Docstoc

Duke University Greenhouse Gas Initiative

Document Sample
Duke University  Greenhouse Gas Initiative Powered By Docstoc
					Duke University Greenhouse Gas Initiative

Report from the Feasibility Study Committee May 2005
www.duke.edu/sustainability
1 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Feasibility Study Committee
Formed by the Executive Vice President
Facilities Management • • • • Glenn Reynolds Aurel Selezeanu Bob Friedman Dennis Kennedy Students • • • Johanna Jobin Becca Ryals Michael Thornton

Medical Center Eng. & Operations
Transportation Services • • Cathy Reeve Peter Murphy Env. Sustainability Coordinator • Sam Hummel • Robert Guerry

2

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Outline
1. Rationale

2. GHG Management Strategy
3. Inventory Findings 4. Feasibility Study Findings

3

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Why should Duke reduce its greenhouse gas emissions?
• Students are asking for emissions reductions
– Students across the nation – including Duke - are organizing and demanding that their school reduce emissions.

• Educational / Research opportunities
– Solving the emissions problem requires bringing together the academic and operational sides of the university in a truly interdisciplinary partnership

• Cost Savings
– Eliminating inefficiencies is the best way to reduce emissions

4

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Why should Duke reduce its greenhouse gas emissions?
• Potential of global warming poses severe threats to NC
– If Duke wishes to call for national and international actions that would limit these threats, it must be taking action itself.

• Hedge liability against future legislation that would cap carbon emissions
– Carbon reporting has already been legislated in NC for future regulation

• It‟s the right thing to do
– Minimizing human effects on the planet is simply a good idea.

5

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Greenhouse Gas Management Process
1. Inventory
Measure Emissions

This report encompasses these two phases

2. Feasibility Study
Examine cost/benefit of various mitigation strategies

3. Goal/Setting & Commitment
Earn commitment from leaders/community (funding!)

4. Implementation

Process is cyclical
6 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Greenhouse Gas Management Process
1. Inventory 2. Feasibility Study 3. Goal/Setting & Commitment

4. Implementation

7

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Inventory Goals
1. Measure current and past emissions in order to identify trends, establish a baseline and inform feasibility study

2. Garner staff support for GHG mitigation through involvement, education, listening

Constraint: Complete during summer of 2004

8

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Inventory Methodology
• Gases inventoried included carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, HFCs and PFCs • Established a 1990 baseline for comparison to Kyoto Protocol, which is the primary benchmark for environmental stewardship with regards to global climate change.
– Cornell, Tufts, University of British Columbia, Lewis & Clark

• Used Clean-Air Cool-Planet software (www.cleanair-coolplanet.org)
9 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Carbon Dioxide Equivalency (eCO2)
Gas Global Warming Potential Every 100 Years Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Methane (CH4) Nitrous Oxide (N2O) HFC-134a HFC-404a Sulfur Hexafluoride (SF6) 1 21 310 1300 3260 23900

Because each greenhouse gas has a different heat trapping potential, all results are reported in carbon dioxide equivalents (eCO2).

From here on a “metric ton of carbon dioxide equivalent” will be abbreviated as “MTCe”
10

Source: Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Second Assessment Report (1996)

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Sources of GHG Emissions Inventoried
• Transportation
–

• Steam Plant
– Coal, Fuel Oil, Natural Gas

Fleet vehicles – Employee commuter trips – Athletic team travel (incomplete)

• •

Refrigerants (negligible)
– PFCs, HFCs, SF6

•

Purchased Electricity
– Duke Power *

Solid Waste (negligible)
– Incinerated, Landfill gases

•

Offsets (negligible)
– – Duke Forest preservation Composting

Negligible

* Used GHG emissions factors reported by the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC) region, which includes Virginia and the Carolinas.
Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

11

University and Medical Center Emissions
400 350

(Thousands of MTCe)

300

250

200

Medical Center University

Emissions

150

100

50

0 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

12

Fiscal Year Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

University‟s emissions (1990-2003)

13

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Million Square Feet
19
0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Metric Tonnes eCO2 / ft2
0.005 0.015 0.025 0.035 0.01 0.02 0.03

Emissions Per Sqft

14

90 92 94 96 98

19 19 19 19 20 20

00 02

0

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Growth in Sqft

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

University‟s emissions (1990-2003)

44% Kyoto Goal 56%

15

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Emissions by Sector

Transportation 15% Steam 29% Electricity 56%
Facilities Management Department’s Energy Management Program significantly cut the universities energy use (and therefore emissions) during the mid-1990s while producing more than $1 million in savings annually.

16

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Sector Detail: Steam Generation
500 450

MMBtu (Thousands)

400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

Natural Gas

Coal

Oil
91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 20 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20

90

19

Fiscal Year
17 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

20

03

Sector Detail: Purchased Electricity
Power plants in SERC Region are responsible for 21% of the GHG emissions emitted by power plants in the US every year.
60%

Percent of Generation

50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

GET SERC NUMBERS!!

