University-based Greenhouse Gas Inventorying and Mitigation A Case - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
university based greenhouse gas inventorying and
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

University-based Greenhouse Gas Inventorying and Mitigation A Case - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 29, 2024 316 likes •586 views

University-based Greenhouse Gas Inventorying and Mitigation A Case Study of the University Park Campus of Penn State University Brandi Nagle Penn State University Issues of Scale Inventory and Calculator Mitigation Planning

slide-1
SLIDE 1

University-based Greenhouse Gas Inventorying and Mitigation

A Case Study of the University Park Campus of Penn State University

Brandi Nagle Penn State University

slide-2
SLIDE 2
  • Issues of Scale
  • Inventory and Calculator
  • Mitigation Planning
  • Lessons Learned
  • Where do we go from here?
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Across the Globe, Around the Corner

  • GHG emissions are a global problem
  • But solutions could be local

– ability to incorporate local variations in economy, geography, and community structure – emissions happen at the local scale – involve local stakeholders

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Universities as Local Places

  • Universities offer a unique opportunity for

GHG inventorying and mitigation planning activities

– autonomous – centralized data availability – resource for current climate change research

slide-5
SLIDE 5

University Park, PA

  • 43,000+ full time

students

  • 14,000+ full time faculty

and staff

  • 758 ‘buildings’
  • 15.5 million gross sq ft
  • 2262 classrooms and

labs

  • 2 steam plants

Steuer, 2004

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Inventory and Calculator Methods

  • Activity-based emission estimates by sector
  • Activity data X emission factor = emissions

– IPCC Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National GHG Inventories – EPA Inventory of U.S. GHG Emissions and Sinks 1990-2002. – EPA’s Emission Inventory Improvement Program (EIIP) Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions Volume VIII – Clean Air Cool Planet (CACP) GHG Inventory Calculator v. 4.0

  • Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

– (TARN Model)

  • Sectors

– Energy, Transportation, Waste, Land Management, Animal Management, Synthetic Chemicals

slide-7
SLIDE 7
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Activity Data

Stationary Sources of Energy Boilers, Heaters, Generators Natural Gas Fuel Oil 2 Diesel Propane Total Year (mcf) (barrels) (barrels) (barrels) 1990 51436 5183 59.52 2770 N/A 1991 56405 5198 59.52 2770 N/A 1992 60473 4943 59.52 2770 N/A 1993 69298 4727 59.52 2770 N/A 1994 85401 4519 59.52 2770 N/A 1995 95603 4195 59.52 2770 N/A 1996 96098 3884 59.52 2770 N/A 1997 90237 3861 59.52 2770 N/A 1998 87030 7029 59.52 2770 N/A 1999 75023 6095 59.52 2770 N/A 2000 101485 5526 59.52 2770 N/A 2001 126399 4973 59.52 2770 N/A 2002 131893 5647 59.52 2770 N/A

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Activity Data

Stationary Sources of Energy Boilers, Heaters, Generators Natural Gas Fuel Oil 2 Diesel Propane Total Year (mcf) (barrels) (barrels) (barrels) 1990 51436 5183 59.52 2770 N/A 1991 56405 5198 59.52 2770 N/A 1992 60473 4943 59.52 2770 N/A 1993 69298 4727 59.52 2770 N/A 1994 85401 4519 59.52 2770 N/A 1995 95603 4195 59.52 2770 N/A 1996 96098 3884 59.52 2770 N/A 1997 90237 3861 59.52 2770 N/A 1998 87030 7029 59.52 2770 N/A 1999 75023 6095 59.52 2770 N/A 2000 101485 5526 59.52 2770 N/A 2001 126399 4973 59.52 2770 N/A 2002 131893 5647 59.52 2770 N/A 282611284 5.00% 7.84% 1.19% 25.16% 60.81% 275026555 0.83% 8.22% 1.24% 26.26% 63.45% 264314466 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 252206355 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 242668208 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 227218964 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 227099724 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 221569222 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 211483292 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 201776432 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 191941608 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 184023959 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% 175030747 0.00% 8.26% 1.25% 26.48% 64.01% (kwh) % of total % of total % of total % of total % of total Total Renewable Other Oil Nat Gas Coal Purchased Electricity

