2008 NC State GHG Inventory

Page 1




Acknowledgements Executive Summary Background Inventory Methodology Campus Overview Campus GHG Emissions by Source

4 6 10 14 18

Natural Gas Refrigerant Fuel Fertilizer Electricity Air Travel & Commuting Waste & Paper Purchasing Peer Institutions Looking Forward Contact Us References & Acronyms

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 37 38




CLIMATE NEUTRALITY. The concept of climate neutrality – a long-term aim to address all greenhouse gases, including all six under the Kyoto Protocol, and others covered by treaties such as the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layeri – poses many challenges. It also presents many possibilities for North Carolina State University. Our students, staff and faculty are learning new ways to think about the many challenges facing our society. Our researchers are developing new ways to provide our communities with sustainable forms of energy. Our extension offices are reaching out to North Carolinians who are adapting to a changing environment. We are collaborating with universities around the globe and fostering an environment that is allowing our students to become global leaders. We are helping create a more sustainable world.



acknowledgements CONDUCTED & WRITTEN BY Jeff Hightower - Director of Utility Infrastructure Planning, Facilities Operations Kim Bernard - Student Intern, Facilities Operations Natasha Herting - Student Intern, Facilities Operations SPECIAL RECOGNITION The authors would like to provide special recognition to Charles Leffler, Kevin MacNaughton, and Jack Colby for leadership and financial support for this project. Special thanks to Allen Boyette, Bob Wood, David Dean, Diane Moose, Richard Corbin, Scott Jennings, Tony Patrick, Lindsay Batchelor, and Torsha Bhattacharya for their critical input of information. PHOTOGRAPHY BY Prachi Gauriar, James Gries, and Creative Services ILLUSTRATIONS BY Kirsten Southwell GRAPHS BY Kirsten Southwell Amanda Swisher - Student Intern, Sustainability Office GRAPHIC DESIGN BY Amanda Swisher We would like to acknowledge support from the following individuals: Al Ball, Facilities Operations Alan Daeke, Facilities Operations Alan Stephens, Facilities Operations Albert Scott, Facilities Operations Allen Boyette, Facilities Operations Amanda Swisher, Student Intern, Sustainability Office Andrew Langdon, Facilities Operations Anthony Patrick, Facilities Operations Barbara Hise, Business Services Barry Olson, University Housing Belinda McKoy, Facilities Operations Bill Beardall, Facilities Operations Bill Ferrell, Facilities Operations Billy Godwin, Facilities Operations Bill Mitchell, Facilities Budget Office Bill Winner, PhD, College of Natural Resources Bob Fraser, Centennial Campus Bob Smolensky, Facilities Operations Bob Wood, Purchasing Department 4


Candice Jicha, Facilities Operations Charles Wood, Facilities Operations Charles Leffler, Finance and Business Connie Justice, Student Intern David Crouch, Facilities Operations David Dean, Sustainability Office David Gregory, Transportation Diane Moose, University Athletics Ed Sekmistrz, Facilities Operations Ellen Buckner, Environmental Health and Safety Garden Freeman, Facilities Operations Horace Tomlinson, Facilities Operations Jack Colby, Facilities Operations Jim Pappenhagen, University Housing Jonathan Peeler, Facilities Operations Joyce Hardwick, Facilities Operations Kathy Bass, Facilities Operations Kevin MacNaughton, Facilities Division Kim Bernard, Student Intern Lee Johnson, University Housing

Lindsay Batchelor, Sustainability Office Lydia Stevens, Facilities Operations Lynn Burris, Facilities Division Marilou Coggins, Facilities Operations Mary Beth Johnson, Facilities Budget Office Mike Baraldi, Facilities Budget Office Natasha Herting, Student Intern Pat Johnson, Facilities Operations Paul Reynolds, Facilities Operations R. Mark Tennant, Facilities Operations Richard Corbin, Facilities Operations Sam Miller, Facilities Operations Scott Jennings, Facilities Operations Timothy Majors, Facilities Operations Tom Kendig, Transportation Torsha Bhattacharya, Transportation Tracy Dixon, Sustainability Office University Planning and Analysis Verna Chester, Facilities Budget Office

