GHG Inventory ReportGHG Inventory Report

Prepared By: Thomas Szatkowski, ARAMARK

GHG

December, 2010

Rosemont CollegeRosemont College

GHG 2

Executive Summary

• Team Members• Executive Summary• Introduction

– Presidents Climate Commitment– Greenhouse Gas Inventory Approach and Process

• Carbon Footprint– GHG Baseline school year ending 2007 - 3,233 metric tonnes eCO2

emitted– GHG Emissions ending FY 2010 - 3,291 metric tonnes eCO2 emitted

increase of 1.8% from 2007• Conclusion

– Carbon Footprint through FY ending 2010– Year over Year Comparisons– Rosemont’s Next Steps

GHG 3

Climate Commitment-Team Members

Advisory Panel - ARAMARK

Brian Datte, District Manager Eastern Region

Christopher Flouris, Project Engineer

Advisory Panel - ARAMARK

Brian Datte, District Manager Eastern Region

Christopher Flouris, Project Engineer

Rosemont College, Climate Commitment Committee

Sharon Hirsh Ph.D., President of the CollegeSr. Jeanne Hatch, VP of MissionThomas Szatkowski, Director of FacilitiesAnthony Wolcott, Assistant Director of FacilitiesAnn Marshall, Infrastructure Committee & AlumCourtney Leik , FacultyRichard Cuba, Food Service Director

Rosemont College, Climate Commitment Committee

Sharon Hirsh Ph.D., President of the CollegeSr. Jeanne Hatch, VP of MissionThomas Szatkowski, Director of FacilitiesAnthony Wolcott, Assistant Director of FacilitiesAnn Marshall, Infrastructure Committee & AlumCourtney Leik , FacultyRichard Cuba, Food Service Director

Project Team

Thomas Szatkowski, Director of FacilitiesAnthony Wolcott, Manager of FacilitiesButch Brown, Director of OperationsPatricia Peterson, Office Manager, Facilities

Project Team

Thomas Szatkowski, Director of FacilitiesAnthony Wolcott, Manager of FacilitiesButch Brown, Director of OperationsPatricia Peterson, Office Manager, Facilities

GHG 4

Executive Summary

• The Greenhouse Gas Inventory is Rosemont College’s 2nd report of GHG Emissions FY ending 2010. This report will be made public on the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment web site.

• Determines Rosemont’s Carbon Footprint

– Measure of the impact due to human activities on the environment in terms of amount of greenhouse gases produced

• This Greenhouse Gas Inventory was performed in the Fall of 2010 using the Clean-Air Cool-Planet’s Carbon Calculator version 6.

• Report is inclusive of all campus operations and activities

Image from:http://cheeju.files.wordpress.com/2007/10/earth-space002.jpg

IntroductionIntroduction

GHG 6

President’s Climate Commitment

(ACUPCC)

GHG

GHG 7

Contextual Overview

• Rosemont College, School Year Ending 2010– Rosemont, PA

– 397,124 GSF

– 616 Full-time Students, 590 Part Time Students

– Faculty FTE 70, Staff FTE 131

Building Space Allocation

35%

37%

15%

4%9%

Residence

Instructional

Miscellaneous

Athletics

Food/Dining

GHG 8

Greenhouse Gas Inventory Approach & Process

Assignment & AccountabilityAssignment & Accountability

- Determine departmental participation and department leader- Prepare and submit data request templates- Review department roles and responsibilities

Meeting withPerson(s)

Accountable

Meeting withPerson(s)

Accountable

Actions & Deadlines Defined

Actions & Deadlines Defined

- Review collection process with each department lead- Discuss department accountability and communication protocols- Meet with student groups- Define collection timeline and deadlines

- Consolidation of data entry submittals from each department leader- Analyze data, make assumptions and document anomalies- Present data findings with Institution’s Environmental Committee- Provide report for submission to ACUPCC by Rosemont College

5/26/20105/26/2010

9/30/20109/30/2010

12/30/201012/30/2010

GHG 9

Emission Factors

• All results are reported in Carbon Dioxide Equivalents, eCO2

– Allows comparison of all types of greenhouse gases

– Converted using respective individual heat trapping potential (global warming potential)

• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)– Provides the accepted

values for global warming potentials (GWP)

Carbon EquivalentsGas 2007 IPCC

GWPCarbon Dioxide – CO2 1

Methane – CH4 25

Nitrous Oxide – N2O 298

Hydrofluorocarbon – HFC-23 14,800

Hydrofluorocarbon – HFC-134a

1,430

Sulfur Hexafluoride – SF6 22,800

GHG 10

Site and Source Emissions

– Rosemont's Electric Region is Mid-Atlantic Area Council (MAAC)

– PECO Electricity Production Fuel Mixture Consists of Nuclear, Natural Gas, #6 Fuel Oil, and #2 Fuel Oil

– Natural Gas– #2 Fuel Oil

– Student and Employee Commuter Trips– College Fleet Vehicles– Athletics & Faculty Travel– Staff Air Miles

