Greenhouse Gas Inventory University of North Carolina at Wilmington

Transcription

1 Greenhouse Gas Inventory University of North Carolina at Wilmington August 2017

2 Acknowledgements This report was prepared by graduate student Daniel Pate with the help of methodologies developed by The Good Company, a Eugene, OR-based sustainability research and consulting firm, and the Appalachian Energy Center. The project was funded by The Green Initiative Fund (TGIF). Additionally, information from the following sources was used: The University of North Carolina System, the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), icompli Sustainability, David Suzuki Foundation, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the UNCW Office of Institutional Research and Planning. Also making contributions were UNCW Environmental Health & Safety Director Stan Harts, Sustainability Captain Kat Pohlman and several university department contacts who helped with data collection. For additional information about UNCW s sustainability efforts, please contact Ms. Pohlman at pohlmank@uncw.edu. Executive Summary This report focuses on university emissions for Fiscal Years (FY) 2015, 2016 and 2017 and builds on previous inventories. In addition to reporting emissions numbers, the study also focuses on comparing the university s performance to peer institutions, projecting future emissions and recommending emissions reduction strategies. Tracking emissions is important in monitoring efforts to achieve sustainability goals such as the University of North Carolina Sustainability Policy that calls for state universities to achieve carbon neutrality by Overall, emissions between FY2015 and FY2017 rose modestly compared to previous years while student enrollment increased rapidly and campus building square footage did not change. The rise in emissions is partly due to an increase in electricity usage, which is possibly linked to an increase in warm weather and building additions occurring just before FY2015. The increase in emissions can also be linked to upticks in goods purchased by the university and the number of parking permits sold. However, natural gas usage has been steadily declining and FY2017 emissions per student are near the lowest level of the past seven years. Campus Greenhouse Gas Inventory This report s methodology follows the accounting guidelines in the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol). The GHG Protocol is the leading global standard for GHG accounting frameworks and serves as the basis for standards that include the Association for the Advancement 14,463 full-time equivalent students 2,200 faculty & staff UNCW At A Glance 4,004,331 building square feet AASHE* STARS** Silver Rating Member Signed the American College & University Presidents' Climate Agreement (ACUPCC) *The Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education **Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System

3 MTCO 2 e of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) and the American Colleges and University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC). This inventory includes emissions from UNCW s main campus along with other university operations in the area. The fiscal years of focus for this report include 2015, 2016 and 2017, although numbers from 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 will be referenced for comparison. The fiscal year starts on July 1 and ends June 30. Figures 1 and 2 below show the university s overall emissions. FY2017 emissions totaled 85,323* metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCO2e). This was a 2.8* percent decrease from FY2016 and a 16.0* percent increase from FY2011. It should be noted that some data from the final months of FY2017 were extrapolated from the previous year due to time constraints. Fiscal Years of Focus Emissions by Year (MTCO2e) FY ,712* 100,000 90, ,763* 80,000 70, ,323* Figure 1: Total emissions for each of the past three fiscal years 60,000 50,000 FY Figure 2: Total emissions over the past seven fiscal years

4 The GHG Protocol uses various scopes based on the entity that controls the emissions of a given source. Scope 1 emissions involve sources controlled by UNCW and include stationary combustion, fugitive emissions and fleet fuels. Scope 1 Stationary combustion Fugitive emissions Fleet fuels Scope 2 emissions are more indirect and involve electricity purchased from another entity. Scope 3 emissions are also indirect and include supply chain, student and employee commutes, business travel, solid waste and transmission and distribution losses. Although the GHG Protocol does not require reporting of Scope 3 emissions, UNCW tracks these numbers for a more accurate idea of the university s carbon footprint. Scope 2 Scope 3 Purchased electricty Figure 3: List of emissions sources by scope Business travel Commute (students & faculty) Solid waste Supply chain Transmission and distribution losses Figures 4, 5 and 6 below illustrate emissions by scope over the past three fiscal years. During this span, Scope 3 had the most emissions at 117,162* MTCO2e. The top emissions sources were purchased electricity at 110,842 MTCO2e and supply chain at 50,242* MTCO2e. It should be noted that some business travel, including rental car, train and student study abroad, were not included due to unavailable data. Figure 7 shows emissions by scope for each of the last seven years. FY Emissions Scope 1 Emissions By Source: FY Scope 1: 12% 7% 5% Scope 3: 45% Scope 2: 43% 88% Fleet Fuels Natural Gas Refrigerants Figure 4 Figure 5

