Overall Rating Gold
Overall Score 70.16
Liaison Kylee Singh
Submission Date Sept. 19, 2019
Executive Letter Download

STARS v2.1

California Polytechnic State University
OP-1: Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Status Score Responsible Party
Complete 7.03 / 10.00 Eric Veium
Energy & Sustainability Analyst
Facilities Management & Development
"---" indicates that no data was submitted for this field

Has the institution conducted a GHG emissions inventory that includes all Scope 1 and 2 emissions? :
Yes

Does the institution’s GHG emissions inventory include all, some or none of its Scope 3 GHG emissions from the following categories?:
All, Some, or None
Business travel Some
Commuting All
Purchased goods and services None
Capital goods None
Waste generated in operations All
Fuel- and energy-related activities not included in Scope 1 or Scope 2 Some
Other categories None

A copy of the most recent GHG emissions inventory:
A brief description of the methodology and/or tool used to complete the GHG emissions inventory, including how the institution accounted for each category of Scope 3 emissions reported above:

The Poly CAP team used the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLIE) Method with adjustments for a university campus analysis.


Has the GHG emissions inventory been validated internally by personnel who are independent of the GHG accounting and reporting process and/or verified by an independent, external third party?:
No

A brief description of the internal and/or external verification process:
---

Documentation to support the internal and/or external verification process:
---

Does the institution wish to pursue Part 2 and Part 3 of this credit? (reductions in Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions):
Yes

Gross Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions:
Performance Year Baseline Year
Gross Scope 1 GHG emissions from stationary combustion 11630 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 14149 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Gross Scope 1 GHG emissions from other sources 2138 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 3561 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Gross Scope 2 GHG emissions from purchased electricity 4822 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 7260 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Gross Scope 2 GHG emissions from other sources 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Total 18590 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 24970 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent

Start and end dates of the performance year and baseline year (or three-year periods):
Start Date End Date
Performance Year July 1, 2018 June 30, 2019
Baseline Year Jan. 1, 1990 Dec. 31, 1990

A brief description of when and why the GHG emissions baseline was adopted (e.g. in sustainability plans and policies or in the context of other reporting obligations):

California implemented the legally binding Global Warming Solutions Act (AB32) in 2006, which commits the state to reducing its emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and by an additional 80 percent by 2050.


Figures needed to determine total carbon offsets:
Performance Year Baseline Year
Third-party verified carbon offsets purchased (exclude purchased RECs/GOs) 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Institution-catalyzed carbon offsets generated 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Carbon sequestration due to land that the institution manages specifically for sequestration 621 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
+ Date Revised: Oct. 16, 2019
0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Carbon storage from on-site composting 2200 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
+ Date Revised: Oct. 16, 2019
0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Carbon offsets included above for which the emissions reductions have been sold or transferred by the institution 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Net carbon offsets 2821 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent

A brief description of the offsets in each category reported above, including vendor, project source, verification program and contract timeframes (as applicable):

Carbon sequestration due to land that the institution manages specifically for sequestration- The Center for Sustainability, together with the Carbon Cycle Institute, the Resource Conservation District of Santa Cruz County, and Swanton Pacific Ranch (SPR), has developed a Carbon Farm Plan for the organically managed acreage at SPR. The dataand carbon sequestration calculations can be found in the finished SPR Carbon Farm Plan here: http://cfs.calpoly.edu/carbon_farm_plan.html

Carbon Storage from on-site composting- In order to calculate carbon storage from the Cal Poly composting facility we consulted with Jeff Creque, Director of Rangeland and Agroecosystem Management, Carbon Cycle Institute (www.carboncycle.org/about-cci/team/) he shared his method for calculation but ultimately said it is best to assume a 1 to 1 ratio, for every ton of compost produced you can assume a ton of CO2 stored.

