Fairfield University Greenhouse Gas Inventory FY 2009

              Fairfield University Greenhouse Gas Inventory FY 2009
Prepared for:
Mr. David W. Frassinelli Assistant Vice President and Director Facilities Management
By:
Darrell Sandlin,
Nexant Clean Energy Markets
1805 Old Alabama Road
Suite 315
Roswell, Georgia 30076
DSandlin@Nexant.com
www.Nexant.com
January, 2010
The Power of ExperienceGHG Inventory - Fairfield University i
Preface
Climate change continues to be a most pressing environmental issue of our time and public awareness and concern for this issue remains at an all time high. Fairfield University has taken a proactive approach toward addressing the challenges of reducing the risk of climate change by joining the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC). The American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment is a high-visibility effort to address global warming by garnering institutional commitments to neutralize greenhouse gas emissions, and to accelerate the research and educational efforts of higher education to equip society to re-stabilize the earth’s climate.
Building on the growing momentum for leadership and action on climate change, the Presidents Climate Commitment provides a framework and support for America’s colleges and universities to go climate neutral. The Commitment recognizes the unique responsibility that institutions of higher education have as role models for their communities and in training the people who will develop the social, economic and technological solutions to reverse global warming.
Presidents signing the Commitment are pledging to eliminate their campuses’ greenhouse gas emissions over time. This involves:
 Completing an emissions inventory
 Within two years, setting a target date and interim milestones for becoming climate neutral.
 Taking immediate steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by choosing from a list of short-term actions.
 Integrating sustainability into the curriculum and making it part of the educational experience.
 Making the action plan, inventory and progress reports publicly available.
The college and university presidents and chancellors who are joining and leading the Commitment believe that exerting leadership in addressing climate change will stabilize and reduce their long-term energy costs, attract excellent students and faculty, attract new sources of funding, and increase the support of alumni and local communities.Contents
GHG Inventory - Fairfield University ii
The following report represents Fairfield’s ongoing progress to achieve the commitment set forth by the ACUPCC -- specifically, maintaining an accurate GHG inventory. Fairfield University has once again requested the services of Nexant’s Clean Energy Markets group to assist with updating their fiscal year 2009 GHG inventory, conforming to the protocols set forth by the ACUPCC. This report concludes the second consecutive year of GHG reporting for Fairfield University and includes the following information:
1. An overview of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) accounting.
2. Updated accounting of the Universities’ GHG inventory – including Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions with clarification of improvements towards the Goal.
3. Highlights of areas improved
4. Clarifications of new emission categories added in FY 2009 data set!
5. Conclusions
6. Recommendations
Due to the dynamic nature of University operations and the regulatory environment at State and Federal levels, it is recommended this document be updated annually. For example, a new administration can move toward federally mandated carbon markets which could dramatically influence the need for capital investment and upgrades and thus change the manner in which the University procures and utilizes energy. Nexant recommends the University continue with annual GHG Inventory updates at the conclusion of each fiscal year.
Author’s Note
The following report summarizes the Green House Gas emissions related to the most recent business activities of Fairfield University. This work required the effort of several faculty and staff members of Fairfield University to conduct the inventory and prepare this report. The software tool used to assemble the University’s consumption data and compute the resulting emissions is the latest version, 6.4, of Clean Air Cool Planet’s “Campus Carbon Calculator”.
Thank You to the Greenhouse Gas Inventory team.
Representing Fairfield University:
Mr. David Frassinelli - Assistant Vice President and Director of Facilities Management.
Ms. Dana August – Graduate Research Student
Mr. William Auger - Director of Utilities
Mr. William Romatzick - Energy Manager
Representing Nexant Clean Energy Markets:
Dr. Paul MacGregor – Vice President
Mr. Darrell Sandlin - Manager Client ServicesGHG Inventory - Fairfield University
Contents
Section Page
Preface............................................................................................................................... i
1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................ 1
1.2 MAJOR FINDINGS ...................................................................................... 2
1.3 CONCLUSIONS............................................................................................ 3
1.4 RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................... 3
2 Findings: GHG Emission Sources ......................................................................... 5
2.1 DIRECT ENERGY CONSUMPTION ON CAMPUS.................................. 5
2.2 PURCHASED ELECTRICITY..................................................................... 7
2.3 FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENT COMMUTING................................ 7
2.4 AIR TRAVEL................................................................................................ 8
2.5 WASTE DISPOSAL...................................................................................... 8
2.6 WATER ......................................................................................................... 8
3 Summary and Conclusions ..................................................................................... 9
4 Recommendations.................................................................................................... 11
Appendix Page
A Summary of 2008 Annual Emissions ..................................................................... A-1
B ACUPCC Reporting ................................................................................................ B-1
C Glossary / Acryonmys.............................................................................................. C-1
D References Sited ....................................................................................................... D-1GHG Inventory - Fairfield University
Figure Page
1.1 Operational Boundaries for Defining Environmental Attributes............................... 1
1.2 FY 2008 Emissions by Scope and Category.............................................................. 3
2.1 Total Emissions by Scope.......................................................................................... 5
2.2 Total Emissions by Scope (MT CO2-eq)................................................................... 6
3.1 Total Emissions by Sector (MT CO2-eq)................................................................... 10
Table PageGHG Inventory - Fairfield University 1
Section 1 Executive Summary
1.1 METHODOLOGY
Good data management is the foundation of any Energy and Greenhouse Gas Management program. As GHG regulations take hold; it will be increasingly important to have a system in place to collect and report this data. Figure 1.1 shows what is expected in a GHG inventory and sets out the operational boundaries of what is to be included in the inventory.
