the coming years, UND will be challenged to continue this efficiency trend. Figure 10: UND s emissions efficiency during the period per thousand square feet, per FTE, and per HDD, along with corresponding trend lines and slopes for all efficiencies Greenhouse Gas Inventory

17 STEAM PLANT SCOPE I EMISSIONS ON-CAMPUS STATIONARY SOURCES Campus stationary sources produce the highest percentage of overall emissions, with the campus Steam Plant being the main contributor. FY 2013 oncampus stationary sources produced 77,439 MTCDE, which accounted for 55 percent of total campus emissions; of this the Steam Plant produced 75,004 MTCDE or 97 percent of these emissions (Figure 1, Table 1). The Steam Plant is fueled primarily by coal and alternatively by #2 distillate oil and natural gas. Other sources of emissions that contribute to the on-campus stationary source category are eight University-owned fixed generators, as well as natural gas burned at buildings not connected to the campus Steam Plant, Figure 11: Output from UND s Steam Plant in MMBTU and MTCDE, such as Ryan Hall, the airport, and Fargo medical buildings. STEAM PLANT UND s Steam Plant is the single largest consumer of energy and is responsible for 53 percent of all UND campus emissions. In FY 2013, the Steam Plant produced 688,244 MMBtu for the campus and surrounding area and generated 75,004 MTCDE of GHGs (Figure 11). An MMBtu is equal to one million British Thermal Units (Btu). One Btu is the amount of heat that is required to increase the temperature of one pound of water one degree Fahrenheit. To facilitate comparisons, all energy units are converted to MMBtu. Between FYs 1993 and 2013, the highest emissions from the Steam Plant were seen in FY 1994, while FY 2012 marked the lowest (Figure 11). The campus Steam Plant is the largest consumer of energy and the greatest source of emissions on campus. Discrepancies between MTCDE and MMBtu outputs for the years FY 1996 and FY 1997 are likely caused by inconsistent data resulting from disaster-related occurrences (Figure 11). Aboveaverage numbers of heating degree days, combined with power outages associated with blizzards and University of North Dakota 13

18 Figure 12: Output from UND s Steam Plant in MMBtu and MTCDE per HDD with linear trend lines and matching slopes for flooding could explain the disturbance in the trend seen in other years (Figure 11). Differences in the fuel mix used in the boilers from year to year can also explain some of the variation seen in Steam Plant outputs elsewhere (Figure 11). Higher quantities of natural gas and lower amounts of coal were used in FYs 1993, 1996, 1997, and 1999, which correspond with lower emission years (Figure 11). from FY 2008 to FY 2013 and this can be seen in the negative slope of the Steam Plant s MTCDE output (Figure 11). This trend will likely continue with the continued commitment of funding and resources. STEAM PLANT AND HEATING DEGREE DAYS Along with energy efficiency measures, emissions from the Steam Plant largely depend on the severity of the winter, with the general trend of higher emissions associated with colder winters and more HDDs. Figure 12 shows the Steam Plant s output in MTCDE and MMBtu per HDD, which provides a graphical representation of the plant s efficiency. The Steam Plant s change in MMBtu per HDD slope is and the Steam Plant s change in MTCDE per HDD slope is Both slopes show an overall improvement in efficiency during for the Steam Plant, with a greater improvement in its production of MMBtu per HDD. Continued efficiency improvements contributed to a trend of decreasing emissions from FY 2001 through FY However, system failures and a cold winter caused emissions to increase in 2007 (Figure 11). Emissions decreased again UND has a higher-than-average number of heating degree days, so students get accustomed to the snow and colder temperatures in winter quickly Greenhouse Gas Inventory