5 MTCO 2 e Business Travel 6% Solid Waste T&D Losses 43% 24% Commute Supply Chain 21% 6% Figure 6 Emissions By Scope 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 FY Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 Figure 7 Figures 8 and 9 show emissions from purchased electricity and on-campus natural gas combustion over the last seven years. These are two of the highest emission sources on campus with natural gas accounting for 8,595 MTCO2e and purchased electricity accounting for 36,543 MTCO2e in FY2017. The university purchases its electricity from Duke Energy.

6 MTCO 2 e / FTE-Student MTCO 2 e / 1,000 Sq. Ft. MTCO 2 e MTCO 2 e Electricity Emissions By Year Natural Gas Emissons By Year 40,000 11,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 9,000 7, ,000 FY Figure 8 gure 2 Figure 9 FY While electricity has remained steady over the past three years, natural gas combustion has decreased 13.4 percent since FY2014 despite increases in student enrollment. In addition to energy efficiency improvements, this decrease is likely due to warmer weather occurring in FY2016 and FY2017 compared to FY2015. Warmer weather results in less natural gas used for heating, although it can result in more electricity used for cooling. Figures 10 and 11 show emissions per full-time equivalent student and per 1,000 building square feet over the last seven years. Emissions per student for FY2017 was 4.58 MTCO2e, or 7.9 percent lower than the previous year. Emissions per 1,000 square feet for FY2017 was 11.4 MTCO2e, or 4.5 percent lower than the previous year. The decreases over the past year could be due to a recent sharp increase in student enrollment and energy efficiency improvements made to campus facilities. Emissions per Emissions per Student 1,000 Building Square Feet FY Figure 10, with a linear trend line FY Figure 11, with a linear trend line

7 MT CO 2 e / FTE Student MTCO 2 e / 1,000 Square Feet GHG Benchmarking Comparing UNCW emissions levels to peer institutions can help the university gauge efficacy in carbon reduction efforts. The institutions below were chosen due to resemblances in student enrollment and academic structures. Figures 12 and 13 compare UNCW s emissions per full-time student equivalent and per 1,000 building square feet with those of peer institutions. For this comparison, only Scope 1 and 2 emissions are included because not all reported Scope 3 emissions numbers from the institutions are equivalent. Additionally, the most recent data from each institution are used. Peer Institutions: Emissions per Full-Time Equivalent Student Peer Institutions: Emissions per Building Square Feet Figure 12 Figure 13 GHG Mitigation For UNCW to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050 as proposed by the UNC Sustainability Policy, the university will have to reduce emissions while undergoing rapid student and building area growth. Carbon neutrality means that the university produces no net emissions and it usually involves the purchase of offsets to negate emissions. This section shows projections using baseline emissions, or emissions under a business as usual scenario, compared to strategies targeting carbon neutrality. Some emissions associated with UNCW are in the control of outside parties. These scenarios include policies that alter the electricity production process at utilities and changes in fuel efficiency of transportation used by university employees. It should be noted that these projections are considered only an assessment and that certainty of numbers decreases with time. Figure 14 projects the baseline emissions and compares it to a targeted rate that aims for carbon neutrality. The baseline, which is projected to be 95,935 MTCO2e by FY2050, was created using historic data from each emissions source. Projections were created using calculations developed by The Good Company in the previous greenhouse gas report. For more on the methodology of these projections, please see the Appendix &