Figure 1.1 Operational Boundaries for Defining Environmental Attributes
The GHG Inventory should include all fully owned facilities: domestic, international, manufacturing, and research & development. Ownership is based on financial control; only facilities financially controlled by Fairfield University will be included in the inventory.
The University has elected to utilize the “Operational Control Approach” as its methodology, accounting for GHG emissions from operations under its operational control.
GHG emissions will be calculated using the Clean Air Cool Planet (CACP) “Campus Carbon Calculator, version 6.4. This software tool utilizes the global warming potential factors (GWP) from the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). This latest version now incorporates 2007 e-Grid factors to quantify the CO2 and CO2 equivalent emissions associated to purchased electricity by the University. Essentially the calculator Section 1 Executive Summary
GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 2
converts other GHG emissions to a CO2 equivalent and adds these to the base carbon emissions creating a totalized carbon equivalent in metric tones.
The University will report annual emissions based upon their fiscal operating year (FY), which runs from July 1 to June 30.
Defined in their initial GHG Inventory, Fairfield University defines FY 2005 data as their base line year for GHG emission benchmarks.
1.2 MAJOR FINDINGS FY 2009
 Fairfield University emitted 29,791 Metric Tones (MT)1 of Carbon Dioxide equivalent (CO2-eq)2
 FY 2009 emissions are 61 percent Scope 1, 6 percent Scope 2, and 33 percent Scope 3. from FY 2009 operations.
 FY 2009 GHG emissions represent a total increase of 11% when compared to baseline operations in FY 2005, while only a 1% when compared to FY 2008 performance.
 The University added data into three Scope 3 categories for the first time in FY 2009. A combined 4,471 metric tonnes was added from Directly Financed Air Travel, Study Abroad Air Travel and Paper usage. This new quantity is equal to 64% of the total scope 3 emissions reported in FY 2008. If data from these (3) new categories were removed from the FY 2009 data set, essentially creating apples to apples comparison to the previous 4 reporting years, FY 2009 would have ended 7% below FY 2008 and 6% below the baseline FY 2005 results!
 The University has successfully moved a significant amount of scope 2 emissions into the scope 1 category with effective operations of an onsite cogeneration plant. Scope 2 emissions from purchased electricity declined 71% compared to FY 2008. Additionally the University has completely eliminated 450 MT (CO2-eq)3
 Since later FY 2008, the University’s cogeneration plant was approved as a “Class III” REC generation resource under the Connecticut Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) program. The University retains title to the emission allowances associated to the RECs generated by the plant. emissions from Transportation and Distribution Losses associated to grid supplied electricity!
 Scope 3 emissions are impacted by faculty, staff, and student commuting habits. During FY 2009 car permits for some underclassmen were eliminated thereby reducing the number of vehicles on campus, commuting miles from personal vehicles and increased ridership on University sponsored vehicles. In summary the University achieved a 30% decrease in scope 3 emissions from personal vehicles when compared to FY 2008.
1 MT: Metric Ton is a measurement of mass equal to 1,000 kilograms or 2204.6 pounds
2 CO2-eq: Carbon Dioxide equivalent includes greenhouse gases of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydro fluorocarbons, per fluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride.
3 CO2-eq: Carbon Dioxide equivalent includes greenhouse gases of carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydro fluorocarbons, per fluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride.Section 1 Executive Summary
GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 3
Figure 1.2 FY 2009 Emissions by Scope and Category
1.3 CONCLUSIONS
The University has done an excellent job reducing the discharge of carbon emissions compared to the first four reporting years despite increases in building area. Figure 1.2 clarifies the shifting of Scope 2 emissions into Scope 1 during FY 2009 operations. The transition is driven by the first full 12 months operation of the University’s combined heat and power (cogeneration) plant. Cogeneration has effectively moved a majority of University’s carbon emissions into the Scope 1 category and providing opportunity for effective control and reduction of the university’s carbon footprint on the campus. Areas of opportunity for further reduction in carbon emissions include increasing ridership on University sponsored transportation and expanding the number of electric and thermal loads connected to the cogeneration plant.
1.4 RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendations available to the University to proactively manage its environmental footprint:
1. Expand responsibility of the Campus Sustainability Committee (CSC). Encourage the CSC to responsibly evaluate the university’s GHG Inventory and identify projects that reduce commuting by personal vehicle and encourage ridership of more efficient mass transit options provided by the University. Expand cross-functional representation, including members of the Faculty and Student bodies of the CSC.
2. Continue investment in energy conservation in your facilities and transportation infrastructure. This is the most cost effective way to reduce emissions and generate environmental attributes. Most energy efficiency projects have excellent economic and environmental returns on investment, and return greater economic value than the cost of any public debt. In fact, Connecticut is a state that recognizes the environmental benefit
Paper1%Scope 2 T&D Losses1%Other On-Campus Stationary10%Co-gen Steam24%Co-gen Electricity22%Solid Waste1%Study Abroad Air Travel12%Directly Financed Air Travel2%Student Commuting9%Faculty / Staff Commuting8%Purchase Electric6%Refrigerant /Chemicals3%Direct Transportation1%2009Scope 1, 18,203.6 , 61%Scope 2, 1,857.0 , 6%Scope 3, 9,730.7 , 33%Section 1 Executive Summary
GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 4
associated with energy conservation and there are programs in place to help the University reduce the payback associated with the investment in energy conservation measures.