19 UND S FUEL USE SCOPE I EMISSIONS: UNIVERSITY FLEET, AVIATION SCHOOL, AND MISCELLANEOUS FUEL USE DIRECT TRANSPORTATION Per Scope I definitions, anything that UND as an entity owns or uses that consumes fuel and produces GHG emissions - a car for transportation, a plane for training, or a lawnmower for cutting grass - counts as Scope I emissions. For ease of use, we combined all of these emissions into a fuel use emission category. UND operates a system of shuttle buses, giving students an alternative to walking or driving when on campus. UNIVERSITY FLEET The University fleet consists of all state-owned vehicles, including all campus shuttle buses and utility operators. Data were based on the University s Department of Transportation (DoT) annual reports, which supplied mileage and gallon usage for the gasoline vehicles and hourly totals for the diesel vehicles. Because total gallon data were unavailable for the diesel fleet, estimations were made based on an hour-per-gallon ratio for campus shuttles. Figure 13: Total fuel use in thousands of gallons for UND s fleet, In FY 2011, there was an update to the classification system for the gasoline vehicles that led to an increase in the MPG accuracy rate used for these vehicles. This, in turn, led to an increase in the accuracy of the MPG rate used for those vehicles (Figure 13). There was also a large drop in gasoline use in FYs 1997 and 1998 for fleet vehicles (Figure 13). This is likely due to the flood of Based on all available information, the University fleet consumed 101,446 gallons of gasoline and 54,566 gallons of diesel fuel in FY Emissions from the University fleet totaled 1,488 MTCDE, or about 1 percent of all campus emissions. AVIATION SCHOOL UND Aerospace offers flight training to students as part of the institution s well-known aviation program. UND operates a fleet of more than 120 aircraft - the world s largest non-military fleet of training aircraft - within its training complex at the Grand Forks International Airport. The jet fuel and aviation fuel used for flight training contribute significantly to campus emissions. University of North Dakota 15

20 Before 2009, all fuel estimates for the aviation school were based on the amount of fuel purchased and a coefficient for actual airtime. Starting in FY 2009, record keeping was changed to include the amount of actual fuel burned during training, and it is this number that is now used in the GHG report (Figure 14). In FY 2013, UND Aerospace used 205,947 gallons of jet fuel and 754,814 gallons of aviation fuel, which make up 34 percent of the energy used by UND. This use emitted 10,327 MTCDE, or 7 percent of all campus emissions. The aviation school accounted for about 7 percent of UND s total emissions in FY UND Flight School has more than 120 aircraft, the world s largest non-military fleet of training aircraft. MISCELLANEOUS FUEL USE UND is responsible for maintaining about 550 acres of land. A large portion of that land needs to be mowed and landscaped. There are also miscellaneous vehicles and equipment used daily for construction and general maintenance at the University that require fuel to operate. Miscellaneous fuel use data were from UND s Department of Transportation annual reports of fuel purchases. The data for FYs 2006, 2007 and 2008 were collected and used to backfill (Figure 15). In 2013, data for FYs were collected and used to backfill FYs 2009 and 2010 (Figure 15). Due to a change in research measures, more equipment was counted in 2013, which led to a rise in miscellaneous fuel consumption numbers. In FY 2013 UND used 9,717 gallons of gasoline and 16,822 gallons of diesel in miscellaneous equipment for the upkeep and maintenance of the University. Figure 14: Total aviation gas and jet fuel used in thousands of gallons by UND s flight school, Figure 15: Total miscellaneous fuel use in thousands of gallons for UND equipment operations, Greenhouse Gas Inventory

21 REFRIGERANTS SCOPE I EMISSIONS Because of its location, UND has long and mild summers REFRIGERANTS The release of chemical refrigerants is a small source of CO 2 emissions for UND. Less than 1 percent of total campus emissions can be traced to refrigerants. The primary refrigerant emissions at UND are chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), the main type of which is known as HCFC-22. UND had a spike in the loss of HCFC-22 over the last several years (FY ) due to the repair and replacement of several older, large-capacity HCFC-22 pieces of equipment (Figure 16). Because of these repairs and upgrades, UND should see a reduction in the amount of HCFC-22 used (Figure 16). 578 pounds of HCFC-22s were lost in FY 2013, which accounted for 446 MTCDE. Figure 16: Total pounds of HCFC-22 released at UND, University of North Dakota 17

22 FERTILIZER SCOPE I EMISSIONS: NITROUS OXIDE (N 2 O) FROM FERTILIZERS FERTILIZER Fertilizer is tracked for GHG emissions because the nitrogen in fertilizer can be transformed into nitrous oxide (N 2 O). Nitrous oxide has a Global Warming Potential of 310; one pound of nitrous oxide has a warming effect equivalent to 310 pounds of carbon dioxide. 4 UND does not engage in agriculture, but it does apply fertilizer to athletic practice fields, flower beds and the Biology Department greenhouse. The University also has a golf course that uses fertilizer. The Grounds Department, which cares for most of the campus lands, uses between 2,500 and 2,600 pounds of synthetic fertilizer each year. The Biology Department uses pounds annually for its greenhouse. The golf course uses an average of 4,200 pounds of fertilizer annually. All of these amounts have been steady over the years. Combined, this is about 7000 pounds of fertilizer which is 31 percent nitrogen. This amount of fertilizer accounts for no more than 9 MTCDE per year. In the 2010 UND Climate Action Plan an idea was proposed for a campus composting site. This compost could be used in place of purchased fertilizer. This natural fertilizer would contribute less to GHG emissions and pollution than its synthetic counterpart. Flowers flourish during the spring at UND Greenhouse Gas Inventory

