Overall Rating | Silver - expired |
---|---|
Overall Score | 62.83 |
Liaison | Danielle Smith |
Submission Date | Aug. 11, 2020 |
University of New Brunswick, Fredericton
OP-2: Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Status | Score | Responsible Party |
---|---|---|
![]() |
3.71 / 8.00 |
Mike
Hardy Sustainability Officer Facilities Management |
"---"
indicates that no data was submitted for this field
Gross Scope 1 and Scope 2 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions:
Performance year | Baseline year | |
Gross Scope 1 GHG emissions from stationary combustion | 13,513 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 17,691 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Gross Scope 1 GHG emissions from other sources | 162 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 129 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Gross Scope 2 GHG emissions from imported electricity | 8,041 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 21,783 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Gross Scope 2 GHG emissions from imported thermal energy | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Total | 21,716 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 39,603 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Figures needed to determine net carbon sinks:
Performance year | Baseline year | |
Third-party verified carbon offsets purchased | 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 storage from on-site composting | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Carbon storage from non-additional sequestration | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | --- |
Carbon sold or transferred | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Net carbon sinks | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
A brief description of the carbon sinks, including vendor, project source, verification program and contract timeframes (as applicable):
---
Adjusted net Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions:
Performance year | Baseline year | |
Adjusted net GHG emissions | 21,716 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 39,603 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Start and end dates of the performance year and baseline year (or three-year periods):
Performance year | Baseline year | |
Start date | May 1, 2018 | May 1, 2007 |
End date | April 30, 2019 | April 30, 2010 |
A brief description of when and why the GHG emissions baseline was adopted:
The variables when choosing the best representative Climate Change Action Plan (CCAP) baseline are contingent on several factors. One main consideration is the timing of the energy management program (EMP). In 1996/1997, the EMP was formalized with a $3.4 million investment in energy-saving projects. Thirteen years later, in 2009, the University of New Brunswick (UNB) took an aggressive Total Building approach and committed $7 million to significantly improve efficiencies and reduce the carbon footprint. The most active phase of program, formulated in 2012, further underscores UNB’s commitment to energy efficiency and climate change. A commitment of $4 million in areas of smart metering, energy information systems, energy recovery and technological enhancements.
Given the energy program timeline, data acquisition, and a well representative weather pattern, the baseline selected for UNBF is an average of the following fiscal years: 2007/2008, 2008/2009 and 2009/2010. To summarize, the three-year CCAP baseline average considers the following reasoning:
· A recent baseline that has quality data reference.
· Three-year average reflects our winter temperature averages well at a mean 4432 HDD. Which is a 0.7% percent difference average compared to our three most recent winters.
· A baseline that takes into account the University’s most recent commitment to climate change and energy efficiency.
Given the energy program timeline, data acquisition, and a well representative weather pattern, the baseline selected for UNBF is an average of the following fiscal years: 2007/2008, 2008/2009 and 2009/2010. To summarize, the three-year CCAP baseline average considers the following reasoning:
· A recent baseline that has quality data reference.
· Three-year average reflects our winter temperature averages well at a mean 4432 HDD. Which is a 0.7% percent difference average compared to our three most recent winters.
· A baseline that takes into account the University’s most recent commitment to climate change and energy efficiency.
Figures needed to determine “Weighted Campus Users”:
Performance year | Baseline year | |
Number of students resident on-site | 1,172 | 1,320 |
Number of employees resident on-site | 6 | 0 |
Number of other individuals resident on-site | 10 | 364.78 |
Total full-time equivalent student enrollment | 6,724.15 | 7,230.13 |
Full-time equivalent of employees | 1,805.20 | 1,848.56 |
Full-time equivalent of students enrolled exclusively in distance education | 1,762.16 | 791.33 |
Weighted Campus Users | 5,379.89 | 6,910.30 |
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 | 4.04 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent | 5.73 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Percentage reduction in adjusted net Scope 1 and Scope 2 GHG emissions per weighted campus user from baseline:
29.57
Gross floor area of building space, performance year:
2,692,632
Gross square feet
Floor area of energy intensive building space, performance year:
Floor area | |
Laboratory space | 121,606 Square feet |
Healthcare space | 0 Square feet |
Other energy intensive space | 20,313 Square feet |
EUI-adjusted floor area, performance year:
2,956,157
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
A brief description of the institution’s GHG emissions reduction initiatives:
---
Website URL where information about the institution's GHG emissions is available:
---
Additional documentation to support the submission:
---
Data source(s) and notes about 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 or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.