Note from the chancellor KNOWING OUR IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AT NC STATE UNIVERSITY How will our University address the many challenges posed by our adoption of the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment? Every day our students, staff, faculty and alumni are addressing the answer to this question. Through their dedication and innovation, we are making progress towards reducing our impact on the environment. As our society addresses the economic, environmental and community aspects of a changing climate, it is with great pleasure that I am sharing our inaugural 2008 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory of NC State University. This document provides a snapshot of the GHG emissions attributable to our University’s facilities in North Carolina. Many individuals throughout our University have provided support and information pertaining to this baseline inventory of GHG. As part of our land-grant mission, we are a University with great responsibility to address the needs and challenges of our state. This proactive assessment of our University’s impact on climate change will allow us to progress towards reducing our impact on the environment. At NC State University, we are working to be a leader in environmental stewardship – in energy, technology, innovation and beyond. We declared 2008 The Year of Energy at NC State University, and in doing so, we initiated several energy-saving programs that reduce the GHG emissions created by our University’s growth. Developing a baseline for all 2008 emissions and comparing the GHG emissions of 2007 and 2008 for particular emissions sources, this inventory allows NC State University to plan for future growth appropriately. We are proud of our University’s many accomplishments and look forward to implementing future aspects of our Climate Action Plan to not only mitigate but avoid the release of Greenhouse Gas emissions. I hope that as you read this report, you will gain a better understanding of what it means for us to continue to be environmental stewards while also finding a way to decrease your individual impact on our world.

Sincerely, James H. Woodward, Chancellor

North Carolina State University



executive summary Understanding our impact on the environment at Nc state university


Many students, faculty and staff at NC State University are minimizing our impact on the environment. In recognizing this contribution Chancellor Oblinger signed the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), which requires the development of a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) inventory and a Climate Action Plan. This report is the first step in meeting the University’s commitment to the ACUPCC and an item that was identified in NC State University’s 2007 – 2008 Sustainability Report. This report utilizes the World Resources Institute’s GHG Accounting Principles as described in the Inventory Methodology section of this report and The Climate Registry’s Protocols.




NC State University is comprised of three main campuses and over 100 satellite offices which amounts to over fifteen million square feet with a population of over 39,900. This inventory includes the three main campuses (Main, Centennial, and Centennial Biomedical) as well as satellite offices for which NC State University manages the utility accounts. The other satellite offices not included in this report have their utility accounts managed by another unit and are a joint endeavor between NC State University and North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University.


Greenhouse Gases are described in scopes. Scope I is from direct emissions from the institution. Scope II emissions are from purchased utilities, and Scope III emissions are indirect emissions from the institution.

Time Frame

Scopes I and II emissions are based on the calendar year (CY) 2008 for the possible implementation of Federal or State requirements. Scope III emissions are based on fiscal year (FY) 2007 – 2008, since most University departments track their records on the fiscal calendar.


The calculations are based on The Climate Registry, Clean Air Cool Planet’s Campus Carbon Calculator version 6 and Atmosfair’s website for air travel.


Figure No. 1 (below) and Figure No. 2 on the next page illustrates the 2008 GHG emissions for NC State University. The majority of GHG emissions from the University are from electrical consumption, natural gas usage, and commuting. Scope I emissions account for 32% of the total and Scope II comprise 53% of the total emissions.

