Get documents about "Carbon Footprint for Winona State University
Document Sample
Carbon Footprint for Winona
State University
Presented by:
McKinstry Co.
May 2008
1881 Station Parkway Andover, MN 55304 763.767-0304 FAX 763.862.9111 CELL 763.354-8596
Minnesota Wisconsin Washington Oregon Idaho Colorado
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Executive Summary __________________________________________________ 3
Carbon Footprint (GHG)______________________________________________ 4
GHG Protocol (Scope 1) - Emissions from Fuel Sources Used On-Site ___________________ 5
GHG Protocol (Scope 2) - Emissions from Purchased Electricity ________________________ 6
GHG Protocol (Scope 1 & 2) - TOTAL_______________________________________________ 8
Sustainable Energy Management Profiler ____________________________ 9
Potential Facility Improvement Measures (FIM’s) ___________________ 10
Lighting Improvements__________________________________________________________ 11
LED Upgrades__________________________________________________________________ 12
Lighting Controls _______________________________________________________________ 13
Vending Machine Control ________________________________________________________ 14
Enhanced Controls______________________________________________________________ 15
Baseline Biomass Boiler _________________________________________________________ 16
Boiler Blowdown Heat Recovery __________________________________________________ 17
Electric to Steam Domestic Hot Water (DHW) ______________________________________ 18
Thermal Storage _______________________________________________________________ 19
Thermal Solar__________________________________________________________________ 20
Thermal Wall Application ________________________________________________________ 21
Water Conservation_____________________________________________________________ 22
Window Replacement ___________________________________________________________ 23
Sub-Metering Plan ______________________________________________________________ 24
Kiosk / Web-Based Information___________________________________________________ 25
Appendix ___________________________________________________________ 26
2
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Executive Summary
In the spirit of collaboration, Winona’s largest public and private institutions -
Winona State University, the City of Winona, the County of Winona, Winona
Area Public Schools, Minnesota State College - Southeast Technical, Cotter
High School, and Saint Mary's University of Minnesota - have all committed to
partnering together to “walk the talk” in implementing sustainable
environmental practices. In order to support this goal, the Sustain Winona
group was formed, and developed a list of eleven core goals. This carbon
footprint report is intended to be the beginning of a coordinated effort
focused on the first two goals; energy conservation and efficiency, and
renewable energy.
By establishing the carbon footprint of Winona State University it establishes
a baseline against which progress and goals can be measured and
communicated. Once the baseline has been established, we can begin the
important work of energy conservation and efficiency, and the
implementation of renewable energy sources. This report not only serves to
establish that baseline for Winona State University, but also identifies
potential Facility Improvement Measures (FIM’s) that would directly impact
either energy conservation and efficiency, renewable energy sources, or
education and community outreach regarding carbon reduction solutions.
This report also contains the first step in analyzing FIM’s for implementation,
and that is the inclusion of the Sustainability Energy Management Profiler
(SEMP). As FIM’s are further defined and scoped out, they will be included in
the SEMP tool in order to determine what impact they will have on the carbon
footprint, which ones act synergistically with each other, which ones act
antagonistically towards each other, and which blend of FIM’s provide the
greatest impact and provide the greatest return on investment for the
University.
3
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Carbon Footprint (GHG)
The Greenhouse Gas Protocol is a standard for collecting and reporting
greenhouse gas (GHG) inventories. It is maintained by the Greenhouse Gas
Protocol Initiative which is a partnership between businesses, Non-
Government Organizations (NGO), and governments convened by the World
Resources Institute (WRI) as well as the World Business Council for
Sustainable Development. The purpose of the GHG Protocol is to assist those
organizations wanting to implement an emissions reduction plan or
participate in GHG reporting programs by increasing consistency and
transparency in GHG accounting. Emissions recorded through the GHG
Protocol are divided into 3 Scopes:
• Scope 1 includes direct emissions, which are emissions from energy
conversion on site, such as emissions that are resulting from the
natural gas consumed at the boiler plant to produce steam.
• Scope 2 emissions are those produced from electricity purchased from
an offsite utility and consumed onsite.
• Scope 3 emissions include emissions from commuters as well as things
such as emissions from food transportation. The GHG Protocol gives
some direction for Scope 3 emissions but regards them as optional,
largely due to concerns about accuracy, variation, and double counting
of such intermittent and uncertain emissions.
The GHG Protocol is a standard, not a reporting or enforcement organization.
The methodology put forth by the GHG Protocol is compatible with a number
of GHG accounting programs including the Chicago Climate Exchange, the
World Wildlife Fund Climate Savers, the UK Emissions Trading Scheme, as
well as the European Union Greenhouse Gas Emissions Allowance Trading
Scheme (EU ETS).