Non-Hydro Renewables

Hydro

Gas/Oil Fuel Source

Nuclear

Coal

18

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

GHG Emissions Intensity of Various Fuels
100 90 80

Our fuel mix is primarily coal (for both electric and steam)

95

MTCe/MBtu

70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0

72

NC has a wealth of biomass fuels.

53

Biomass
19

Natural Gas

Fuel Oil

Coal

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Sector Detail: Transportation
25

MTCe (thousands)

20 15 10 5 Air Travel Faculty/Staff Commuters Student Commuters Fleet

20

90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01 20 02 20 03

19

Fiscal Year
Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Source Detail: Duke Forest
With the help of the Nicholas School of the Environment, it was estimated that the 7,000 acres of Duke Forest absorbs approximately 8,000 metric tons of CO2 each year.
120%

Percent of Total Acres/MTCe

Emissions

100%
Acres

80% 60% 40% 20% 0%
Acres

Emissions

Academic Campus
-20%

Duke Forest
Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

21

Greenhouse Gas Management Process
1. Inventory 2. Feasibility Study 3. Goal/Setting & Commitment

4. Implementation

22

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Greenhouse Gas Management Process
1. Inventory 2. Feasibility Study 3. Goal/Setting & Commitment

4. Implementation

23

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Primary Goals
1. To examine the potential for greenhouse gas emissions reductions as part of Duke‟s commitment to environmental sustainability. 2. To understand the cost implications of any greenhouse gas reduction targets Duke may consider.

24

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Secondary Goals
3. Improve the inventory
-

Identify uncertainty
Improve data collection methods for next inventory

4. Hear staff and administrator concerns and answer them in a non-public forum

25

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Mitigation Strategies Reviewed
Transportation • reduce number of employees • eliminate freshmen parking • greater carpool incentives • 2 kinds of parking (“storage” and daily use) • incentives for people to live close to campus • green campus fleets • hybrid SUVs for hospital and security • hybrid buses • bigger, but fewer, buses • stricter “no idling” policy for buses • reroute buses to reduce number of stops • better bike paths on and approaching campus • DATA or Duke bus route to targeted apartments • increase parking fees • subsidize DATA passes for those that do not buy parking permit • fee-bate for those who do not buy parking permit • Car sharing: ZipCar, FlexCar • Reduce number of fleet vehicles Electricity/Chilled Water • Behavior modification • Building recommissioning • Steam driven chillers • Steam/Solar regenerated desiccant dehumidification • Restart Energy Management Program in maintainence shops • HVAC Heat Exchanger/Recovery for fresh air intake • On-site Alternative Energy • Cogeneration • Solar street lighting with utility backup • More insulated windows on west campus • Night time computer/light shutoff • More day-lighting • More sub-metering • Energy Star purchasing policy • Building efficiency standards • More efficient transformers • More high efficiency lighting retrofits • Green energy purchasing • Passive heating/cooling • Geothermal heating and cooling • Demarco-type systems Steam Heating • Use more natural gas in summer

• • • •
• • • • • • •

How do we compare such diverse strategies?

• • •

Co-fire Biomass New biomass plant Cogeneration Monitoring systems/Energy management systems Better control of room temperatures Recomissioning buildings and controls Microturbines Education programs: habit transformation Submetering Solar hot water Solar steam collectors Steam trap maintenance Better insulation on system Better insulation in buildings

26

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Cost/Offset Ratio
Net Present Value of the Cost/Savings Generated by the Measure

Total GHG Emissions Offset Over Measure‟s Lifetime

lifetim e

Net Present Value =


t 1

AnnualCostOrSavings (1  .06)t

Total Emissions Red. = metric tons eCO2 offset over lifetime (MTCe) Lifetime = The lifetime will vary by measure. A behavior modification project could be 1 year while a new chiller could be 25 years. Discount Rate = 6%
27 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Cost/Offset Ratio

“Dollar cost per metric ton of eCO2 offset
through the implementation of the given measure.”

Dollars Unit of Comparison = MTCe

28

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Cost/Emissions Ratio: Example #1
(measures with no Initial Cost) Ex: Use 30% blend of biodiesel in the buses.
Initial Cost = $0 Annual Operating Cost = $77,780 (assuming average cost of B100 doesn’t change significantly for 5 years) Lifetime = 5 years

NPV = $309,241
Lifetime eCO2 reductions = 568 metric tons per year x 5 years = 2,840 MTCe

$309,241 2,840

=

$110 per MTCe

29

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Cost/Emissions Ratio: Example #2
Ex: Use 25% blend of Natural Gas in steam plant during summer months.

Initial Cost = $0 (assuming no additional equipment needed) Annual Operating Cost = $272,740 (assuming average cost doesn’t go up or come down for 2 years) Lifetime = 2 years Lifetime eCO2 reductions = 1177 x 2 = 2,354 MTCe

$235,867 2,354
30

=

$100 per MTCe

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Comparing Ratios
30% biodiesel in buses • “Offsetting 1 metric ton of eCO2 per year through the use of 30% biodiesel will cost $110 per year.”

25% natural gas for steam • “Offsetting 1 metric ton of eCO2 per year through the use of 25% Natural Gas in the steam plant during the summer will cost $100 per year.”