3. Enhance utilization of the University’s existing cogeneration plant by shifting additional thermal loads to the cogeneration plant and thereby reducing current load on traditional fossil fueled boilers.
4. Actively manage the utilization of energy. Create energy budgets and visible systems of accountability that are married to a written energy policy that encourages the wise use of energy. These programs are most effective when kept simple and require simple monitoring and feedback such as a periodic “Report Card”. Typically the programs are low cost and managed internally.
5. Using the CSC, continue the study of student and faculty commuting habits to and from the university. Fairfield University is located in area that has well established mass transportation options. Establish a campaign to increase the utilization of mass transportation, car-pooling, and other measures to decrease single occupancy and total vehicular travel. Implementation of transportation alternatives can reduce the amount of Scope 3 emissions, effectively moving these into the Scope 1 category which can then be more effectively managed and measured by the University.
6. Carefully consider the investment into on-site renewable energy projects such as solar, wind or geothermal projects based on both project economic and environmental characteristics. Renewable energy projects can become financially viable when considering governmental tax benefits and the sale of RECs and or EEC.
7. Purchase at least 15 percent of the university’s electric consumption from renewable sources, one of seven options suggested within the ACUPCC commitment. Essentially the University’s Cogeneration system is producing 84% of the campus electric load. The University may consider purchasing a small quantity of renewable energy credits to offset their FY 2009 purchased electricity. For example if the university were to establish a reoccurring annual purchase between 4,500 and 5,000 RECs this should cover their annual quantity of grid supplied electricity while at the same time meeting the 15% commitment sought by the ACUPCC. GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 5
Section 2 Findings: GHG Emission Sources
Scope 1, Scope 2, and Scope 3 emissions from Fairfield University facilities, operations, and student and faculty impacts were analyzed beginning with fiscal year (FY) 2005 through end of FY 2009. For purposes of accounting and evaluating a GHG reduction goal for Fairfield; FY 2005 was selected as the baseline year. Figure 2.1 shows the break down of Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions comparing FY-2005 (baseline) to most recent FY-2009.
Figure 2.1 Total Emissions by Scope
The following sections provide highlights of the campus operations contributing to each of the emission Scope categories.
2.1 DIRECT ENERGY CONSUMPTION ON CAMPUS
Scope 1 emissions are those from direct energy consumption on campus. Operations on campus that contribute to these are combustion of natural gas and fuel oil. For example fuel consumption to fire boilers that generate hot water for domestic use and for building heating purposes.
In addition the university operates a fleet of vehicles for campus business ranging from maintenance activities to transportation of students. Currently these fleet vehicles consume either gasoline or diesel fuel. These fuels are delivered to the campus by a local vendor and stored in large tanks.
FY 2009 29,791 Mt CO2-eq
FY 2005 26,904 Mt CO2-eq
2005Scope 3, 7,293.8 , 27%Scope 2, 11,734.9 , 44%Scope 1, 7,874.9 , 29%2009Scope 1, 18,203.6 , 61%Scope 2, 1,857.0 , 6%Scope 3, 9,730.7 , 33%GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 6
As part of ongoing landscape maintenance for the campus a combination of organic and synthetic fertilizers are applied to the grounds. The fertilizers include nitrogen which is then included in the CO2-eq amount for the university’s Scope 1 emissions.
The university effectively operates a combined heat and power (Cogen) plant since calendar year 2008. The Cogen plant was designed to generate approximately 90 percent of the university’s electrical load while recovering useful thermal energy that is used to offset heating loads on the stand-alone boiler and hot water heating infrastructure.
An upward shift in Scope 1 emission levels from 2005 to 2009 is directly related to the cogen plant. See Figure 2.2. FY 2009 the combined scope 1 and 2 emissions are 2.5% lower than FY 2008 operations, a reflection of efficiency improvements in campus operations. Increases in the scope 3 emissions are directly related to the addition of three new reporting categories, beginning in FY 2009. These include directly financed travel for university faculty and staff, Air travel for Study Abroad programs and directly financed travel for Students, for example sports team travel.
Figure 2.2 Total Emissions by Scope (MT CO2-eq)
05,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,000200520102015YearTotal Emissions (Metric Tonnes eCO2) Scope 1 EmissionsScope 2 EmissionsScope 3 EmissionsGHG Inventory - Fairfield University 7
2.2 PURCHASED ELECTRICITY
Scope 2 emissions are directly related to grid supplied electricity from the local utility provider, United Illuminating, to operate the university. On a positive note the emission factors for purchased electricity in Connecticut are relatively low compared to other regions in the United States.
FY 2009 the University generated 84 percent of the electricity used on campus with the cogeneration plant. Total electric consumption from FY 2008 to FY 2009 decreased 2.5 percent a tremendous success when considering a population that is continuously increasing their energy intensity life style.
2.3 FACULTY, STAFF AND STUDENT COMMUTING
Scope 3 emissions for Fairfield University are impacted largely by the personal commuting habits of the Faculty, Staff and Student body. Head counts for each of these 3 groups were essentially unchanged compared to FY 2008. Commuting habits, including one way distance, frequency and percentage of population statistics were collected by a member of the campus sustainability committee. New in FY 2009, the University restricted a larger portion of underclassmen from obtaining parking permits thereby reducing the number of student commuters using personal vehicles and increased ridership on University sponsored vehicles. Summary of the assumptions follows here;
 Students: 44 percent of total enrolled students are commuting to and from campus once a day and driving 11 miles each way. They are commuting 76 days per semester, two semesters per school year. The personal vehicles are averaging 22.1 miles per gallon (MPG) and consuming gasoline for a fuel source.
