Sightlines LLC FY11 Final Presentation Champlain College Date: February 14, 2012 Presented by: Jeff Murphy and Josh Vidro University of Hartford University of Idaho University of Illinois at Chicago University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign The University of Maine University of Maine at Augusta University of Maine at Farmington University of Maine at Machias University of Maine at Presque Isle University of Maine at Fort Kent University of Maryland University of Massachusetts Amherst University of Massachusetts Dartmouth University of Massachusetts Lowell University of Michigan University of Minnesota University of Mississippi Medical Center University of Missouri University of Missouri - Kansas City University of Missouri - St. Louis University of New Hampshire University of New Haven University of North Texas University of Notre Dame University of Oregon University of Pennsylvania University of Portland University of Redlands The University of Rhode Island, Narragansett Bay The University of Rhode Island, Feinstein Providence The University of Rhode Island, Kingston University of Rochester University of San Diego University of San Francisco University of St. Thomas (TX) University of Southern Maine University of Southern Mississippi University of the Pacific University of the Sciences in Philadelphia University of Vermont Upper Iowa University Utica College Virginia Commonwealth University Virginia Department of General Services 1 Washburn University
FY11 Core observations Reaching 95% Housing Participation Identifying the challenges to the 2020 goal Diversifying housing types and attributes increases upperclassman participation Modeling Impacts of New Construction Develop a comprehensive Annual Stewardship program to meet future building needs Additional GSF will stretch coverage ratios impacting service levels Additional GSF Impacts Carbon Profile Increasing Champlain s GSF grows gross campus GHGs Perry Hall to Res Tri Residential GSF shifts distribution of emissions away from Scope 3 2
Collected GHGs at Champlain College 3 Scope 1 Direct GHGs Scope 2 Upstream GHGs Scope 3 Indirect GHGs Natural Gas Vehicle Fleet Agriculture Refrigerants Purchased Electricity Employee/Student Commuting Study Abroad Travel Solid Waste Wastewater Transfer & Distribution Losses
Gross carbon emissions FY11: 6,743 MTCDE Gross MTCDE 4 Carbon Emissions by Type Carbon Emissions by Scope Wastewater 0.1% Solid Waste 1% Paper 1% T&D Losses 5% 3,500 3,000 2,500 Study Abroad 10% On-Campus Stationary 20% Vehicle Fleet 1% Refrigerants 0.05% 2,000 Student Commute 18% Employee Commute 10% Electricity 34% Agriculture 0.01% 1,500 1,000 500 0 Scope 1 Emissions Scope 2 Emissions Scope 3 Emissions FY10 FY11
Gross carbon emissions FY11: 6,743 MTCDE Gross MTCDE 5 Carbon Emissions by Type Carbon Emissions by Scope 3,500 Wastewater 0.1% Paper 1% T&D Losses 5% 3,000 Solid Waste 1% 2,500 Study Abroad 10% Scope 3 Student 45% Commute 18% Employee Commute 10% On-Campus Stationary Scope 1 20% 22% Electricity Scope 2 33% 34% Vehicle Fleet 1% Refrigerants 0.05% Agriculture 0.01% 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 Scope 1 Emissions Scope 2 Emissions Scope 3 Emissions FY10 FY11
Growth in electricity usage erases NG savings Gross GHGs decreased by 2% even as owned GSF increased by 23% 8,000 Longitudinal Gross Emissions 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 20% Increase in Scope 2 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 6
Growth in electricity usage erases NG savings Gross GHGs decreased by 2% even as owned GSF increased by 23% 8,000 Longitudinal Gross Emissions 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 7
Comparing progress on Scope 1 & 2 sources Consuming less energy than peers due to significant campus reinvestment Go-Green Peer Institutions Cost Avoidance: $1.5M Carbon Avoidance: 4,940 MTCDE Babson College Bentley University Hamilton College Hamline University Hampshire College Le Moyne College Siena College University of Portland Wesleyan University
Scope 3 - Measuring campus engagement Commuters are utilizing alternative transportation options in Burlington Solid Waste 3% Paper 2% Study Abroad Air Travel 23% Other Directly Financed Travel 1% Scope 3 Sources Scope 2 T&D Losses 11% Employee Commuting 21% Student Commuting 39% 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Student Primary Commuting Modes 0% Champlain Students Peer Average Students Drive Alone Carpool Bus Bike/Walk
Scope 3 - Measuring campus engagement Diverting more material from the waste stream leading our database Solid Waste 3% Paper 2% Scope 2 T&D Losses 11% Employee Commuting 21% Study Abroad Air Travel 23% Student Commuting 39% Other Directly Financed Travel 1%
Scope 3 - Measuring campus engagement Diverting more material from the waste stream leading our database Compost Recycling Landfill/Incinerated
Increasing residential students shifts GHG profile Res Tri s will increase gross GHGs, but reduce Scope 3 sources 9,000 Longitudinal Gross Emissions 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 20% Below 2004 Baseline By 2020 Common Liberal Arts Target 40% Below 2004 Baseline By 2020 Leadership Target 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012* FY2013* FY2014* Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 *Projected impact of Res Tri - 100% occupancy; current student commuting mode split & trip distance; 17,000 BTU/GSF electric use and 4,200 BTU/GSF natural gas use
Scope distribution of GHGs shifts after Res Tri With fewer commuters, Champlain takes more control over its GHGs FY11 Emissions Distribution Projected FY14 Emissions Distribution Scope 3 45% Scope 1 22% Scope 3 33% Scope 1 18% Scope 2 33% Scope 2 49%
Strategies for success Champlain FY11 Housing MB&A Projected housing capacity in 2016 still falls 20% short of the 2020 participation goal Target Sophomores for market research to better understand what they are looking for in a housing community Facilities MB&A Develop a comprehensive Stewardship program to protect the value of new and recently renovated assets Manage maintenance staffing levels to maintain current coverage ratios (+1 FTE for Res Tri) Go-Green MB&A Continue to limit the carbon impact of new GSF by utilizing geothermal systems Create a framework for evaluating carbon offsets (or RECs) project criteria, cost, applicability, funding source; or generate offsets locally Focus renovations to rejuvenate older spaces and increase attributes that attract upperclassman Stretch custodial coverage ratios with new GSF in order to approach peer coverage levels Industry Innovation: Consider developing a Cap & Trade mechanism to halt energy consumption increases from new construction 14