Peer Comparison

In comparison to the University of Maryland, University of Florida and Harvard GHG emissions, these percentages are comparable to their Scope I emissions ranging from 27 to 32% and Scope II emissions ranging from 40 to 51%.






















































Figure No. 1 - This chart summarizes the 2008 GHG emissions from NC State University. For more information see page 23. 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY


Greenhouse Gas Emissions - 2008 North Carolina State University Paper Purchasing 0.0% Waste Water

Air Travel 2.7%

Commuting 11.8%

Fertilizers 0.0%

scope 3

scope 2


Solid Waste 0.4% Composting 0.2%

Natural Gas 22.5%

scope 1 Fuel Oil 1.3%

Electricity 52.9%

Refrigerants* 5.7% Figure No. 2 - This chart summarizes the 2008 GHG emissions from NC State University. For more information see page 23


Currently the campus enrollment is projected to grow from 32,382 in 2008 to 38,000 by 2020. To meet this increase in population the campus’ building area will need to increase at a proportionate rate. This increase in student population is estimated to increase NC State University’s GHG emissions by approximately 15% at today’s current trends.



Emergency Generators 1.3%

Vehicle (Biodiesel) 0.2% Vehicle (Gas) 0.8%

Current Programs

Currently, NC State University is proposing a project to reduce its GHG emissions by producing electricity on campus, which is proposed in NC State Legislature Senate Bill 629. This project would install two 5.5 MW combustion turbines with heat recovery steam generators, which would reduce the campus’ GHG emissions by approximately 33,000 MTeCO2 or by 12%.

Future Inventories

The following are recommendations for improving the accuracy of the GHG Inventory: •

The commuting emissions are based on one survey of students, faculty, and staff. In future inventories, it is recommended to develop comprehensive commuting surveys that are taken monthly to improve the accuracy and sensitivity of the commuting habits of the campus population. This inventory did not include the GHG emissions from purchased products. It is recommended for future inventories to include items purchased from the University’s purchasing departments which would help develop guidelines to reduce GHG from purchased products.

The only offset included in this inventory is for composting. Future reports should include offsets from the University’s forested land.

Next Steps

As required by the ACUPCC, the University is planning to develop a Climate Action Plan, which will be guided by the University’s Campus Environmental Sustainability Team and contributions by academic students, faculty, and staff. NC State University’s Energy Management Office plans to develop annual tactical plans and an overall Energy Strategic Plan with a focus on reducing energy consumption as well as Greenhouse Gases. The Facilities Operations Department will create emissions trends and reporting.



background Many organizations and governments have been working on climate change issues

The Greenhouse effect was developed from experiments by Joseph Fourier and John Tyndal in 1827 and 1861 respectively, which state that the atmosphere allows solar radiation in with little change and gases like water vapor and carbon dioxide absorb thermal radiation thereby increasing the Earth’s atmospheric temperature.i This effect is illustrated in Figure No. 3 to the right.ii “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice and rising global average sea level.”iii As indicated in Figure No. 4 on page 10 the global average temperature and the global average sea level have increased since the 1800’s, while Northern Hemisphere snow cover has decreased.iii Figure No. 5 on page 13 illustrates the changes in Greenhouse Gases from years 0 to 2005, and it also indicates that the major changes 10 NC STATE UNIVERSITY

started to occur around 1750, which corresponds with the Industrial Revolution.iv To this endeavor 194 of 196 members of the United Nations have adopted the 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer and 84 countries have ratified the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. These protocols are designed to improve the atmosphere and reduce the current global warming trend.v, vi In acknowledging this situation many universities developed the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), which was signed by Chancellor Oblinger in the Spring of 2008. The following sections describe the current political atmosphere for reporting and reducing impacts to global warming.

International Initiatives

The Montreal Protocol was developed in response to the depletion of the ozone layer and it has been estimated that by 2050 with the implementation of the controls in the protocol that the ozone layer will have recovered. Some of the controls in the protocol include phase out of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and phase out of most hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). These compounds are typically used as refrigerants and solvents and are found in fire extinguishers. The Montreal protocol was widely adopted and led to the creation of the Kyoto Protocol, which seeks to limit the use of six greenhouse gases (GHG). The gases that the Kyoto Protocol places controls on are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, sulfur hexafluoride, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). The major sources and uses of these gases are combustion of fossil fuels, in animal waste by-products, in electrical transmission products, in the semiconductor production industry, as refrigerants, and produced from decaying fertilizers. The Kyoto Protocol calls for reduction in GHG emissions by 5.2% from 1990 emission levels by 2012, which would represent a 30% reduction in emissions in 2010 without control measures.vii

