| Overall Rating | Gold - expired |
|---|---|
| Overall Score | 66.35 |
| Liaison | Trevor Ledbetter |
| Submission Date | May 2, 2017 |
| Executive Letter | Download |
University of Arizona
OP-1: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
| Status | Score | Responsible Party |
|---|---|---|
|
4.74 / 10.00 |
Benjamin
Champion N/A Office of Sustainability |
"---"
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 | None |
| Other categories | Some |
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 UA determined it's boundary using an operational control approach. Emissions data and estimates were provided to the consultant by UA Staff, and the consultant used the CA-CP calculator to develop the inventory and deliver a final report. For some sources (e.g., commuting), consultants were provided with CO2-e values.
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?:
Yes
A brief description of the internal and/or external verification process:
As described in the description of the methodology, the data was provided to a certified third party consultant. Results were internally reviewed for accuracy and questions raised if there were issues.
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 | 77,576 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 67,994 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Gross Scope 1 GHG emissions from other sources | 2,935 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 2,554 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Gross Scope 2 GHG emissions from purchased electricity | 92,837 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 105,114 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 | 173,348 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 175,662 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, 2014 | June 30, 2015 |
| Baseline Year | July 1, 2008 | June 30, 2009 |
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):
The GHG emissions baseline represents the first year UA completed a full GHG inventory. So this is our baseline year for comparison to subsequent GHG inventories.
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 | 84.73 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Carbon sequestration due to land that the institution manages specifically for sequestration | 116 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 166 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Carbon storage from on-site composting | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 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 | 200.73 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 166 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):
The institution-catalyzed carbon offsets are a result of the UA Compost Cats program. A professor of life-cycle analysis has led a team of students in developing a robust life-cycle analysis comparison of the Compost Cats operation and logistics process compared with sending the same waste to a landfill. This is the result of that analysis.
The carbon sequestration due to land managed specifically for sequestration is the result of the UA campus arboretum practices in managing the overall campus grounds for health and vitality of the arboretum species, and their attendant carbon sequestration.
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 | 173,147.27 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 175,496 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Figures needed to determine “Weighted Campus Users”:
| Performance Year | Baseline Year | |
| Number of students resident on-site | 6,789 | 6,084 |
| Number of employees resident on-site | 28 | 25 |
| Number of other individuals resident on-site and/or staffed hospital beds | 487 | 0 |
| Total full-time equivalent student enrollment | 41,631 | 35,743 |
| Full-time equivalent of employees (staff + faculty) | 12,479 | 11,842 |
| Full-time equivalent of students enrolled exclusively in distance education | 1,074 | 3,468 |
| Weighted campus users | 41,968.25 | 34,615 |
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 | 4.13 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 5.07 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Percentage reduction in adjusted net Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions per weighted campus user from baseline:
18.62
Gross floor area of building space, performance year:
14,721,402
Gross square feet
Floor area of energy intensive building space, performance year:
| Floor Area | |
| Laboratory space | 1,262,028 Square feet |
| Healthcare space | 807,972 Square feet |
| Other energy intensive space | 0 Square feet |
EUI-adjusted floor area, performance year:
18,861,402
Gross square feet
Adjusted net Scope 1 and 2 GHG emissions per unit of EUI-adjusted floor area, performance year:
0.01
MtCO2e per square foot
Scope 3 GHG emissions, performance year:
| Emissions | |
| Business travel | 18,113 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Commuting | 23,540 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Purchased goods and services | 941 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Capital goods | --- |
| Fuel- and energy-related activities not included in Scope 1 or Scope 2 | --- |
| Waste generated in operations | 10,683 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
| Other categories | 6,115 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
A brief description of the institution’s GHG emissions reduction initiatives, including efforts made during the previous three years:
Three new automatic boilers were installed at the CHRP plant to handle variations in steam load. The boilers automatically start and stop and vary production, which minimizes the need to keep a larger boiler on low fire to handle load variations. The new boilers handle load variation more efficiently in terms of steam output versus gas consumption, and respond more quickly to demand fluctuations to maintain more consistent distribution system temperature and pressure.
A systematic re-insulation of steam lines, valves, and other system appurtenances over the past 3 years has significantly decreased thermal losses in buildings and in the distribution system. Identification of missing or deficient insulation was one result of an extensive survey of campus utility tunnels to support creation of a Utility-tunnel BIM model.
Two utility-tunnel runs were refurbished or reconstructed to replace deteriorated structure; another run was replaced with direct-bury, highly insulated utility lines. The deteriorated tunnels were endangering exisitng utilties, which were replaced with new, better-insultated supply lines.
The HVAC systems in about 9 buildings have been upgraded in the past three years to replace older, less efficient equipment, address control issues, better match equipment with current building needs, and increase reliability.
The remaining 4,160-volt distribution circuits on campus were replaced with 13.8-kilovolt circuits. At the higher voltage, line losses are lower due to lower current.
An ongoing cooling/heating plant energy management system project is centralizing controls on the three plants, which will allow more effective monitoring, equipment dispatch and optimization of total plant operation. The new system will automate many of the decisions as to what equipment is started and stopped and operational parameters to ensure best use of purchased electricity and natural gas. By allowing tighter control of system tuning, distributed steam and chilled-water temperatures, and pressures will allow more efficient operation of building HVAC systems.
Un-Islanding of 4.5MW Turbine: The AHSC turbine, a 4.5MW combined cycle unit, was previously islanded to specific equipment located within the refrigeration plant. This precluded the turbine from consistently being able to produce power and steam at maximum output and realize the full benefit of this cogeneration system. The turbine was recently un-islanded and now exports power to the campus electrical grid. This modification in operations now allows the turbine to operate at full power and steam output. With this change, a corresponding decrease in campus greenhouse gas emissions should result. The University’s use of the natural gas turbine in lieu of the local electrical utility, which predominately utilizes coal based production units,is one more step towards reducing the campus carbon footprint.
The website URL where information about the programs or initiatives is available:
---
Additional documentation to support the submission:
---
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
All numbers for emissions and weighted campus users have been updated to FY15 data.
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 or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.