– HCFC-22 from Air Conditioning Equipment

– Landfill with CH4 recovery and flaring

– Synthetic & Organic Fertilizer

Purchased Electricity

Stationary Sources

Transportation

Refrigerants

Agriculture

Solid Waste

Carbon FootprintCarbon Footprint

GHG 12

Footprint Calculation

• Collect University Data– Purchased Electricity– Purchased Natural Gas & # 2 Fuel Oil– Aggregate Transportation– Refrigerant Usage– Solid Waste Disposal

• Clean Air-Cool Planet Campus Carbon Calculator (CA-CP)– Input Data into CA-CP– CA-CP Converts to Generated Emissions

GHG 13

Greenhouse Gas Emission Breakdown 2010

• Scope 1 = Natural Gas/Fuel Oil, Direct Transportation, Refrigerants, Agriculture. Scope 2 = Purchased Electricity. Scope 3 = Commuter Transportation, Air Miles, Solid Waste & Electrical T & D Losses

• Rosemont's total GHG emissions in 2010 breakdown Scope 1 = 56%, Scope 2 = 21% & Scope 3 = 23%

Source Energy Consumed (MMBtu) eCO2 Emitted (Metric Tonnes)

Natural Gas & # 2 Fuel Oil 31,996 1,765

Direct Transportation 611 44

Refrigerants n/a 28

Agriculture n/a 2

Purchased Electricity 37,043 691

Transportation Students, Faculty, Staff, Air Miles 9,349 646

Solid Waste n/a 47

Electrical T & D Losses 3,664 68

Total 82,662 3,291

GHG 14

On Campus Stationary Combustion Sources

– Building Heat - Natural Gas & Oil.• Gas Provider Hess Corporation• Oil Provider FC Haab

– Each building on the campus has a separate gas & oil meter

• 28,379 MMBtu of natural gas• 26,208 gallons of # 2 fuel oil

• 1,765 metric tonnes eCO2 emitted

Rosemont

2010 School Year

GHG 15

Purchased Electricity

– Our provider for Generation is Excelon

– Our provider for Transmission is PECO

– Beginning January 2011 our provider for Generation will be GDF SUEZ Energy Recourses

– All electricity for the campus is collected on one meter

• 3,529,932 kWh used in FY 2010

• 691 metric tonnes eCO2 emitted

Rosemont

2010 School Year

GHG 16

Transportation

– Commuter Transportation, Facility Transportation, Staff Air Miles

– Commuter Transportation• Students, Faculty & Staff

• 600 metric tonnes eCO2 emitted

– University Fleet• Facilities Vehicles, Sports Team

Travel & Other Direct Financed Travel

• 53 metric tonnes eCO2 emitted

– Air Travel• Staff Travel

• 37 metric tonnes eCO2 emitted

Rosemont

2010 School Year

GHG 17

Transportation

• Transportation was responsible for 23% of the College’s 2010 GHG emissions

Type of Transportation Gasoline Consumption (gal) Emissions (MT eCO2)

Student Commuters 42,038 396 metric tonnes emitted

Faculty/Staff Commuters 22,665 204 metric tonnes emitted

Air Travel 236,540 37 metric tonnes emitted

University Fleet & Other Direct Financed Travel 5,934 53 metric tonnes emitted

Totals 307,177 690 metric tonnes emitted

GHG 18

Campus Refrigerants

– Main refrigerant used: HCFC-22– Used in Air Conditioning Applications– Release hydro fluorocarbons (HFC’s)

• Highest global warming potential

– 36 pounds of refrigerant released

– 28 metric tonnes eCO2 emitted

Rosemont

2010 School Year

GHG 19

Solid Waste Disposal

– Waste Hauler:• Allied Waste

– Landfill Utilization• Taken to a site with methane

recovery and flaring

– 153 tonnes of waste produced

– 47 metric tonnes of eCO2 emitted

Rosemont

2010 School Year

GHG 20

Campus Agriculture

– Emissions from synthetic/organic fertilizer

• 24% nitrogen content• Releases nitrous oxide

– 2,450 lbs of fertilizer applied

– 2.5 metric tonnes of eCO2 emitted

Rosemont

2010 School Year

Image from: http://a.abcnews.com/images/Technology/pd_earth_hand_070904_ms.jpg

ConclusionConclusion

GHG 22

Rosemont' Carbon Footprint 2010

• Rosemont emitted 3,291 metric tonnes of eCO2 in 2010

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

GHG 23

Year over Year Comparisons

• 1.8 % emissions increase from 2007 to 2010

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

                   

GHG Source FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010

Scope 1 1,849 1,550 2,119 1,839

Scope 2 692 682 665 691

Scope 3 692 735 685 761

All Scopes 3,233 2,967 3,469 3,291,

GHG 24

Rosemont’s Next Steps

– Submit to AASHE by January. 15, 2011– Continue data input via CA-CP database– Bi Annually submit inventory to AASHE