To provide guidance on GHG protocols the United Nations established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has developed reporting procedures for governments to track GHG sources and sinks. The methods developed by the IPCC are typically not utilized for individual institutions. The World Resources Institute (WRI) developed the Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative to provide a method for institutions and businesses to calculate their GHG emissions and this protocol is the basis for many GHG inventory models. This model is typically utilized internationally and separates GHG emissions into three categories called Scopes. Scope I is for emissions that an institution is directly responsible for, such as combustion of fuel in boilers and generators as well as emissions from company owned vehicles. Scope II accounts for emissions from indirect utility sources, such as purchased electricity. Scope III includes indirect emissions from sources such as consumer products, air travel, and commuting of company personnel. Figure No. 3 - Illustration depicts the Greenhouse effect. (From Water Vapor Feed back and Global Warming, Annual Review of Energy and the Environment)



National Initiatives

In the 2007/2008 and 2009/2010 fiscal years, the United States Congress created and introduced 126 bills to address GHG emissions. The 2009 bills that address GHG emissions are H.R. 1 the “Stimulus Bill”, H.R. 232 the GHG Registry Bill, and H.R. 1337 Carbon Tax Bill. The “Stimulus Bill” provides funding for projects that reduce GHG; the GHG Registry Bill (based on the Climate Registry) proposes developing a national inventory system of GHG; and the Carbon Tax Bill introduces the possibility of taxing GHG emissions. The Climate Registry is a nonprofit organization comprised of 40 states and is referenced in several proposed federal bills, which provides a method to report GHG emissions. viii The Climate Registry sets

Figure No. 4 - Graphs indicate changes in global mean temperature, global average sea level, and northern hemisphere snow cover. (From IPCC Assessment Report A - Synthesis Report 2007)iii

protocols for measuring the six Kyoto gases, organizational, operational, and geographical boundaries. The NC State GHG inventory is based on the Climate Registry for Scopes I and II in preparation for federal legislation being passed that will utilize the Climate Registry protocols. The ACUPCC was developed by Chancellors and Presidents of colleges and universities in the United States to bring an awareness of the global warming condition and attempt to reduce GHG emissions. Currently, over 625 colleges and universities have signed the ACUPCC. In signing the ACUPCC, NC State University made the following commitment: 1. Initiate the development of a comprehensive plan to achieve climate neutrality as soon as possible. a. Within two months of signing this document, create institutional structures to guide the development and implementation of the plan. b. Within one year of signing this document, complete a comprehensive inventory of all greenhouse gas emissions (including emissions from electricity, heating, commuting, and air travel) and update the inventory every other year thereafter. c. Within two years of signing this document, develop an institutional action plan for becoming climate neutral, which will include: i. A target date for achieving climate neutrality as soon as possible. ii. Interim targets for goals and actions that will lead to climate neutrality. iii. Actions to make climate neutrality and sustainability a part of the curriculum and other educational experience for all students. 12


iv. Actions to expand research or other efforts necessary to achieve climate neutrality. v. Mechanisms for tracking progress on goals and actions.

2. Initiate two or more of the following tangible actions to reduce greenhouse gases while the more comprehensive plan is being developed. a. Establish a policy that all new campus construction will be built to at least the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED Silver standard or equivalent. b. Adopt an energy-efficient appliance purchasing policy requiring purchase of ENERGY STAR certified products in all areas for which such ratings exist. c. Establish a policy of offsetting all greenhouse gas emissions generated by air travel paid for by our institution. d. Encourage use of and provide access to public transportation for all faculty, staff, students and

visitors at our institution e. Within one year of signing this document, begin purchasing or producing at least 15% of our institution’s electricity consumption from renewable sources. f. Establish a policy or a committee that supports climate and sustainability shareholder proposals at companies where our institution’s endowment is invested. g. Participate in the Waste Minimization component of the national RecycleMania competition, and adopt 3 or more associated measures to reduce waste.