8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MTCO 2 e) Assumptions section or Appendix B of the 2014 Greenhouse Gas Inventory, which is available on the UNCW Sustainability website. 100,000 Historic/Baseline/Target Campus Emissions 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, Historic GHG Emissions Baseline GHG Emissions Target Emissions Level Figure 13: Comparing two emissions projections up to 2050; historic emissions also included Purchased electricity is one of the university s largest emissions sources. The source s carbon intensity is influenced by policies on Duke Energy s electricity generation, which in turn can alter the university s carbon footprint. This scenario also applies to regulations on fuel economy for vehicles that could be purchased by the university. Current policies and utility plans suggest that the carbon intensity of purchased electricity and vehicle fuel economy will be reduced in the long-term future. This would help UNCW towards closing the gap between baseline and target emissions. Figure 15 illustrates a projection of this scenario. This strategy is projected to reduce FY2050 campus emissions to 66,362 MTCO2e, or about 22 percent below the FY2017 level.

9 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MTCO2e) Policy-Adjusted Emissions 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, Baseline Emissions Target Emissions Policy-Adjusted Emissions Figure 15: Baseline and target emissions projections up to 2050 with a projection that includes carbon-related policies In addition to the aforementioned policies, the university will have to implement mitigation efforts in order to reach carbon neutrality. While there are many mitigation strategies, this report focuses on Energy Services Performance Contracts (ESPCs) and solid waste management. ESPCs are agreements with energy companies that involve upgrades to campus buildings. UNCW recently completed ESPC 2, which involved upgrades to 17 buildings on campus and is projected to save the university $577,484 in energy costs during the first year. ESPC 1 was completed in 2011 and saved the university $357,766 in FY2015. The second mitigation strategy of focus is solid waste management. The university can substantially reduce emissions by sending its waste to a landfill that recovers and flares methane, a potent greenhouse gas. If methane flaring was carried out in FY2017, the university could have reduced emissions by as much as 7,996 MTCO2e. New Hanover County Landfill, the location where the university disposes its solid waste, plans on implementing this practice by January Additional solid waste management strategies include increasing composting services and continuing to market recycling services. Figure 16 illustrates projected emissions when combining policy changes and the campus mitigation efforts mentioned above. These two strategies are projected to reduce FY2050 campus emissions to 48,459 MTCO2e, or about 43 percent below the FY2017 level. The university can implement additional mitigation strategies to close the gap even further.

10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions (MTCO 2 e) Policy-Adjusted and Mitigation Strategy Emissions 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20, Baseline Emissions Policy-Adjusted Emissions Target Emissions Mitigation Strategies Figure 16: Baseline and target emissions projections up to 2050 with carbon-related policies and campus mitigation strategies incorporated

11 The following are strategies the university can launch or continue in order to reduce its campus carbon footprint. Solid Waste Starting in August 2017, UNCW will compost organics from Wagoner Dining Hall and Dub's Cafe at the New Hanover County Landfill. The landfill plans on recovering and flaring methane by January This process can reduce university emissions by as much as 7,996 MTCO 2 e each year. The university can continue to market recycling and increase the number of bins on campus. Energy Service Performance Contracts (ESPCs) These contracts involve energy efficiency upgrades to campus facilities. The university recently completed ESPC 2, which involved 17 facilities and is projected to save UNCW $577,484 in energy costs in the first year. The university saved $357,766 in FY2015 from ESPC 1. Continuing these projects in the future can help mitigate campus energy demand while increasing the longevity of university facilities. Carbon Offsets Offsets can be purchased from another party to negate emissions produced by the university. Carbon sequestration is another offset strategy. Planting 200 trees and allowing them to grow for 10 years can sequester nearly 17,000 pounds of CO 2 e, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Green Transportation Promoting alternative transportation can reduce emissions from employee and faculty commutes, a leading source of air pollution on campus. Making a real-time tracker map available can encourage the use of Seahawk Shuttle services. Other recommendations include encouraging carpooling through incentives and continuing to maintain bike routes and the campus bike-share program. Smart Energy Generation Investing in renewable sources or efficient machinery can reduce emissions in the long run. Examples include installing photovoltaic (PV) panels and using combined heat and power (CHP). State policies that allow the purchase of renewable energy from third parties would make this option much more affordable. Other Strategies The university can further reduce its carbon footprint by: Selling fryer oil from Wagoner Dining Hall for biofuel use Switching to alternative refrigerants Continuing to build up the sustainability curriculum and student environmental opportunities at the university