– All new construction & renovations adheres to LEED Silver standard

– Provide more public transportation– Purchase 10% of electricity from renewable sources

in 2011– Continue participation in RecycleMania competition

– Develop Climate Action Plan– Identify major greenhouse gas emission sources and

general reduction strategies– Campus Master Plan– Energy Audit

1. GHG Inventory

2. Tangible Actions

3. Action Plan

GHG 25

Rosemont’s Next Steps: To Do Action Plan

– Emissions trajectory for “business as usual”

– Determine date for achieving climate neutrality as soon as possible

– Energy Audit to determine mitigation strategies and action items to reduce energy and GHG emissions

– Calculate financial impact exposures for alternate action items

– Incorporate climate neutrality and sustainability into curriculum and other educational experience for students

– Implement actions to expand research and other efforts to achieve climate neutrality

– Compile action plan into report format in compliance with AASHE

Analyze Data

Target Date

Reduction Plan

Financial Impacts

Sustainability

Action Plan

Research

GHG 26

Appendix B: ACUPCC Tangible Action Items Adopted # Yes No Tangible Action Item Description

1 X

Establish a policy that all new campus construction will be built to at least the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED Silver standard or equivalent.

Policy has been adapted that new construction & renovations will meet the LEED Silver standard equivalent .

2 X

Adopt an energy-efficient appliance purchasing policy requiring purchase of ENERGY STAR certified products in all areas for which such ratings exist.

The College's purchasing standards have been updated so that all new equipment purchased carries the ENERGY STAR certified label when economically feasible.

3 XEstablish a policy of offsetting all greenhouse gas emissions generated by air travel paid for by our institution.

4 XEncourage use of and provide access to public transportation for all faculty, staff, students and visitors at our institution.

Information is provided by Rosemont College to all employees and students about bus/train schedules. Rosemont has two light rail stops close by. Rosemont provides transportation to and from these stops.

5 X

Within one year of signing this document, begin purchasing or producing at least 15% of our institution’s electricity consumption from renewable sources.

Beginning Jan 2011 a minimum of 10% of our electricity will be from Renewable Energy Power Sources. We will receive renewable energy credits (RECs) and enable the College to promote carbon foot print reduction on campus.

6 X

Establish a policy or a committee that supports climate and sustainability shareholder proposals at companies where our institution’s endowment is invested.

The Board of Trustees has accepted more strict guides with regards to investment strategies with more focus given towards "Green" initiative based companies.

7 X

Participate in the Waste Minimization component of the national RecycleMania competition, and adopt 3 or more associated measures to reduce waste.

We have converted to single stream recycling. The benefits are more items can be recycled and can be commingled in the same container. ARAMARK, who provides housekeeping, grounds and maintenance services, has adopted a non hazardous waste policy with regards to its cleaning and maintenance products.

GHG 27

Appendix c: ACUPCC Tangible Action Items, Recommendations for adopting the remaining items.

# Yes No Tangible Action Item Description

3 XEstablish a policy of offsetting all greenhouse gas emissions generated by air travel paid for by our institution.

Item pending, need to find ways to accomplish this item.

GHG 28

Appendix C: Carbon Equivalents

• The EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator was used to convert Rosemont’s emissions.

• Rosemont’s 2010 emissions is equivalent to carbon sequestering annually by 702 acres of pine or fir forests or CO2 emissions from the energy use of 285 homes for one year or greenhouse gases produced annually by 629 passenger vehicles.

Image from: http://www.nature.org/wherewework/northamerica/states/delaware/preserves/art12413.html

http://smgenglish.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/07/24/traffic.jpg

GHG 29

• Rosemont College’s fiscal year of 2007, from July 2006 to June 2007 was used as a baseline.

• Our Electrical supplier PECO indicated the following for electrical production, 10% Coal, 10.3% Natural Gas, 6.4% Fuel Oil #1 – 4, 65.8%% Nuclear, 6.5% Hydro, .4% Purchased & .6% Renewable Energy.

• Of all of the solid waste that is disposed by Waste Management at Rosemont College, 97% is brought to a Landfill with CH4 recovery and flaring. Being that it is difficult to determine where the remaining 3% is brought, we approximated that 100% of Rosemont College’s waste ends up in a landfill with CH4 recovery and flaring.

• Assumptions were made in scope 3 emissions due to the difficulty obtaining driving habits from students. Data from faculty & staff is well represented. Data was gathered by using parking passes issued, resident student population, non resident student population, full & part time staff & faculty population and zip code. Surveys were also utilized with limited results. The following estimates were made from that data, Full time students were estimated at 15.5 miles x 2 trips per day for 112 days a year, Part time students were estimated at 15.5 miles x 2 trips per day for 56 days a year Faculty were estimated at 15.6 miles x 2 trips per day for 112 days a year and Staff 13.9 miles x 2 trips per day for 225 days a year. Other Directly Financed Travel was also estimated based on year ending 2010 from which we had fair data. Going forward the departments will try to capture this data. A mpg ratio of 5 mpg (Boeing) was used to convert air miles to gasoline consumed.

Appendix D: Assumptions