3. Make the action plan, inventory, and periodic progress reports publicly available by providing them to the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) for posting and dissemination.ix

State of North Carolina Initiatives

The State of North Carolina has recognized the importance of reducing energy consumption not only for reducing costs but also for reduction in GHG emissions by having promulgated Senate Bill 668 and Senate Bill 1946. These two pieces of legislation require a 20% reduction of energy consumption in state institutional facilities by 2010 and a 30% reduction by 2015. The North Carolina Department of the Environment and Natural Resources and NC Environmental

Management Commission has currently proposed a rule to require major Title V Air Quality permit holders to report their 2009 GHG emissions from their permitted sources. North Carolina’s Senate Bill 3 requires public utilities to purchase, produce or reduce at least 12.5% in energy by renewable energy or energy efficiency measures by 2021.

University of north carolina General administration Initiatives

The University of North Carolina (UNC) system has developed an initiative to address sustainability and GHG emissions termed the UNC Tomorrow Commission, whose report states that “reducing our energy footprint and developing renewable sources of energy are not just good projects; they are the law of the state.”x The UNC Tomorrow Commission also established the UNC Sustainability Committee. This committee has proposed a policy that “each constituent institution shall develop a plan to become carbon neutral as soon as possible and by 2050 at the latest, with an ultimate goal of climate neutrality.”xi Thirteen of the UNC system institutions, including NC State University, have created Faculty Climate Change Reports that address the “…causes and consequences of climate change.”xii In addition to these efforts the UNC system has created a Sustainability Policy that is expected to be adopted by the Board of Governors in the Winter of 2010. Each constituent campus will be required to develop a GHG inventory and Climate Action Plan.

Nc state university initiatives

Figure No. 5 - Atmospheric concentrations of important long-lived GHG over the last 2,000 years. Increases since about 1750 are attributed to human activities in the industrial era. (From IPCC Assessment Report 4 - Working Group 2007)

In the Spring of 2008, NC State University signed the ACUPCC and adopted the following three measures to curtail GHG emissions: USGBC LEED Silver standard, US EPA’s Energy Star partner, and to provide access to public transportation. NC State University has a Sustainability Office which serves as the clearinghouse for sustainability activities and initiatives on campus. An institutional structure for sustainability at NC State University was recently created to help provide a unified sustainability message, produce a cohesive strategic and tactical plan as well as enable ongoing accountability towards a sustainable campus and culture. The NC State University students developed the Wolfpack Environmental Student Association (WESA). In the spring of 2009, the Student Senate proposed the Campus Sustainability Continuous Improvement Act. With the effort of these groups and NC State University Facilities Operations, NC State University has developed the GHG inventory and started the progress on a Climate Action Plan (CAP). 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY


inventory methodology based on the climate registry, the world resources institute and usepa climate leaders ghg protocol Figure No. 6 - GHG Emission Scopes

This inventory is intended to be proactive in terms of NC State University’s carbon neutrality goals. However, in order to develop and implement a successful GHG emission reduction policy, it is necessary for us to quantify our GHG emissions. To accurately account and report on the six GHG emissions, we have (1) collected emissions data, (2) calculated the GHG emissions by each identified GHG source, (3) reported on the data in the aggregate and disaggregate, and (4) developed next steps.xiii

Although our baseline inventory is not reactive to the proposed legislation described within the Background section of this publication, the university recognizes that our inventory methodology will evolve with this legislation and the implementation of our CAP. Our current inventory methodology was developed based on (1) six fundamental principles of accounting – relevance, completeness, consistency, transparency, accuracy and conservativenessxiv – and (2) guidance from the following groups: • • •

The Climate Registry (TCR) General Reporting Protocol, Version 1.1, March 2008, http://www.theclimateregistry.org/ downloads/GRP.pdf World Resources Institute (WRI) GHG Protocol – The GHG Protocol for Project Accounting, November 2005, http:// www.ghgprotocol.org/files/ghg_project_protocol.pdf USEPA Climate Leaders GHG Inventory Protocol – Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources, November 2007, http://www.epa.gov/ climateleaders/documents/resources/ stationarycombustionguidance.pdf Scope GHG Source Satellite Extension Research Facilities