 10 percent of students enrolled are using student buses (on campus transportation) an average of 3 one-way trips per day, 90 days per year and traveling an average of 6 miles per trip. These buses average 39.67 MPG and are using diesel fuel.
 Faculty: 100 percent of the faculty uses their personal cars to commute to work. Their commute is one round trip to and from the campus for an average of 5 days per week, 40 weeks per year. The average one-way trip is 13.1 miles and the cars being driven are averaging 22.1 MPG while consuming gasoline.
 Staff: 100 percent of the staff uses their personal cars to commute to work. Their commute is one round trip to and from the campus each day and 5 days per week. They are commuting to and from the campus 48 weeks per year and their average one way trip is 13.1 miles. Their cars are averaging 22.1 MPG and consuming gasoline.GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 8
2.4 AIR TRAVEL
FY 2009 data includes the first year reporting for emissions related to air travel. The combination of directly financed Air Travel, for University business, and air travel related to student study abroad programs add 4,219 MT CO2-eq not included in previous reporting years. The newly reported emissions are equal to 15.5% of the total emissions from FY 2008 activities
2.5 WASTE DISPOSAL
Solid Waste disposal, another emission source under the Scope 3 classification, can be a positive influence depending on the final processing of the waste stream. In the case of Fairfield University, the university benefits positively from the Town of Fairfield using the waste stream in a trash to energy incineration process. FY 2009 the university realized a credit of 253 MT CO2-eq from solid waste disposal.
2.6 WATER
Water used on the campus is purchased from Aquarion, a private water company. The majority of this water is used as potable water for daily living activities on the campus. From a mass balance analysis of the University’s water system, 85 percent of the total water is returned to the Town of Fairfield and processed at a central treatment facility that incorporates anaerobic digestion followed by combustion of the off gases in local micro turbine(s), in turn producing power for the treatment facility and hot water to sustain the digester. The result is an extremely low emission factor for the university’s waste water volume.
The mass water balance identifies three (3) paths for domestic water consumption. 1) Domestic water used for basic life support across the campus. 2) Evaporative cooling losses in the condenser cooling loops supporting the campus chilled water plant. 3) Irrigation water for campus landscaping uses. Water conservation practices on the campus minimize water consumption while the water returned to the Town of Fairfield is processed in such as way to minimize the GHG impact. FY 2009 waste water emissions represent less than 0.1% of the University’s total GHG inventory.GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 9
Section 3 Summary and Conclusions
The University continues an excellent job maintaining the discharge levels of carbon emissions over the last five reporting years. Operation of the cogeneration plant has effectively moved a majority of University’s scope 2 carbon emissions into the Scope 1 category. The University now has the opportunity to effectively manage their scope 1 emissions through the implementation of new and additional energy efficient plans and programs.
Based on nationwide trends of moving toward more energy intense lifestyles, the assumption is the University’s carbon footprint will grow in the absence of actively managed programs that seek implementation of energy efficiency across all areas and departments on campus. One of the key areas for improvement is with Scope 3 emissions which are largely driven by the commuting habits of students, faculty, and staff.
Figure 3.1 shows the emissions contribution by sector. Beyond 2009, the carbon calculator projects emission levels from a linear growth in building area which is based upon the building data entered from FY 2005 to FY 2009. The largest change has come from On Campus Stationary sources which are directly related to the ramp up of the on-site cogeneration plant. Going forward it is important that the Facility Maintenance department continue looking for opportunities to expand the thermal load connected to the cogeneration plant, further increasing the operating efficiency of this capital investment and minimizing the load on their traditional fossil fueled boiler plant.
With the university purchasing only 15% of their total electric consumption from the electric grid, the opportunity to offset the environmental impact associated to grid supplied electricity is now within reason. A small quantity of Renewable Energy Credits, RECs, can be purchased to fully offset the GHG emissions associated to the purchased electricity. If the University were to take this course of action, the FY 2009 total emissions would have been 6% lower for a total of 27,934.4 MT or a mere 1,030 MT above the FY 2005 emissions inventoryGHG Inventory - Fairfield University 10
Figure 3.1 Total Emissions by Sector (MT CO2-eq)
05,00010,00015,00020,00025,00030,00035,00040,0002005200820112014YearTotal Emissions (Metric Tonnes eCO2) Scope 2 T&D LossesPaperWastewaterSolid WasteStudy Abroad Air TravelDirectly Financed OutsourcedTravelCommutingPurchased Steam / Chilled WaterPurchased ElectricityAgricultureRefrigerants & ChemicalsDirect TransportationOn-Campus Stationary
10% below FY 2005 Levels by 2012
Target is 24,214 MT eCO2GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 11
Section 4 Recommendations
The following are areas where Fairfield University may focus upon to improve the management of its environmental footprint:
1. Continue to Build Support for the CSC. Task the CSC group with responsibility to evaluate the university’s GHG Inventory and set priorities for those areas where improvement can be achieved. Continue with cross-functional representation of the Faculty, Staff, and Student body. Further recommendation to include the existing “Student Environmental Association (SEA) to assist the task force. The SEA has been promoting environmental awareness on campus since 1993. The SEA group is likely very effective in promoting “program change” across the student body, a necessary item of a total campus solution. The AVP and Director of Facility Management; as chair of the CSC; to provide the team with results and or data necessary to make informed decisions. Educate the CSC to the University’s GHG Inventory data as contained in the Clean Air Cool Planet “Campus Carbon Calculator” and utilize this tool to manage and track improvement projects and programs identified.