In examining energy use in identified facilities, McKinstry has complied with
the GHG Protocol as pertaining to that energy use. Accounting for emissions
from transportation, GHG other than CO2, or any Scope 3 emissions is beyond
the scope of this study.
4
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
GHG Protocol (Scope 1) - Emissions from Fuel Sources Used On-
Site
Base Year Period
This data represents a base year from April 2006 - March 2007
Operational Boundary
In this study, emissions for WSU were confined to those resulting from facility
energy use in identified buildings, associated site(s) as measured by utility bill
and fuel consumption.
Fuel Consumed at WSU
FUEL Million Btu Lbs CO2 Metric Tons CO2
Natural Gas 124,237 14,545,609 6,598
Fuel Oil 2,269 336,493 153
Totals 126,506 14,882,102 6,750
Graphical Representation of GHG Protocol Scope 1 for WSU
Metric Tons CO2 Produced on Site
Natural Gas
98% Fuel Oil
2%
5
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
GHG Protocol (Scope 2) - Emissions from Purchased Electricity
Base Year Period
This data represents a base year from April 2006 - March 2007
Operational Boundary
In this study, emissions for WSU were confined to those resulting from facility
energy use in identified buildings, associated site(s) as measured by utility bill
and fuel consumption.
Electrical Breakdown
Xcel Energy; the utility company providing electrical power for the WSU
Campus provided a 2007 breakdown of the various fuel components required
to produce electricity. The total kWh consumption on the WSU Campus was
distributed proportionally based on the fuel source percentage. The following
is a tabulated breakdown of the electricity (kWh) for WSU:
Fleet Totals - Xcel Energy (NSP 2007) kWh Breakdown
Coal 37.63% 7,456,025
Coke 0.02% 3,075
Gas 21.36% 4,232,893
Hydro 7.14% 1,415,127
LFG
Fuel Source
0.17% 33,161
Nuclear 26.44% 5,238,962
Oil 0.30% 59,341
Other 0.00% -
RDF 0.95% 188,482
Solar 0.00% -
TDF 0.03% 6,402
Wind 4.49% 888,872
Wood 1.46% 290,126
19,812,467
Further supporting documentation associated with the Electrical Breakdown
and the associated CO2 is located in the Appendix.
6
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Applying the GHG Protocol (Scope 2) yields the associated CO2:
FUEL KWh Lbs CO2 Metric Tons CO2
Bituminous 7,456,025 13,422,823 6,088.49
Natural Gas 4,232,893 5,504,584 2,496.84
Petroleum 3,075 130,658 59.27
Hydro 1,415,127 - -
LFG 33,161 721,418 327.23
Nuclear 5,238,962 - -
Distillate Fuel 59,341 32,676 14.82
Other - - -
Solar - - -
Tire-Derived 6,402 229,036 103.89
Wind 888,872 - -
Wood 290,126 - -
Municipal Solid 188,482 3,269,495 1,483.02
Totals 19,812,467 23,310,689 10,574
Fuel Sources Provided by Xcel Energy for 2007
Graphical Representation of GHG Protocol Scope 2 for WSU
Metric Tons CO2 from Purchased Electricity
Coal 57%
Natural Gas 24%
Other 5%
Municipal Solid Waste 14%
7
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
GHG Protocol (Scope 1 & 2) - TOTAL
Combining both Scope 1 & Scope 2 of the GHG Protocol results in the
following Total Metric Tons of CO2 associated with the WSU Campus.
Total Metric Tons of CO2
Electrical Contribution 10,574
Fuel Consumed (Nat. Gas & Fuel Oil) 6,750
Total CO2 Footprint (Metric Tons) 17,324
Graphical Representation of GHG Protocol Scope 1 & 2 for WSU
Total WSU Carbon Footprint in Metric
Tons of CO2
Fuel Consumed
(Nat. Gas & Fuel
Oil)
39%
Electrical
Contribution
61%
8
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Sustainable Energy Management Profiler (SEMP)
SUSTAIN WINONA - Winona State University Sustainable Energy Management Profiler
Ver 2.1 / April 2008
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #1 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) EXISTING
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #2 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #3 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) Natural Gas Used 124,237 Annual MMBTU
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #4 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) Fuel Oil Used 2,269 Annual MMBTU
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #5 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) Electricity Used 19,812,467 Annual kWh
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #6 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) CO2 Emissions 17,324 Metric Tons
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #7 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #8 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #9 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) PROPOSED
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #10 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #11 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) Natural Gas Used - Annual MMBTU
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #12 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) Fuel Oil Used - Annual MMBTU
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #13 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) Electricity Used - Annual kWh
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #14 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off) CO2 Emissions - Metric Tons
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #15 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #16 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #17 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #18 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #19 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Facility Improvement Measure (FIM) #20 0 (1 = On / 0 = Off)
Aggregate Annual Savings $ -
Annual CO2 Reduction - Metric Tons
Equivalent Reduction in Annual Barrels of Oil Produced - Barrels of Oil Source: http://www.usctcgateway.net/tool/
Annual Electrical Consumption (kWh) Existing kWh Annual Nat Gas Consumption (Therms) Existing Nat Gas
Existing vs. Proposed Annual CO2 Emissions - Metric Tons
Proposed kWh Proposed Nat Gas
280,000 Oil CO2 Emissions
2,275,000
Elec CO2 Emissions
Nat Gas CO2 Emissions
2,022,222 240,000
20,000
1,769,444
18,000
200,000
1,516,667 16,000
160,000 14,000
1,263,889
12,000
1,011,111 120,000 10,000
758,333 8,000
80,000
6,000
505,556
4,000
40,000
252,778
2,000
- - -
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 1 2
9
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Potential Facility Improvement Measures (FIM’s)
A preliminary energy audit was performed on the Winona State University (WSU)
Campus in conjunction with evaluating the existing carbon footprint and the
ability to help reduce it. There major components make up this preliminary
energy audit:
• Site Visits
• Identification of Facility Improvement Measures (FIM’s)
• Sustainable Energy Management Profiler
Site Visits
A site visit occurred during the month of February 2008 to both identify potential
FIM’s and to start the inventory process of the various FIM components.