Figure No. 7 - This table indicates the scopes and the impacts that the Satellite Extension Research Facilities have on the campus. 14


1 2

Natural Gas

< 1%


< 1%


< 5%

Relevance - We adhere to the relevance principle in that we recognize that this baseline inventory publication is a reference document for future projects and activities on NC State University’s three campuses. Therefore, it describes “a set of activities that result in GHG emissions and will be referred to as the baseline emissions, against which project activity emissions can be compared for the purpose of quantifying GHG reductions in future internal analysis and xv external documents.”

Completeness - A GHG inventory should accurately reflect the timeframe of the report.xvi We adhere to the completeness principle in that each emissions sub-section of this inventory reflects a full year of emissions data associated with the 2008 calendar year (CY08).

Consistency - A specialized inventory methodology was consistently used to calculate GHGs associated with each of our emissions sub-sections, and these methodologies are consistent with national and international standards.

Transparency - We have attempted to compile, analyze, and document the university’s GHG emissions clearly and coherently so that reviewers may assess the credibility and reliability of this baseline inventory.

Accuracy - The accuracy of calculations and estimates used to develop this report will be verified by a third-party. If possible, this third-party will be accredited. A rigorous quantification of all emissions sources is not required, but at a minimum, an estimate based on available data has been developed for all sources.xvi

Conservativeness - The sixth principle of accounting is not applicable to this inventory because it pertains to the estimation of GHG reductions. This 2008 inventory constitutes a baseline upon which future reductions in emissions can be estimated. Therefore, future methodologies for estimating the university’s GHG reductions will be based on this principle. Where data and assumptions were uncertain and the cost of measures to reduce uncertainty was not worth the increase in accuracy, conservative Best Quality values and assumptions were used. Therefore, conservative values and assumptions that are more likely to underestimate than overestimate GHG Data pre-organized for reductions will be used.

six fundamental principles of accounting

Tier 1

“The materiality of a source can only be established after it has been assessed.” Therefore, no materiality threshold was set for reporting emissions in this baseline inventory. Rather, materiality of an emissions source was established based on boundaries used to determine the scope of our inventory and described in the next sub-section of this report. xvi

The organizational boundaries of this baseline inventory Scope focused on the University’s Main, Centennial Biomedical and Centennial Campuses. The University’s cooperative extension offices are classified as satellite extension research facilities because they are controlled by both NC State University and North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University. Because these facilities are not solely operated by the university, usage data and purchase records for certain GHG emission sources were not consistently available. Therefore, the satellite extension research facilities were considered for inclusion in this inventory only when such information was available. Figure 6 on the previous page describes the specific GHG sources that include information from satellite extension research facilities, and figure No. 6 on the previous page provides an illustration and description of our inventory boundaries in terms of direct emissions – Scope I – and indirect emissions – Scopes II and III.

Tier 2

Better Quality

Data pre-organized for

Tier 3

Good Quality

Data organized for the sole purpose of the inventory Figure No. 8 - Illustrates the data quality tiers. 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY


Figure No. 9 - Table indicates the scopes, GHG sources and calculation method utilized for this inventory.





GHG Source

Internal Method*

Standardized Calculator

Fuel Oil


The Climate Registry

Natural Gas


The Climate Registry

Fuel- Biodiesel Fuel- Ethanol


Fuel- Gasoline Fertilizer Refrigerants


The Climate Registry The Climate Registry Clean Air Cool Planet i The Climate Registry



The Climate Registry

The Climate Registry

TransportationAir Travel

Atmosfair ii


Clean Air Cool Planet iii

Wastewater Treatment

Clean Air Cool Planet

Waste Disposal

Clean Air Cool Planet

Purchased Paper Products

Clean Air Cool Planet


Clean Air Cool Planet

*Internal Methods were developed with extensive guidance from the three groups referenced in this section