12 Appendix & Assumptions To ensure consistency, emissions calculations were based on a methodology carried out by The Good Company in the previous greenhouse gas inventory. The methodology follows the accounting guidelines in the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (GHG Protocol). Additionally, it should be noted that several key assumptions were involved in determining emissions. These assumptions are important in aiming for accurate emissions numbers but also mean that the numbers should not be treated as sacrosanct. For example, when determining the emissions of student commutes, the calculations included an assumption that each student makes one trip to campus and one trip back home every day. Obviously, it is very possible that students make multiple trips on any given day or even no trips. While this appendix briefly describes the methodology and assumptions, a more in-depth description can be found in the appendices of the 2014 Greenhouse Gas Inventory on the UNCW Sustainability website. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Stationary combustion numbers were collected from the UNCW Office of Facilities and mobile fuel numbers were collected from UNCW Parking Services. Emissions were calculated using high heating values of the fuels and fuel-specific emissions factors. Refrigerants data were collected from the Office of Facilities. Emissions were calculated using the global warming power (GWP) of the given refrigerant. Purchased electricity numbers were collected from the Office of Facilities. Emissions were calculated using electricity emissions factors reported by the EPA s Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated Database (egrid) for the Virginia/Carolina subregion. UNCW purchases its electricity from Duke Energy. University-sponsored air travel data were not available for FY2015 through FY2017, so emissions were calculated based on historic numbers. This calculation incorporated increased student and faculty enrollment, average air carrier economy and standard emissions factors. Solid waste data were based on historic numbers. Emissions calculations incorporated factors from the EPA Waste Reduction Model (WARM), which includes landfill disposal, recycling and composting practices. Commute data were collected from UNCW Parking Services. The distances driven by students and faculty were determined using zip codes and the number of permits sold. Emissions were calculated using an average vehicle fuel efficiency figure from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) and standard emissions factors.

13 Supply chain data were collected from the UNCW Department of Purchasing Services and included individual purchase information from the past three years. Calculations were made using the Economic Input-Output Life-Cycle Analysis (EIOLCA), a public-domain tool developed by Carnegie Mellon University. This tool uses information from each industry involved with the supply chain of each good to generate an emissions number. GHG Benchmarking Peer universities have similar student enrollment and academic structures as UNCW. This allows for a congruent comparison when looking at emissions data. Information on each peer institution was found on Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS) profiles on the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) website. This information included square footage, enrollment numbers and yearly emissions. The most recent data from each university was used. GHG Mitigation The calculations used for emissions projections were carried out by The Good Company in the previous greenhouse gas inventory. The projections looked at baseline emissions, emissions targeted to carbon neutrality, policy-adjusted emissions and mitigation strategy emissions. All projections were calculated using custom-built models in Microsoft Excel. Baseline emissions were projected using historic emissions intensity multiplied by projected future activity measures. These measures include gross square feet, full-time equivalent students and full-time equivalent personnel. The emission sources that were included were stationary combustion, mobile combustion, fugitive emissions, purchased electricity, transmission and distributive losses, supply chain, air travel and solid waste. To determine the targeted emissions amounts, a linear trend was generated using Microsoft Excel. Policy-adjusted emissions involved regulations on utilities and vehicle fuel economy. The resources used to project emissions included the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), an Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) filing with the North Carolina Utilities Commission from Duke Energy and Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. For mitigation strategies, historic data on solid waste disposal and Energy Services Performance Contracts (ESPC) were used.