Identification of Facility Improvement Measures (FIM’s)
During the site visits a variety of potential FIM’s were identified. This list of
FIM’s, starting on the next page is not intended to be an exhaustive list; it
contains measures or components that typically result in energy savings,
operational improvements and carbon footprint reductions.
Sustainable Energy Management Profiler
The framework for combining and illustrating the impact that the individual FIM’s
have on the overall carbon footprint has been developed (see previous page for
the Sustainable Energy Management Profiler). Once the FIM list has been
finalized and the individual FIM’s have been completely developed and imported
into the Profiler tool, the various interactions that occur between the FIM’s and
their impact on carbon footprint can then be performed.
10
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Lighting Improvements
• Solution:
– Upgrade any remaining T12 lamps with magnetic ballasts to T8
25watt lamps with Electronic Ballasts.
– Upgrade any remaining compact fluorescent or incandescent Exit
fixtures with LED.
– Replace T8 32 watt lamps with T8 25 watt lamps.
– Replace metal halide fixtures in the gymnasium with fluorescent
high-bay fixtures.
• Benefits:
– Reduce electrical use
– Improved light levels
– Improved light distribution
11
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
LED Upgrades
• Solution:
– Perform a comprehensive exterior lighting survey to determine
locations that would potentially benefit from an upgrade to LED
fixtures.
• Benefits:
– Reduce electrical use
– Significantly reduce operations costs
12
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Lighting Controls
• Solution:
– Perform a comprehensive lighting survey to determine where
occupancy sensors or photo sensors would save energy.
– Install lighting sensors where energy savings can be achieved.
• Benefits:
– Reduce electrical use
13
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Vending Machine Control
• Solution:
– Provide controls on the vending machines so that they power
‘down’ to a lower setting during periods of low occupancy.
• Benefits:
– Reduce electrical use
14
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Enhanced Controls
• Solution:
– Install CO2 sensors and controls on ventilation systems serving
large areas such as auditoriums to optimize the amount of
ventilation based on occupancy.
– Interface occupancy sensors with variable air volume (VAV) boxes
to reduce the ventilation in the space when the area is unoccupied.
• Benefits:
– Reduce electrical use
15
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Baseline Biomass Boiler
• Solution:
– Evaluate the ‘base’ campus steam load and the viability of
implementing a biomass boiler.
– Natural Gas Costs approximately $7.30 mmBtu
– Biomass Costs = $3.86 mmBtu (based on corn stover)
– Utilize existing railway tracks adjacent to Central Utility Plant.
• Benefits:
– Reduce utility costs
– Environmental
16
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Boiler Blowdown Heat Recovery
• Solution:
– Evaluate opportunity to recover heat from the boiler surface
blowdown to preheat feedwater entering boilers.
• Benefits:
– Help reduce natural gas costs
17
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Electric to Steam Domestic Hot Water (DHW)
• Solution:
– Replace the existing electric domestic hot water (DHW) heater in
the utility plant with an instantaneous steam unit.
• Benefits:
– Reduce electrical use
– Take advantage of existing infrastructure
18
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Thermal Storage
• Solution:
– Depending upon the electrical rate structure, a thermal storage
system may be a cost effective solution at the Central Utility Plant.
• Benefits:
– Reduce electrical use
– Leverage existing refrigeration systems already in place.
19
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Thermal Solar
• Solution:
– Install thermal solar collectors on the roof of the natatorium for
helping heat the swimming pool water.
• Benefits:
– Reduce natural gas costs
– Environmental.