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Activity Data

Stationary Sources of Energy Boilers, Heaters, Generators Natural Gas Fuel Oil 2 Diesel Propane Total Year (mcf) (barrels) (barrels ) (barrels) 1990 51436 5183 59.52 2770 N/A 1991 56405 5198 59.52 2770 N/A 1992 60473 4943 59.52 2770 N/A 1993 69298 4727 59.52 2770 N/A 1994 85401 4519 59.52 2770 N/A 1995 95603 4195 59.52 2770 N/A 1996 96098 3884 59.52 2770 N/A 1997 90237 3861 59.52 2770 N/A 1998 87030 7029 59.52 2770 N/A 1999 75023 6095 59.52 2770 N/A 2000 101485 5526 59.52 2770 N/A 2001 126399 4973 59.52 2770 N/A 2002 131893 5647 59.52 2770 N/A N/A 185562 68793 N/A 141194 69417 N/A 121653 68619 N/A 179925 67216 N/A 135824 67247 N/A 164157 73208 N/A 166158 71207 N/A 208826 66633 N/A 154200 65860 N/A 157894 66934 N/A 167379 65939 N/A 156112 64022 N/A 150598 64362 (N/A) (mcf) (tons) Total Other Natural Gas Coal Steam Plants

slide-11
SLIDE 11

C02 Emissions (for example)

Stationary Sources Boilers, Heaters, Generators Natural Gas Fuel Oil 2 Diesel Propane Total Year (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) 1990 2803 2189 25 692 5710 1991 3074 2196 25 692 5987 1992 3296 2088 25 692 6101 1993 3777 1997 25 692 6491 1994 4654 1909 25 692 7281 1995 5210 1772 25 692 7700 1996 5237 1641 25 692 7595 1997 4918 1631 25 692 7266 1998 4743 2969 25 692 8430 1999 4089 2574 25 692 7381 2000 5531 2334 25 692 8583 2001 6889 2101 25 692 9707 2002 7188 2385 25 692 10291

Also calculates CH4, N20, and has an ‘other’ tab for customization Converts everything to MTC02E

slide-12
SLIDE 12

GHG Emissions (MTC02E)

Stationary Sources Boilers, Heaters, Generators Natural Gas Fuel Oil 2 Diesel Propane Total Year (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) (MTCO2E) 1990 2820 2193 25 708 5746 1991 3092 2199 25 708 6025 1992 3315 2091 25 708 6140 1993 3799 2000 25 708 6532 1994 4682 1912 25 708 7327 1995 5241 1775 25 708 7749 1996 5269 1643 25 708 7645 1997 4947 1633 25 708 7314 1998 4771 2974 25 708 8478 1999 4113 2579 25 708 7425 2000 5564 2338 25 708 8635 2001 6930 2104 25 708 9767 2002 7231 2389 25 708 10353

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Emissions by Sector

50,000 100,000 150,000 200,000 250,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 450,000 500,000

GHG Emissions (MTCE)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Energy Transportation Other

336,273 408,332

Steuer, 2004

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Emissions at University Park

University Park's Observed (1990-02) and Projected (2003-12) Greenhouse Gas Emissions

525679

336273

300000 350000 400000 450000 500000 550000 600000 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

GHG Emissions (MTCO2E)

Kyoto Compliance

C li

56.3% 312734

Adapted from Steuer, 2004

slide-15
SLIDE 15

We have an inventory, now what?

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Emissions Reductions

  • Work with university stakeholders

– Engineers, planners, managers – Focus groups, individual meetings

  • Discuss options for Penn State

– Physically possible – Economically feasible – Socially desirable – Highest priority

  • Look for cost-saving alternatives
slide-17
SLIDE 17

There’s Good News and Bad News

  • Penn State is already doing a lot!

– Guaranteed Energy Savings Program – Continuous Commissioning Program – LEEDs certification – EnergyStar purchasing – Recycling

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Room for Improvement

  • Dissemination of initiatives
  • Collaboration – bridge with academia
  • Outreach
  • Behavioral adaptations
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Looking at Emissions Differently

Emissions per capita

7 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8 8.2 8.4 8.6 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03

Year MTC02E

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Looking at Emissions Differently

CO2 Emissions per Square Foot of Building Space at UP

0.038 0.039 0.04 0.041 0.042 0.043 0.044 0.045 0.046 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00

Year MTCO2E

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Lessons Learned from the Inventory

  • Emission inventories should be performed for

multiple years.

  • Emission inventory compilers should

consider carefully the accuracy of their emission factors.

  • Emission inventories should be performed by

a team consisting of sector “experts” and an inventory compiler.

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Implications

  • Shift from technical to behavioral focus
  • Despite these efforts, emissions still rising

– Where do we go from here?

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Penn State – Moving Forward

  • Continued energy efficiency efforts
  • Increased outreach and collaboration
  • Environmental Awareness Center
  • Formal adoption of MAP
  • Beyond University Park – other Commonwealth

campuses

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Conclusions

  • Local scale study is very valuable, university

campuses offer unique opportunity

  • Emissions must be looked at in specific

context in which they are generated

  • Penn State is working on technical, lacking on

behavioral changes

slide-25
SLIDE 25

West Campus Steam Plant circa 1933