ACUPCC Reporting System

GHG Report for Case Western Reserve University

Submitted on May 15, 2013; last updated on May 15, 2013

Summary Statistics

Making fair comparisons between higher education institutions is always challenging due to the rich diversity of higher education. The unverified nature of the information in this database and unavailability of unbiased normalization metrics means such comparisons are even more difficult. Users should therefore approach direct institution to institution comparisons with caution and recognize that all comparisons between institutions are inherently biased.
Total Per Full-Time Enrollment Per 1000 Square Feet % Offset
Gross emissions (Scopes 1 + 2) 181,337 metric tons of CO2e 21.6 metric tons of CO2e 22.9 metric tons of CO2e 0%
Gross emissions (Scopes 1 + 2 + 3) 217,973 metric tons of CO2e 25.9 metric tons of CO2e 27.6 metric tons of CO2e 0%
Net emissions 217,858 metric tons of CO2e 25.9 metric tons of CO2e 27.5 metric tons of CO2e N/A

Emissions Inventory Methodology and Boundaries

Start date of the 12-month period covered in this report July 1, 2011
Consolidation methodology used to determine organizational boundaries Operational control approach
If any institution-owned, leased, or operated buildings or other holdings that should fall within the organizational boundaries are omitted, briefly explain why.

‘Operational control’ approach has been used as the consolidation methodology to determine the organizational boundaries for Case Western Reserve University (CWRU), in order to inventory its GHG emissions. For institution-owned, leased or operated buildings, this means all such properties for which CWRU pays utilities.

Emissions calculation tool used Clean Air-Cool Planet
Please describe why this tool was selected.

Clean Air-Cool Planet (CACP) was selected because of its broad use among higher ed institutions and because of its ease of use.

Please describe the source(s) of the emissions coefficients used.

Clean Air-Cool Planet (CACP) provided Emissions Coefficients and Factors in the Emission Factors Module.
a) To select the correct electricity emission factor, the appropriate state was chosen to use the correct eGrid Regions.
b) To select the correct steam and chilled water emission factors for FY12, the default fuel generation mix % and boiler efficiencies in the tool were updated based on the university's steam and chilled water sources.
c) Used the rest of the emission factors in the CACP tool for fuels, paper, waste, water etc. without modifications.

Which version of IPCC's list of global warming potentials did you use? Fourth Assessment Report
Who primarily conducted this emissions inventory? Student researcher(s)
Please describe the process of conducting the inventory.

The FY12 scope of CWRU emissions captured were expanded or improved for accuracy, including the addition utilities from additional residential properties, transportation assumptions, waste to landfill and paper purchases.
Emphasis was given to enhanced documentation of the student and staff data collection process to make it easier to conduct future inventories.

Please describe any emissions sources that were classified as de minimis and explain how a determination of the significance of these emissions was made.

No information provided

Please describe any data limitations related to this submission and any major assumptions made in response to these limitations.

(i) Refrigerant data was limited by information available from CWRU’s vendors. It was determined that prior FY08 and FY09 refrigerant numbers reported were significantly overestimated and have been adjusted. Additionally, between FY09 and FY12 a significant amount of cooling equipment was taken offline and buildings were added to University’s district utility’s chilled water line. Thus the overall amount of refrigerant needed onsite has been dramatically reduced while the chilled water utilization has increased. The facilities director and assistant director determined the FY12 probable refrigerant usage based on the capacity of still utilized decentralized cooling on campus.
(ii) Commuting emissions were calculated based on vehicle travel for students, staff and faculty with zip codes and parking pass data. Public transport, car-pooling and bike are all viable commuting options used by CWRU students, staff and faculty however, actual utilization numbers are not available and could not be accurately estimated for purposes of this calculation. In the future a Web site for self-reporting will be available to better analyze commuting habits. Additionally, tools to refine the estimates/assumptions that were used for computing commuting emissions, including the number of trips/week/semester/year for different staff/faculty categories and graduate-professional student categories will be pursued.
(iii) Accurate directly financed-outsourced air-travel data and personal mileage reimbursement data remains limited by the availability and usability of travel invoices in an electronic format that is expensed within CWRU. The software platform for collecting this information was upgraded near the end of FY12, thus a formula was created based on the total spend for this fiscal year, and the historical data to create as accurate an estimate as possible. In years going forward, extremely accurate data will be available, based on exact totals of traveled miles. Additionally, all airline and other travel sources from athletic student travel were available and were accurately captured.
(iv) In addition to athletic student travel by air and by bus, there was also significant data for travel by van, a category that is not available in the calculator. Given this, the assumption was made that all van miles traveled would be comparable to rental car or taxi miles traveled, and thus were recorded in this section of the calculator. As this data was also available for the previous fiscal years but not reported, these numbers were entered into the historical carbon emissions calculators as well.
(v) CWRU’s actual purchased paper categories and the % recycled content were re-approximated to show a higher degree of accuracy for the types of paper most consumed by the university. Additionally, the university switched office supply vendors mid-way through FY12 and thus access to accurate paper purchasing data was unavailable. Substitute data from the partial year with the new vendor was utilized, and extrapolated to estimate a full year’s worth of paper purchasing.