+ Date Revised: Oct. 16, 2019

Emissions reductions attributable to Renewable Energy Certificate (REC) or Guarantee of Origin (GO) purchases:
Performance Year Baseline Year
Emissions reductions attributable to REC/GO purchases 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 0 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent

A brief description of the purchased RECs/GOs including vendor, project source and verification program:
---

Adjusted net Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions:
Performance Year Baseline Year
Adjusted net Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions 15769 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 24970 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent

Figures needed to determine “Weighted Campus Users”:
Performance Year Baseline Year
Number of students resident on-site 7816 2775
Number of employees resident on-site 21 9
Number of other individuals resident on-site and/or staffed hospital beds 12 1
Total full-time equivalent student enrollment 20272 15899
Full-time equivalent of employees (staff + faculty) 2589 1884
Full-time equivalent of students enrolled exclusively in distance education 0 0
Weighted campus users 19117 14034.25

Adjusted net Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions per weighted campus user:
Performance Year Baseline Year
Adjusted net Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions per weighted campus user 0.82 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent 1.78 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent

Percentage reduction in adjusted net Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions per weighted campus user from baseline:
53.64

Gross floor area of building space, performance year:
6047614 Gross Square Feet

Floor area of energy intensive building space, performance year:
Floor Area
Laboratory space 164801 Square Feet
Healthcare space 32293 Square Feet
Other energy intensive space 626450 Square Feet

EUI-adjusted floor area, performance year:
7068252 Gross Square Feet

Adjusted net Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions per unit of EUI-adjusted floor area, performance year:
0.00 MtCO2e / GSF

Scope 3 GHG emissions, performance year:
Emissions
Business travel 682 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Commuting 13081 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Purchased goods and services ---
Capital goods ---
Fuel- and energy-related activities not included in Scope 1 or Scope 2 ---
Waste generated in operations 230 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent
Other categories 125 Metric Tons of CO2 Equivalent

A brief description of the institution’s GHG emissions reduction initiatives, including efforts made during the previous three years:

Cal Poly continues to make progress on its goal of carbon neutrality by 2050, reducing total greenhouse gas emissions
by 17 percent over the last two years. The goal to reduce emissions to pre-1990 levels by 2020 was met five years
ahead of the state mandate, despite 100 percent growth in building square footage and on-campus housing since that
time. Energy conservation efforts reduced 2016–17 building energy intensity by 3 percent over the prior year, while
water conservation, zero waste efforts, and improved agricultural practices further reduced carbon emissions. Along
with greater renewable energy generation across the state from solar and wind, increased rainfall in the northwest
improved hydroelectric generation for PG&E in 2017, resulting in 79 percent of Cal Poly’s electricity purchase coming
from carbon-free sources — up from 59 percent two years ago. With completion of the 4.5 MW Gold Tree Solar Farm
in May of 2018, 25 percent of Cal Poly’s total electricity needs are now being met by on-site solar generation, with
more solar projects in development.

The greatest challenge Cal Poly faces on its path to carbon neutrality is transforming the way commuters get to
campus, as commuting accounts for nearly half of total campus carbon emissions. Transportation and Parking Services
implemented numerous initiatives to reduce emissions from commuting, including prohibition of cars for freshmen
living on campus, addition of bike racks, and expansion of ZipCar and vanpool programs. To reduce circling and traffic
congestion, all commuter parking permits are now assigned specific parking locations.

The 2018 campus Transportation Survey found that emissions from commuting were up 36 percent since the 2015
survey, partly due to improvements in survey language and methodology that influenced responses and captured
more data, such as trips into town by on-campus residents that were previously unaccounted for. Increased emissions
were attributed to increased student enrollment, a reduction in bus service offered by SLO Transit in fall of 2017, which
reduced ridership by 5 percent, and increasing housing costs in SLO which continue to push faculty and staff into
surrounding communities, and students into neighborhoods further from campus. The increase in on-campus housing
envisioned in the Master Plan will reduce these emissions substantially.

Transportation and Parking Services continues to promote and expand alternative transportation options for
commuters including restoration of some of the bus route frequency previously reduced, enhancement of vanpool and
carpool programs, development of more electric vehicle charging stations, and increased educational outreach to the
campus community through their award winning “My Other Car Is” campaign.


The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
---

The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution and complete the Data Inquiry Form.