Procedures used to gather Data collection source data are described within the source sections of this publication. Approximately 25% of the Scope II data analyzed in this inventory was from monthly paper billings or usage records that interns manually entered into Excel workbooks. This places data-entry error as the main source of problems moving forward. Refrigerant data was typically well recorded, however, in several instances it was illegible which required phone calls and verbal conversations to properly document the refrigerant data. The data quality tiers shown in Figure 8 on the previous page did not impact the calculation methods used to estimate emissions, but it is important for us to identify and disclose the quality of our data to adhere to a principle of accuracy and consistency moving forward. The data quality tiers are based on internal factors unique to NC State University and guidance from extensive work conducted by the groups listed above. Much of the electrical bill data pertaining to usage had already been assembled and well-organized within Microsoft (MS) Excel spreadsheets in anticipation of 16


an analysis, and this was referred to as Tier 1 quality data. Almost all of the electrical bill data and natural gas bill data were available and organized within MS Excel spreadsheets for financial purposes, and this was referred to as Tier 2 quality data. (1) Any electrical bill data and natural gas bill data that were missing within the MS Excel spreadsheets used for financial purposes and (2) all refrigerant data were manually entered within our MS Excel GHG Inventory Workbooks and this data were referred to as Tier 3 quality. calculations The carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) of each internationally monitored GHG is included in this inventory. All CO2e values are shown in metric tons. The amount of CO2e for each of the five non-CO2 gases – CH4, N2O, PFCs, HFCs, and SF6 – was calculated using their respective Global Warming Potentials (GWPs). GWPs enable scientists, policymakers, and carbon accountants to compare the ability of each GHG to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to other gases. It is a relative scale which compares the gas in question to that of the same mass of Carbon Dioxide. The GWP of a GHG is the “ratio of radiative forcing (both direct and indirect), from one kilogram of GHG to one kilogram of CO2 over a period of 100 years as recommended by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate

Change (IPCC) and employed for US policymaking and reporting purposes”.xvii This methodology is shown in Figure 6 on page 14. The majority of Scope I and Scope II emissions and some Scope III emissions were calculated based on methods developed internally with extensive guidance from the three groups referenced earlier in this section. Details for internal calculation methods are included in the following sections of this report: •


This report describes the University’s Reporting baseline inventory of GHG emissions attributable to the three main campuses within Wake County. This is step one of an ongoing reporting process that will be used to manage and reduce the amount of GHG emissions attributable the University’s mission. Annual Reports present aggregated and disaggregated data that pertains to the University’s GHG emissions. The disaggregated data is organized based on (1) scope and (2) contribution to the University’s overall GHG emissions. verification

Natural Gas

Fuel Oil

• •

Gasoline/Biodiesel/Ethanol Refrigerant

This GHG inventory report will be verified by a third party, and any amendments to this assessment will be published within 6 months of the completed verification process.

Other source emissions were calculated using standardized GHG calculators listed in Figure No. 9 to the left. Figure No. 10 (below) explains the calculation methods used to estimate direct Scope I emissions and some indirect Scopes II emissions. Potential anomalies in the data used to calculate the Calendar Year (CY) 2008 emissions included in this baseline inventory were identified and disclosed.

To ensure accurate, transparent, and consistent measurement of GHG emissions across North America, TCR developed a General Verification Protocol (GVP). ISO 14064-3 serves as the foundation for this verification program, and by verifying this GHG inventory report against the requirements outlined in the GVP, ISO 14064-3, and ISO 14065 NC State University will be complying with xviii international GHG standards.

There are two basic approaches for estimating GHG emissions: Direct measurement


2 Calculation based method Direct measurement of GHG emissions is performed through the use of a Continuous Emissions Monitoring System (CEMS). Calculation based method is a mass balance approach where the carbon content and carbon oxidation factors are applied to the fuel input levels to determine emissions.