Emissions Data

Emissions from the following sources (in metric tons of CO2e)

Scope 1 Emissions
Stationary Combustion 4,151.0 metric tons of CO2e
Mobile Combustion 765.0 metric tons of CO2e
Process Emissions 0.0 metric tons of CO2e
Fugitive Emissions 635.0 metric tons of CO2e
Total Scope 1 emissions 5,551.0 metric tons of CO2e
Scope 2 Emissions
Purchased Electricity 86,297.0 metric tons of CO2e
Purchased Heating 0.0 metric tons of CO2e
Purchased Cooling 32,011.0 metric tons of CO2e
Purchased Steam 57,478.0 metric tons of CO2e
Total Scope 2 emissions 175,786.0 metric tons of CO2e
Scope 3 Emissions
Commuting 13,900.0 metric tons of CO2e
Air Travel 21,830.0 metric tons of CO2e
Solid Waste 906.0 metric tons of CO2e
Total Scope 3 emissions 36,636.0 metric tons of CO2e
Biogenic Emissions
Biogenic Emissions from Stationary Combustion No information provided
Biogenic Emissions from Mobile Combustion No information provided

Mitigation Data

Carbon Offsets
Carbon offsets purchased No information provided
Offset verification program(s) No information provided
Description of offsets purchased (including vendor, project source, etc.)

No information provided

Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs)
Total RECs purchased None kWh
Percent of total electricity consumption mitigated through the purchase of RECs None %
Emissions reductions due to the purchase of RECs No information provided
REC verification program(s) No information provided
Description of RECs purchased (including vendor, project source, etc.)

No information provided

Sequestration and Carbon Storage
Sequestration due to land owned by the institution No information provided
Description of how sequestration was calculated

No information provided

Carbon storage due to composting 115.0 metric tons of CO2e

Normalization and Contextual Data

Building Space
Gross square feet of building space 7,909,541.0 sq ft
Net assignable square feet of laboratory space No information provided
Net assignable square feet of health care space No information provided
Net assignable square feet of residential space No information provided
Population
Total Student Enrollment (FTE) 8404.0
Residential Students No information provided
Full-time Commuter Students No information provided
Part-time Commuter Students No information provided
Non-Credit Students No information provided
Full-time Faculty No information provided
Part-time Faculty No information provided
Full-time Staff No information provided
Part-time Staff No information provided
Other Contextual Data
Endowment Size No information provided
Heating Degree Days 5774
Cooling Degree Days 1040
Please describe any circumstances specific to your institution that provide context for understanding your greenhouse gas emissions this year.

(i) Overall square footage and research square footage both moderately increased and yet overall utilities decreased, trending in the right direction.
(ii) Between FY09 and FY12 a significant amount of cooling equipment was taken offline and buildings were added to University’s district utility’s chilled water line. Thus the overall amount of refrigerant needed onsite has been dramatically reduced while the chilled water utilization has increased.
(iii) Poultry is no longer being housed at the University's farm.
(iv) Waste to landfill is now categorized under recovered and flared, reducing the associated GHG emissions.
(v) On campus composting of food service preparation waste is now being composted at the University Farm.

Supporting Documentation

Completed inventory narrative No information provided
Completed inventory calculator Download

Auditing and Verification

These emissions data have been audited, verified, or peer-reviewed.
Please briefly describe this verification, if any.

The FY12 GHG inventory was internally verified and peer-reviewed by the Director of Sustainability and the Director of Facilities. Questions were clarified and answered, errors were identified and corrected. CWRU data was compared to public data from a peer institution for comparison of total footprint.