23 ELECTRICITY SOURCES SCOPE II EMISSIONS UND S ELECTRICITY EMISSIONS The second largest contributor to campus emissions is purchased electricity. UND campus electrical usage for FY 2013 accounted for 734,838 MMBtu and 20,208 MTCDE, which is 14 percent of total emissions (Figure 17 and 18, and Table 1). Overall usage has increased since base year 1993, which can be attributed to campus growth, higher student numbers, and more intensive electricity uses, such as research. The last several years have seen a decrease in the Figure 17: Emissions output from purchased electricity (Scope II) in MTCDE, overall MTCDE emissions and MMBtu output from purchased electricity for UND, with a small increase in MTCDE emissions output in the last two years (Figure 17 and 18). This increase in MTCDE emissions is due to the declining percentage of hydroelectricity as a source of purchased electricity. Figure 18: Power from purchased electricity in MMBtu and energy efficiency of MMBtu per 1000 sq. ft. with trend line, PURCHASED ELECTRICITY SOURCES UND s contract with WAPA (Western Area Power Association) covers more than half of the campus electricity demand and contributes clean hydroelectricity to UND s purchased electricity mix (Figure 19, Table 4). Most of the remaining campus demand is met by Xcel Energy, which uses a variety of sources (Figure 19, Table 4). A small amount is supplied by Nodak Electric, which provides UND s University of North Dakota 19

24 Electricity mix and emissions in percentages for FY 2013 Figure 19: Large pie graph is UND s purchased electricity mix in percentages. Small pie graph is the emissions in percentages from each source. Note the large amount of emissions from coal given its smaller amount in the overall mix for UND Custom Fuel Mix airport facilities with electricity. This accounts for 2-3 percent of UND s annual usage. Because UND has a fixed contract with WAPA, increasing demand for electricity must be met by increased amounts purchased from Xcel Energy. This results in more emissions from fossil fuel sources. This trend will likely continue until UND s contract with WAPA changes or the campus develops alternative energy projects. CURRENT FUEL MIX UND s purchased electricity mix contained less than one third hydrocarbons (fossil fuels, percent) in FY 2013 (Figure 19, Table 4). The other part of the Energy Source Percentage Purchased Energy Source Electricity kwh MTCDE Coal 24.19% 17,937,216 17,818 Natural Gas 7.56% 5,605,119 2,387 Nuclear 3.83% 2,837,446 0 Hydro-Electric 60.00% 44,485,109 0 Biomass 0.41% 302,351 3 Renewable (wind, solar) 3.95% 2,930,477 0 Other 0.06% 46,516 0 Total 100% 74,144,234 20,208 Table 4: Break down of UND s purchased electricity mix by percentages and kwh for FY WAPA supplies UND with percent of campus electricity needs with hydroelectricity annually. (Source: Greenhouse Gas Inventory electricity mix comes from renewable sources (64.36 percent, mostly from WAPA) and from nuclear energy (3.83 percent; Figure 19 and Table 4). Such fuel mixtures dramatically decrease emission amounts from purchased electricity. With further development of green energy in North Dakota, more electricity may come from renewable sources which would reduce the hydrocarbons used in the future.