2. Complete a formal Carbon Action Plan (CAP) This is a requirement of the ACUPCC and is essentially a detailed tactical plan to for the University to achieve carbon neutrality over time. The plan should include interim goals and specific lists of projects that target energy efficiency improvement projects and programs, including simple no and low cost opportunities and leading to longer term capital investments. Utilize external Engineering subject matter experts to lead this effort and present the findings to the CSC for their prioritization and action. Essentially, the CAP would serve as the prime directive to reducing its carbon footprint.
3. Invest in energy conservation across all existing facilities. The “Nega-Watt” remains the most cost effective way to reduce emissions and generate environmental attributes. Many energy efficiency projects offer reasonable economic and environmental return on investment, and return greater economic value than the cost of any public debt. In fact, Connecticut is a state that recognizes the environmental benefit associated with energy conservation and there are programs in place to help the University reduce the payback associated with the investment in energy conservation measures.
4. Expand connected load to the Combined Heat and Power Plant. Enhance the utilization of Fairfield University’s existing cogen plant to move in the direction of maximizing overall thermal efficiency, reducing load on the existing boilers, reducing Scope 1 emissions, reducing energy expense by the University and improving ROI on the cogeneration investment.
5. Actively manage the utilization of energy. Create energy budgets and visible systems of accountability that are married to a written energy policy that encourages the wise use of energy. These programs are best when kept GHG Inventory - Fairfield University 12
simple and offer monitoring and feedback such as periodic “Report Card” to be effective. These programs typically have a low operating cost and require little upfront investment.
6. Implement a study on how students and faculty travel to the school. Fairfield University is located in area that has well established mass transportation options. Establish a campaign to increase the utilization of mass transportation, car-pooling, and other measures to decrease single occupancy and total vehicular travel. Improvements in this area may result in the shifting of existing Scope 3 emissions to Scope 1, which can then be more effectively managed and measured by the university. Furthermore the University need consider the fuel type and economy of their fleet, again to reduce amount of Scope 1 emissions.
7. Effective market leverage with Renewable Energy Credits. Investigate opportunities to effectively utilize environmental attributes available on open markets to further reduce the University’s carbon footprint while promoting energy efficiency.
8. Investigate investment in on-site renewable energy. Investigate project opportunities with biomass, solar, wind, or geothermal technologies. The Connecticut market offers excellent incentives for these type projects and the Federal Government also provides several investment incentives for development of renewable energy.
9. Implement a Zero Energy Dormitory Challenge. Install energy meters for each dormitory. Publish real time consumption data on the campus intranet as well as large flat screen monitors at the entryways to each dormitory. Create a prize-based competition for the facility that can reduce their electric consumption the most. Create behavior based programs that educate students on the impacts of leaving computers on all night, cell phone charges plugged in all the time and leaving the lights on when leaving the room. University sponsored prizes may include celebration cookouts, free passes to ride the campus bus, university wide recognition as being the least energy intense dormitory for the month and possibly competition with another local university for energy efficient “bragging rights”.GHG Inventory - Fairfield University A-1
Appendix A Summary of 2008 Annual Emissions
MODULESummaryWORKSHEETOverview of Annual EmissionsUNIVERSITYFairfield UniversitySelect Year -->2009Energy ConsumptionCO2CH4N2OeCO2MMBtukgkgkgMetric TonnesScope 1Co-gen Electricity127,440.76,723,230.6672.213.46,742.7Co-gen Steam136,797.37,216,840.8721.614.47,237.7Other On-Campus Stationary56,577.92,989,886.2299.86.12,998.6Direct Transportation4,911.1344,708.667.423.3353.1Refrigerants & Chemicals----847.8Agriculture---80.323.8Scope 2Purchased Electricity29,399.41,849,155.434.723.91,857.0Purchased Steam / Chilled Water-----Scope 3Faculty / Staff Commuting34,583.72,425,024.7485.1167.02,485.6Student Commuting39,143.62,750,564.7523.5181.32,816.3Directly Financed Air Travel3,580.0702,884.76.98.0705.4Other Directly Financed Travel-----Study Abroad Air Travel17,832.93,501,259.734.539.63,513.8Solid Waste-(252,465.4)--(252.5)Wastewater--62.783.926.3Paper----252.2Scope 2 T&D Losses2,907.6182,883.53.42.4183.7OffsetsAdditional-Non-Additional-TotalsScope 1325,726.917,274,666.31,761.0137.518,203.6Scope 229,399.41,849,155.434.723.91,857.0Scope 398,047.89,310,151.91,116.1482.19,730.7All Scopes453,174.128,433,973.62,911.8643.629,791.4All Offsets-Net Emissions:29,791.4Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report B-1
Appendix B ACUPCC Reporting
MODULESummaryWORKSHEETAUCPCC ReportingNOTE: Grey columns indicate an ACUPCC reporting category that the Campus Carbon Calculator either does not use or defines differently. You may simply consider them placeholders, or you may use them to enter your data as you gather information for your report. For more information on ACUPCC definitions of data categories, reference theACUPCC Implementation Guide.UNIVERSITYFairfield University--- Scope 1 Emissions Sources ------ Scope 2 Emissions Sources ------ Scope 3 Emissions Sources ------ Biogenic Sources ------ Carbon Offsets Fiscal YearStationary CombustionMobile CombustionProcess EmissionsFugitive EmissionsPurchased ElectricityPurchased HeatPurchased CoolingPurchased SteamCommutingAir TravelSolid WasteBiogenic emissions from stationary combustionBiogenic emissions from mobile combustionCarbon Offsets PurchasedRenewable Energy Credits PurchasedPercent of electricity consumption mitigatedEmissions Reductions from RECsDue to compostingDue to forestsGross Building SpaceMT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2kWh%MT eCO2MT eCO2MT eCO2Square feet1990------------- ----1991------------- ----1992------------- ----1993------------- ----1994------------- ----1995------------- ----1996------------- ----1997------------- ----1998------------- ----1999------------- ----2000------------- ----2001------------- ----2002------------- ----2003------------- ----2004------------- ----20057,21245620711,735--6,366-(259)--------1,773,32420067,41650031211,049--6,433-(287)--------1,797,03120077,02753122511,198--6,285-(276)--------1,797,031200813,1564741506,418--6,599-(281)--------1,799,988200916,9793538721,857--5,3024,219(252)--------1,799,988201016,8544674948,108--6,2564,243(274)---- ----Normaliz --- RECs ----- Sequestration -Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-1