But HOW MUCH can each measure offset?

31

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Comparing Ratios (continued)
• Calculate the maximum offset possible with each measure (as a percentage of Duke‟s 2003 emissions)
Example #1 - Biodiesel Cost per ton: $110 Max offset potential: 568 metric tons Max offset: 0.47% Example #2 – Summer Natural Gas Cost per ton: $100 Max offset potential: 1177 metric tons Max offset: 0.88 %
Duke’s University’s emissions in 2003 were 134,344 MTCe
32 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Visualizing the Comparison

33

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Cost/Emissions Ratio Example #4
(measures that produce a savings)
Ex: LSRC chilled water plant efficiency upgrade.
Initial Cost = $506,715 Annual Operating Cost = -$117,000 (cost is a savings) Lifetime = 20 year warranty on equipment NPV = -$787,986 Annual electric reduction = 2,340,000 KWH Annual eCO2 offset = 2,340,000 KWH x .00053 MTCe/KWH = 1240 MTCe Lifetime eCO2 offset = 1240 MTCe x 20 years = 24,800 MTCe

-$787,986 24,800

=

-$31 per MTCe offset

Cost is negative. This signals a savings per metric ton offset each year through this method.
34 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Cost/Emissions Ratio Example #3
(measures that produce a savings)
Ex: Hire a Transportation Demand Manager and provide with $75,000 budget in order to reduce number of people coming to campus by car by 450 cars. This would remove the need to lease 450 parking spaces at $500,000 a year.
Salary + Budget = $50,000 + $75,000 = $125,000 Lost parking permit revenue = $75,000 Annual Operating Cost = $125,000 + $75,000 - $500,000 = -300,000 Lifetime = 5 years NPV = -$423,003 Miles not driven annually = 450 cars x 8 miles per day x 250 days = 900,000 miles Total eCO2 reductions = (900,000 miles / 22.1 mpg) x 0.009 MTCe per gallon x 5 years = 1,832 MTCe

-$423,003 1,832 MTCe

=

-$231 per MTCe

Cost is negative. This signals a savings per metric ton offset through this method.
35 Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Visualizing the Ratio Comparison
Options on the left side of the axis create savings that could potentially be used to offset the cost of measures on the right side of the axis.

36

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

% of 2003 Emissions Offset
0.0% 0.5% 1.0% 1.5% 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5%

SAMPLE of Cost/Offset Ratios for Measures Investigated

37
-$ 49 8 -$ 23 1

40 ft buses TDM: Best Lots Education: Fume Hood Best-Use Computer Energy Mgmt Hybrid Buses LSRC CW Upgrade Dessicant Dehumidification Co-fire Biomass: 15% Blend Recommissioning LSRC Steam Turbine Chiller Education: Dorm Energy Conservation

-$ 64 -$ 61 -$ 50 -$ 31 -$ 25 -$ 23 -$ 22 -$ 21 -$ 13 $2

SAVINGS $0

$0
$1 4 $1 6 $6 6 $9 7 $1 00 $1 10 $4 47

CIEMAS Wind RECS Install Windows with Higher Insulative Factor Insulating Steam Manholes Carpool/Rideshare Passes Solar Hot Water Natural Gas: 25% in Summer Biodiesel: 30% blend Solar Electric

COSTS

Cost / Offset Ratio Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Cost of Emission Reductions ($/MTCe)
-$100 $100 -$50 $50 $0
0%
TDM & 40 ft. Buses Education: Fume Hood Best-Use Computer Energy Mgmt Hybrid Buses LSRC CW Upgrade Dessicant Dehumidification

38
2% 4% 6% 8%
CIEMAS Wind RECS Biomass: 15% blend Recommissioning LSRC Steam Turbine Chiller Education: Dorm Energy Conservation

10%
Replace Single Pane Windows

Cumulative Reductions for Measure SAMPLE

Cumulative Percent of Total Emissions
12% 14%

Insulate Manholes Carpool Passes Solar Hot Water Natural Gas in Summer Biodiesel: 30% blend

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Solar Electric

Scenario: Top 10 Measures
• Top 10 measures (by Cost/Offset ratio):
– – – – – – – – – – 40 ft buses Transportation Demand Manager Education: Fume Hood Best-Use Computer Energy Mgmt LSRC CW Upgrade Dessicant Dehumidification Biomass 15% Recommissioning LSRC Steam Turbine Chiller Education: Dorm Energy Conservation

After the initial cost is recovered, the savings can be used to invest in further low or no ROI programs that produce dramatic emissions reductions.

• Total Reductions as % of 2003 = 7% • Total Initial Cost = $2.2 million • Total Annual Savings = $840,000

• Simple ROI = 38%

ROI of Duke Endowment is 9%

39

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

Summary
  Rationale GHG Management Strategy  Inventory Findings  Feasibility Study Findings Next: Goal & Funding Strategy

Summer ‟04
40

Fall „04

Winter/Spring ‟05

Summer ‟05

Fall „05

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University

41

Greenhouse Gas Initiative - Duke University


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Stats:
views:78
posted:4/28/2008
language:English
pages:41