25 INDIRECT TRANSPORTATION SCOPE III EMISSIONS: COMMUTING, FINANCED TRAVEL, AND STUDY ABROAD TRAVEL INDIRECT TRANSPORTATION Indirect transportation covers transportation that creates GHG emissions that is indirectly related to the operation of UND. For the purpose of this report, these emissions have been grouped into several categories: Commuting, Directly Financed Air Travel, and Study Abroad Air Travel. While these categories do not cover all indirect transportation emissions (for example, student or faculty travel by train or boat) they do cover most of these emissions. COMMUTING With more than 18,000 students, faculty and staff, the commute to campus produces considerable emissions. An in-depth commuting survey was sent to all UND students, faculty, and staff in October 2009 and was used to backfill the commuting information to This was followed up with a shorter commuting survey in November 2013, which was used to fill the years Both surveys were designed to sample commuting habits and estimate the number of miles traveled per year per campus community member. The results from this survey for car usage can be seen in Table 5. Survey Year Average Car Usage Trips per Week/Miles per Trip Student Faculty Staff /6 12/7 13/ /9 12/7 13/10 Table 5: Average trips per week and average miles per trip traveled, based on the number of community members each year at UND from the results of two surveys from 2009 (used to cover ) and 2013 (used to cover ). There was a difference in the averaged trips per week traveled for students (an increase of 3 trips per week) while both faculty and staff showed no change. There was also an increase in miles per trip for students (an increase of 3 miles per trip), while staff had only an increase of one mile per trip and faculty was again consistent with the previous survey. There were changes in the questions used for the second survey which did not allow for as much of a breakdown for bus usage as the first survey. This increased the bus mileage calculated for commuting. This might have led to an overestimation on the amount of bus usage for UND. Emissions from commuting estimates totaled 17,845 MTCDE, or 13 percent of total campus emissions in FY Commuting consumed 242,994 MMBtu, or 8 percent of total energy usage. Commuting contributes about 13 percent of total UND emissions. DIRECTLY FINANCED TRAVEL Directly-financed travel emissions were computed from cash value reimbursement records based on the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) guidelines. These guidelines use University of North Dakota 21

26 Figure 20: Amount of miles traveled with directly financed travel at UND, a formula that includes the Air Transport Association of America (ATAA) conversion number, which was 17 cents in Conversion numbers were not found for 2011 or 2012 so 2013 s conversion number of 17 cents was used for all three years. Records for UND-financed travel could only be collected from 2005 on. Therefore, all previous emission amounts before 2005 were calculated based on data collected from (Figure 20). The AATA conversation number used for all of these years ( ) was 25 cents. There are spikes seen in directly financed travel (FYs 2004, 2008, ), but overall the trend in miles traveled has been increasing over the last several years (Figure 20). The last three years (FYs 2011, 2012, and 2013) all show higherthan-average miles traveled (Figure 20). In FY 2013, faculty and staff totaled over 8 million air miles which used 22,026 MMBtu and produced 4,426 MTCDE, or less than 4 percent of total campus emissions. STUDY ABROAD AIR TRAVEL Emissions from study abroad travel were calculated based on data from the number of students studying abroad each year and the number of air miles to each destination. Study abroad estimates have been steadily increasing since 1991; they peaked in 2005 with Bikes provide alternative transportation to students at UND. 2,930,874 miles (Figure 21). Since then, study abroad has hovered between 1.5 million and 2.5 million miles (dropping below these numbers in 2009 and 2010) (Figure 21). The number of miles seems to be based more on the number of students going to more distant destinations than any other trend in the last several years. Figure 21: Amount of miles traveled for study abroad travel at UND, Greenhouse Gas Inventory Study abroad has a low impact on total campus emissions and energy usage. For example, in FY 2013, estimates on study abroad travel showed students traveled about 1.6 million miles which consumed 4,431 MMBtu of energy and produced 890 MTCDE for that year. These numbers represent less than 1 percent of overall energy usage and of total campus emissions.

27 WASTE MANAGEMENT SCOPE III EMISSIONS: SOLID WASTE AND WASTEWATER DISPOSAL WASTE MANAGEMENT Waste management at UND consists of the disposal of solid waste and wastewater, which account for about 5 percent of campus CO 2 emissions per year (Table 1).Landfilled waste or solid waste disposal is the primary source of methane emissions on campus, while wastewater releases a significant amount of nitrous oxide. SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL When collecting solid waste data for the GHG report, FYs , 1997 and1998 had to be backfilled based on the data from the surrounding years. This includes flood year It is likely that if exact data were available, 1997 would be characterized by a much higher than normal amount of waste disposal due to the amount of damage by flooding that year. Even with a growing population, UND has been able to decrease the amount of trash it sent to the landfill in recent years. Figure 22: UND s community population size, amount recycled in tons, and amount sent to landfill in tons per year, Even with its population climbing, UND has been able to maintain a stable solid waste disposal amount, and more recently has reduced this number (Figure 22). In FY 1994 UND had a population close to 15,000 students, faculty and staff. In that same fiscal year the University sent 2,188 tons of solid waste to the landfill. Yet with a population this fiscal year (2013) of about 18,000, UND sent 2,118 tons, less than This is partly due to UND s aggressive recycling program. In FY 1993 UND recycled only about 9 percent of its solid waste (about 287 tons), but 10 years later UND recycled 684 tons of waste. This was close to 24 percent of the University of North Dakota 23