Appendix C Glossary/Acronyms
ACRONYMS
ACUPCC: American College and University President’s Climate Commitment
CDM: Clean Development Mechanism
CEM: Continuous Emission Monitoring
CH4: Methane
CER: Certified Emission Reduction
CCAR: California Climate Action Registry
CO2: Carbon Dioxide
CO2- e: Carbon Dioxide Equivalent
GHG: Greenhouse Gas
GAAP: Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
HFCs: Hydro fluorocarbons
IPCC: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ISO: International Standards Organization
JI: Joint Implementation
N4O: Nitrous Oxide
NGO: Non-Governmental Organization
PFCs: Per fluorocarbons
SF6: Sulfur Hexafluoride
T&D: Transmission and Distribution
WBCSD: World Business Council for Sustainable Development
WRI: World Resources InstituteFairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-2
GLOSSARY
Absolute target: A target defined by reduction in absolute emissions over time e.g., reduces CO2 emissions by 25% below 1994 levels by 2010.
Additionality: A criterion for assessing whether a project has resulted in GHG emission reductions or removals in addition to what would have occurred in its absence. This is an important criterion when the goal of the project is to offset emissions elsewhere.
Allowance: A commodity giving its holder the right to emit a certain quantity of GHG.
Audit Trail: Well organized and transparent historical records documenting how an inventory was compiled.
Baseline: A hypothetical scenario for what GHG emissions, removals or storage would have been in the absence of the GHG project or project activity.
Base year: A historic datum (a specific year or an average over multiple years) against which an entity’s emissions are tracked over time.
Base year emissions: GHG emissions in the base year.
Base year emissions recalculation: Recalculation of emissions in the base year to reflect a change in the structure of the entity to reflect a change in the accounting methodology used. This ensures data consistency over time, i.e., comparisons of like with like over time.
Biofuels Fuel: made from plant material, e.g. wood, straw and ethanol from plant matter.
Boundaries GHG: accounting and reporting boundaries can have several dimensions, i.e. organizational, operational, geographic, business unit, and target boundaries. The inventory boundary determines which emissions are accounted and reported by the entity.
Cap and trade system: A system that sets an overall emissions limit, allocates emissions allowances to participants, and allows them to trade allowances and emission credits with each other.
Capital Lease: A lease which transfers substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership to the lessee and is accounted for as an asset on the balance sheet of the lessee. Also known as a Financial or Finance Lease. Leases other than Capital/Financial/Finance leases are Operating leases. Consult an accountant for further detail as definitions of lease types differ between various accepted financial standards.
Carbon sequestration: The uptake of CO2 and storage of carbon in biological sinks.Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-3
Clean Development Mechanism: A mechanism established by Article 12 of the Kyoto Protocol for project-based emission reduction (CDM) activities in developing countries. The CDM is designed to meet two main objectives: to address the sustainability needs of the host country and to increase the opportunities available to Annex 1 Parties to meet their GHG reduction commitments. The CDM allows for the creation, acquisition and transfer of CERs from climate change mitigation projects undertaken in non-Annex 1 countries.
Certified Emission Reductions: A unit of emission reduction generated by a CDM project. CERs are tradable commodities that can be (CERs) used by Annex 1 countries to meet their commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.
Co-generation unit/Combined heat and power (CHP): A facility producing both electricity and steam/heat using the same fuel supply.
Control: The ability of a company to direct the policies of another operation. More specifically, it is defined as either operational control (the organization or one of its subsidiaries has the full authority to introduce and implement its operating policies at the operation) or financial control (the organization has the ability to direct the financial and operating policies of the operation with a view to gaining economic benefits from its activities). (Chapter 3)
Corporate inventory program: A program to produce annual corporate inventories that are in keeping with the principles, standards, and guidance of the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard. This includes all institutional, managerial and technical arrangements made for the collection of data, preparation of a GHG inventory, and implementation of the steps taken to manage the quality of their emission inventory.
CO2 equivalent (CO2-e): The universal unit of measurement to indicate the global warming potential (GWP) of each of the six greenhouse gases, expressed in terms of the GWP of one unit of carbon dioxide. It is used to evaluate releasing (or avoiding releasing) different greenhouse gases against a common basis.
Cross-sector calculation tool: A GHG Protocol calculation tool that addresses GHG sources common to various sectors, e.g. emissions from stationary or mobile combustion. See also GHG Protocol calculation tools (www.ghgprotocol.org).