20
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Thermal Wall Application
• Solution:
– We will investigate the opportunity of a solar wall application.
These solar walls can capture heat from the sun and preheat
required ventilation air entering the facilities air handling units. This
in turn significantly reduces the building overall heating load.
**** Example: On a sunny day the temperature outside may be
0 degrees, these solar panels can heat the outside air up between 30
& 76 degrees, thus reducing your heat load.
• Benefits:
– Reduce energy consumption
– Reduce heat loads
– Environmental.
21
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Water Conservation
• Solution:
– Perform a comprehensive plumbing survey to determine which
areas would benefit from a plumbing fixture upgrade.
• Benefits:
– Reduce water and sewer costs
22
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Window Replacement
• Solution:
– Evaluate the replacement of original windows in a variety of
buildings to improve occupant comfort and help reduce utility costs
• Benefits:
– Reduce energy consumption
– Improve occupant comfort
– Extend life of building
23
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Sub-Metering Plan
• Solution:
– Implement a sub-metering program for chilled water and steam so
that the actual energy consumption of each facility can be
determined.
• Benefits:
– Actual information will be utilized for determining anomalies and
individual building performance.
24
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Kiosk / Web-Based Information
• Solution:
– In conjunction with an energy efficiency project install a public
accessible Kiosk in the Commons.
– This same information can also be accessed through a website.
• Benefits:
– Communicate to the public, benefits of energy efficiency
– Communicate the efforts undertaken by Sustain Winona – WSU.
25
Winona State University – Carbon Footprint
May 16, 2008
Appendix
GHG - SCOPE 2 EMISSIONS DATA
Electrical Breakdown - EXISTING
Lbs CO2 per Million
FUEL kWh Btu Million Btu BTU ** Lbs CO2 Metric Tons CO2 Source
Bituminous Coal (BIT) 7,456,025 2.54E+10 65,381.50 205.30 13,422,823 6,088.49
Lignite Coal (LIG) - 0 0.00 215.40 0 0.00
Sub bituminous Coal (SUB) 212.70 0 0.00
- 0 0.00 From NREL "Power Technologies Energy Data BooK" available at
Petroleum Coke (PC) 3,075 1.05E+07 580.37 225.13 130,658 59.27 http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/power_databook/
Waste Coal (WC) - 0 0.00 205.30 0 0.00
Synthetic Coal (SC) - 0 0.00 205.30 0 0.00
Natural Gas (NG) 4,232,893 1.44E+10 47,015.58 117.08 5,504,584 2,496.84
Hydro 1,415,127 4.83E+09 4,828.41 0.00 0 0.00
LFG 33,161 1.13E+08 6,259.16 115.26 721,418 327.23 CO2 EF from EIA Voluntary Reporting Program
Nuclear 5,238,962 1.79E+10 17,875.34 0.00 0 0.00
Distillate Fuel Oil (DFO) 161.39 32,676 14.82
59,341 2.02E+08 202.47
From NREL "Power Technologies Energy Data BooK" available at
Residual Fuel Oil (RFO) 173.91 0 0.00
- 0 0.00 http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/power_databook/
Waste Oil (WO) - 0 0.00 210.00 0 0.00
0 0.00 From Leonardo Academy Report available at
Other - 0.00E+00 0.00 2.19 http://www.cleanerandgreener.org/download/efactors.pdf
Propane - 0 0.00 0.00 0 0.00
0 0.00 From NREL "Power Technologies Energy Data Book" available at
RDF - 0 0.00 http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/power_databook/
Solar - 0.00E+00 0.00 0.00 0 0.00
Tire-Derived Fuel (TDF) 189.54 229,036 103.89 From NREL "Power Technologies Energy Data Book" available at
6,402 2.18E+07 1,208.39 http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/power_databook/
Wind 888,872 3.03E+09 3,032.83 0.00 0 0.00
Wood 290,126 9.90E+08 989.91 0.00 0 0.00
Distillate Fuel Oil (DFO) 161.39 0 0.00
- 0 0.00
Geothermal (GEO) - 0 0.00 16.60 0 0.00
From NREL "Power Technologies Energy Data Book" available at
Jet Fuel (JF) - 0 0.00 156.26 0 0.00
http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/power_databook/
Kerosene (KER) - 0 0.00 159.54 0 0.00
Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) 91.90 3,269,495 1,483.02
188,482 6.43E+08 35,576.66
TOTALS 19,812,467 23,310,689 10,573.55
** NOTE: Lbs CO2 per Million BTU does NOT include any transmission or distribution losses, which by some estimates would incorporate an additional 7% to 8%.
Overall Efficiency for Fuel Sources Contributing to lbs of CO2 is estimated to match the overall emissions rate of 1.176 lbs CO2 / kWh based on information received from Xcel Energy.
26
Related docs