28 University s total solid waste for the year and included 83 tons of scrap metal. Since FY 1993, UND has diverted more than 10,000 tons of solid waste from the local landfill with its recycling program. Solid waste disposal accounts for a small percentage of campus CO 2 emissions (Table 1) and is the primary source of methane (CH 4 ) emissions, which have 21 times the global warming potential of CO 2. 4 The city landfill that takes in UND solid waste does not currently have CH 4 recovery capabilities. CO 2 emissions from waste have decreased slightly since base year 1993 as seen with its decreasing Figure 23: UND MTCDE emissions from solid waste and wastewater per year, slope of -3.4 (Figure 23). Landfilled waste contributed 6,566 MTCDE, or 5 percent of total campus CO 2 emissions in FY Solid waste was responsible for 262,632 kg of CH 4 emissions, or 93 percent of overall campus CH 4 emissions. UND is working hard to control its wastewater production. WASTEWATER UND s wastewater is another small contributor to campus emissions and has been decreasing since base year 1993 (Figure 23). This can be seen in the slight decrease in its slope of (Figure 23). Wastewater from campus is sent to a local water treatment plant. CO 2 emissions from wastewater are insignificant and contribute less than 1 percent to UND s total emissions (Table 1). However, wastewater was responsible for 181 kg of N 2 O emissions, or 6 percent of campus N 2 O emissions in FY Greenhouse Gas Inventory

29 OTHER EMISSION SOURCES SCOPE III EMISSIONS: PAPER PAPER An in-depth study was conducted by the Purchasing Office in 2008 to estimate the amount of paper UND uses. The study totaled about 200,000 lbs. of paper with about 20 percent of it having 30 percent recycled content. The amount of paper used previous to 2008 was then backfilled based on this study and the number of community members at UND each FY (Figure 24). UND uses 200, ,000 lbs. of paper per year. paper had a recycled content of 30 percent (Figure 24). Following 2008, the University s Purchasing Office started to track all paper purchases made by each department. Because of the large amount of work required for this tracking program, it was stopped a couple of years later and only covered FYs 2009 & The Purchasing Office s numbers for these FYs were about 325,000 lbs. and 17 percent of the The largest paper tracking program is through UND s Duplications Department, which handles most of the white printing paper for the departments and computer labs. The University s Printing Department was shut down so that paper count is no longer within the overall paper count. The combination of the loss of the Purchasing Office s tracking program and the shutdown of the Printing Department accounts for the difference seen between 2010 and 2011 in paper totals (Figure 24). In 2013, UND s Duplications Department tracked about 240,000 lbs. of paper with about 7 percent of it being of 30 percent recycled content. The paper purchased in FY 2013 produced 179 MTCDE, or less than 1 percent of UND s total CO 2 emissions. Figure 24: Total paper purchased in thousands of pounds (lbs.) at UND over the years University of North Dakota 25

30 PEER INSTITUTIONS COMPARISON WITH OTHER UNIVERSITIES SELECTION PROCESSES Because of UND s location in North Dakota, one of America s coldest states, UND has a higherthan-average heating energy use. UND also has a world renowned aviation school which adds to UND s energy use. Therefore, other institutions for comparison were chosen based on size, location, and if they have an aviation school, to more closely match UND s circumstances. One university from Montana and five from Minnesota were chosen for comparison based on location and size. Two other universities were chosen based on having aviation schools: Cornell University, New York and the University of Cincinnati, Ohio (Figure 25). The University of Minnesota, Crookston also has an aviation program. Figure 25: Comparison of emissions between UND per 1000 square feet and per FTE with other selected institutions, as reported to the AASHE.¹ All institutional data were from their own GHG inventory reports and posted on the AASHE website. 1 Eight of the universities except one have no offsets; Cornell University has a 5 percent offset. Of the eight schools compared, the average MTCDE per FTE was 6.9 MTCDE and the average MTCDE per 1000 sq. ft.was16.8 MTCDE. UND s MTCDE per FTE was 7.6 and its MTCDE per 1000 sq. ft. was 21.8 in 2013 (Figure 25). Therefore, for this comparison UND s emissions were above average. New energy efficient lighting at UND saves money and reduces campus emissions Greenhouse Gas Inventory