Direct GHG emissions: Emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the reporting company.
Direct monitoring: Direct monitoring of exhaust stream contents in the form of continuous emissions monitoring (CEM) or periodic sampling.
Double counting: Two or more reporting companies take ownership of the same emissions or reductions.
Emissions: The release of GHG into the atmosphere.Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-4
Emission factor: A factor allowing GHG emissions to be estimated from a unit of available activity data (e.g. tonnes of fuel consumed, tonnes of product produced) and absolute GHG emissions.
Fugitive emissions: Emissions that are not physically controlled but result from the intentional or unintentional releases of GHGs. They commonly arise from the production, processing transmission storage and use of fuels and other chemicals, often through joints, seals, packing, gaskets, etc.
Green power: A generic term for renewable energy sources and specific clean energy technologies that emit fewer GHG emissions relative to other sources of energy that supply the electric grid. Includes solar photovoltaic panels, solar thermal energy, geothermal energy, landfill gas, low-impact hydropower, and wind turbines.
Greenhouse gases (GHG): For the purposes of this standard, GHGs are the six gases listed in the Kyoto Protocol: carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O); hydro fluorocarbons (HFCs); per fluorocarbons (PFCs); and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6).
GHG capture: Collection of GHG emissions from a GHG source for storage in a sink.
GHG credit: GHG offsets can be converted into GHG credits when used to meet an externally imposed target. A GHG credit is a convertible and transferable instrument usually bestowed by a GHG program.
GHG offset: Offsets are discrete GHG reductions used to compensate for (i.e., offset) GHG emissions elsewhere, for example to meet a voluntary or mandatory GHG target or cap. Offsets are calculated relative to a baseline that represents a hypothetical scenario for what emissions would have been in the absence of the mitigation project that generates the offsets. To avoid double counting, the reduction giving rise to the offset must occur at sources or sinks not included in the target or cap for which it is used.
GHG program: A generic term used to refer to any voluntary or mandatory international, national, sub-national, government or non-governmental authority that registers, certifies, or regulates GHG emissions or removals outside the company. e.g. ACUPCC, CDM, EU ETS, CCX, and CCAR.
GHG project: A specific project or activity designed to achieve GHG emission reductions, storage of carbon, or enhancement of GHG removals from the atmosphere. GHG projects may be stand-alone projects, or specific activities or elements within a larger non-GHG related project.
GHG Protocol: calculation tools a number of cross-sector and sector-specific tools that calculate GHG emissions on the basis of activity data and emission factors (available at www.ghgprotocol.org).
GHG Protocol Initiative: A multi-stakeholder collaboration convened by the World Resources Institute and World Business Council for Sustainable Development to design, develop and Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-5
promote the use of accounting and reporting standards for business. It comprises of two separate but linked standards—the GHG Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard and the GHG Protocol Project Quantification Standard.
GHG Protocol: sector specific A GHG calculation tool that addresses GHG sources that are unique to certain sectors, e.g., process calculation tools emissions from aluminum production. (see also GHG Protocol Calculation tools)
GHG registry: A public database of organizational GHG emissions and/or project reductions. For example, the US Department of Energy 1605b Voluntary GHG Reporting Program, CCAR, World Economic Forum’s Global GHG Registry. Each registry has its own rules regarding what and how information is reported.
GHG sink: Any physical unit or process that stores GHGs; usually refers to forests and underground/deep sea reservoirs of CO2.
GHG source: Any physical unit or process which releases GHG into the atmosphere.
GHG trades: All purchases or sales of GHG emission allowances, offsets, and credits.
Global Warming Potential (GWP): A factor describing the radiative forcing impact (degree of harm to the atmosphere) of one unit of a given GHG relative to one unit of CO2.
Group company / subsidiary: The parent company has the ability to direct the financial and operating policies of a group company/subsidiary with a view to gaining economic benefits from its activities.
Heating value: The amount of energy released when a fuel is burned completely. Care must be taken not to confuse higher heating values (HHVs), used in the US and Canada, and lower heating values, used in all other countries (for further details refer to the calculation tool for stationary combustion available at www.ghgprotocol.org).
Indirect GHG emissions: Emissions that are a consequence of the operations of the reporting company, but occur at sources owned or controlled by another company.
Intergovernmental Panel on International Climate Change (IPCC): body of climate change scientists. The role of the IPCC is to assess the scientific, technical and socio-economic information relevant to the understanding of the risk of human-induced climate change (www.ipcc.ch).
Inventory: A quantified list of an organization’s GHG emissions and sources.
Inventory boundary: An imaginary line that encompasses the direct and indirect emissions that are included in the inventory. It results from the chosen organizational and operational boundaries. (
Inventory quality: The extent to which an inventory provides a faithful, true and fair account of an organization’s GHG emissions. Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-6
Kyoto Protocol: A protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Once entered into force it will require countries listed in its Annex B (developed nations) to meet reduction targets of GHG emissions relative to their 1990 levels during the period of 2008–12.
Leakage (Secondary effect): Leakage occurs when a project changes the availability or quantity of a product or service that results in changes in GHG emissions elsewhere.
Life Cycle Analysis Assessment: of the sum of a product’s effects (e.g. GHG emissions) at each step in its life cycle, including resource extraction, production, use and waste disposal.
Material discrepancy: An error (for example from an oversight, omission, or miscalculation) that results in the reported quantity being significantly different to the true value to an extent that will influence performance or decisions. Also known as material misstatement.
Materiality threshold: A concept employed in the process of verification. It is often used to determine whether an error or omission is a material discrepancy or not. It should not be viewed as a de minimus for defining a complete inventory.
Mobile combustion: Burning of fuels by transportation devices such as cars, trucks, trains, airplanes, ships etc.
Model uncertainty: GHG quantification uncertainty associated with mathematical equations used to characterize the relationship between various parameters and emission processes.
Non-Annex 1 countries Countries that have ratified or acceded to the UNFCC but are not listed under Annex 1 and are therefore not under any emission reduction obligation (see also Annex 1 countries).
Operation: A generic term used to denote any kind of business, irrespective of its organizational, governance, or legal structures. An operation can be a facility, subsidiary, affiliated company or other form of joint venture.
Operational boundaries: The boundaries that determine the direct and indirect emissions associated with operations owned or controlled by the reporting company. This assessment allows a company to establish which operations and sources cause direct and indirect emissions, and to decide which indirect emissions to include that are a consequence of its operations.
Organic growth/decline: Increases or decreases in GHG emissions as a result of changes in production output, product mix, plant closures and the opening of new plants.
Organizational boundaries The boundaries that determine the operations owned or controlled by the reporting company, depending on the consolidation approach taken (equity or control approach).
Outsourcing: The contracting out of activities to other businesses.Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-7
Parameter uncertainty: GHG quantification uncertainty associated with quantifying the parameters used as inputs to estimation models.
Primary effects: The specific GHG reducing elements or activities (reducing GHG emissions, carbon storage, or enhancing GHG removals) that the project is intended to achieve.
Process emissions: Emissions generated from manufacturing processes, such as the CO2 that is arises from the breakdown of calcium carbonate (CaCO3) during cement manufacture.
Productivity/efficiency ratios: Ratios that express the value or achievement of a business divided by its GHG impact. Increasing efficiency ratios reflect a positive performance improvement. e.g. resource productivity (sales per tonne GHG). Productivity/efficiency ratios are the inverse of intensity ratios.
Renewable energy: Energy taken from sources that are inexhaustible, e.g. wind, water, solar, geothermal energy, and biofuels.
Reporting: Presenting data to internal management and external users such as regulators, shareholders, the general public or specific stakeholder groups.
Reversibility of reductions: This occurs when reductions are temporary, or where removed or stored carbon may be returned to the atmosphere at some point in the future.
Rolling base year: The process of shifting or rolling the base year forward by a certain number of years at regular intervals of time.
Scientific Uncertainty: Uncertainty that arises when the science of the actual emission and/or removal process is not completely understood.
Scope: Defines the operational boundaries in relation to indirect and direct GHG emissions.
Scope 1 inventory: A reporting organization’s direct GHG emissions.
Scope 2 inventory: A reporting organization’s emissions associated with the generation of electricity, heating/ cooling, or steam purchased for own consumption.
Scope 3 inventory: A reporting organization’s indirect emissions other than those covered in scope 2.
Scope of works: An up-front specification that indicates the type of verification to be undertaken and the level of assurance to be provided between the reporting company and the verifier during the verification process. )
Sequestered atmospheric carbon: Carbon removed from the atmosphere by biological sinks and stored in plant tissue. Sequestered atmospheric carbon does not include GHGs captured through carbon capture and storage.Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report C-8
Significance threshold: A qualitative or quantitative criteria used to define a significant structural change. It is the responsibility of the company/ verifier to determine the “significance threshold” for considering base year emissions recalculation. In most cases the “significance threshold” depends on the use of the information, the characteristics of the company, and the features of structural changes.
Stationary Combustion: Burning of fuels to generate electricity, steam, heat, or power in stationary equipment such as boilers, furnaces etc.
Structural change: A change in the organizational or operational boundaries of a company that result in the transfer of ownership or control of emissions from one company to another. Structural changes usually result from a transfer of ownership of emissions, such as mergers, acquisitions, divestitures, but can also include outsourcing/ insourcing.
Target base year: The base year used for defining a GHG target, e.g. to reduce CO2 emissions 25% below the target base year levels by the target base year 2000 by the year 2010.
Target boundary: The boundary that defines which GHG’s, geographic operations, sources and activities are covered by the target.
Target commitment period: The period of time during which emissions performance is actually measured against the target. It ends with the target completion date.
Target completion date: The date that defines the end of the target commitment period and determines whether the target is relatively short- or long-term.
Target double counting policy: A policy that determines how double counting of GHG reductions or other instruments, such as allowances issued by external trading programs, is dealt with under a GHG target. It applies only to companies that engage in trading (sale or purchase) of offsets or whose corporate target boundaries interface with other companies’ targets or external programs.
Uncertainty 1. Statistical definition: A parameter associated with the result of a measurement that characterizes the dispersion of the values that could be reasonably attributed to the measured quantity. (e.g., the sample variance or coefficient of variation).
Value chain emissions: Emissions from the upstream and downstream activities associated with the operations of the reporting entity.
Verification: An independent assessment of the reliability (considering completeness and accuracy) of a GHG inventory.Fairfield University GHG Inventory Report D-1
Appendix D References Sited
American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment, (ACUPCC)
http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/
The New Zealand Business Council for Sustainable Development
http://www.nzbcsd.org.nz/
Clean Air Cool Planet (CACP) Climate Action Tool Kit
http://www.cleanair-coolplanet.org/toolkit/index.php
Fairfield University – Institutional Research – Fact Book
http://www.fairfield.edu/about/ir_factbook.html
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol: World Resources Institute, World Business Council for Sustainable Development.
http://www.wri.org