GHG Emission Rate Methodology

1 Direct Measurement Method

Output from Continuous Emissions Monitoring System (CEMS)

2 Calculation Method Based On Usage

Fuel Analysis Approach

Generalized Approach

GHG Emissions Figure No. 10 - Diagrams the calculation methods used for Scopes I and II. 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY


Campus overview campus greenhouse gas inventory

The NC State University Campus occupies a total of 2,235 acres of land in which 34% is Main Campus including the West Annex Research Complex, 49% is Centennial Campus, and 17% is Centennial Biomedical Campus combined with the Stadium/Arena Complex (Figure No. 12 on the next page). As an extensive research and land grant institution,

2007 & 2008 NC State Population 50000


Community Capita

In 2007, the total student headcount at North Carolina State University was 31,802. The total population growth from 2007 - 2008 is estimated above 3.2% (Figure No. 11 to the right). The full-time faculty and staff employed at the University amounted to 7,387 in 2007 and 7,581 in 2008. Today, NC State University has an enrollment of more than 33,000 students and an on-campus population greater than 39,900.












Total Student Headcount

Figure No. 11 - NC State University’s population for 2007 and 2008. 18


NC State University is unique not only in its growing size but also by its number of supported satellite research facilities and lands. The University is comprised of over 100 outreach facilities spread across the state. The three main campus buildings and satellite research facilities grossing over 1,000 sq ft totaled a gross square footage (GSF) of 14,731,833 ft2 in 2007 and 15,009,050 ft2 in 2008. Although the Population grew over 3% from 2007 to 2008, the facility GSF grew less than 2%.

Future growth

NC State University Population Growth (Figure No. 13, below) tracks student enrollment from 1992 to 2008. The regression line approximates the real data points to a 97% accuracy. The trend projects the population of 2020 to grow 18% from 2007, an increase of more than 5,600 students in just over a decade. As the student population grows, the faculty and staff population will also increase, demanding more resources, energy, water, and gross square footage.

Figure No. 12 - Map of NC State University’s three main campuses.

A list of the University’s proposed building projects can be found on the Office of University Architect’s website located at http://www.ncsu.edu/facilities/physical_master_plan/ index.htm.


NC State University Population Growth


32000 31000 30000

R2 = 0.9699

29000 28000

Enrollment Trendcurve


19 9 19 2 9 19 19 3 - 93 9 19 19 4 - 94 9 19 19 5 - 95 9 19 19 6 - 96 9 19 19 7 - 97 9 19 19 8 - 98 9 19 20 9 - 99 0 20 20 0 - 00 0 20 20 1 - 01 0 20 20 2 - 02 0 20 20 3 - 03 0 20 20 4 - 04 0 20 20 5 - 05 0 20 20 6 - 06 07 20 - 2 07 00 8


Years Figure No. 13 - NC State University’s population growth from 1992 to 2008. 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY 19

natural gas

ghg emissions for natural gas are the largest contributors to scope I in the inventory

NC State University receives the majority of its natural gas from PSNC Energy, and billings from this provider were used to develop this section of the university’s baseline GHG inventory. A very small portion of emergency generators utilize natural gas, and the large majority use diesel fuel. Therefore, the data collection, CO2e calculations, and report on emissions associated with emergency generators are included in the fuel section of this report. The main uses for natural gas on campus are for heating purposes and for emergency generators. The natural gas bills Data collection for fiscal years 06-07, 07-08, and 08-09 were acquired from an Accounting Technician within NC State University’s Business Services unit. This unit receives Photograph by Utilities and Engineering and uses the bills for financial purposes related to different account holders within the University. Although it is common practice to analyze billed data based on the account holders, this natural gas analysis has been performed based on individual natural gas meters. Any one account within the University can be responsible for one or more natural gas meters. The maximum number of natural gas meters under one account within the university is six. The minimum number of natural gas meters under an account is zero. This is not surprising since many account holders are not financially responsible for the natural gas used to heat the buildings within which their constituents live, work, and/or learn.




0.004 0.003 0.002 0.001 0.000

80000 Short Tons of CO2e

Short Tons of CO2e


Total CO2e from Natural Gas Usage

CO2e per Gross Square FootNatural Gas Usage

70000 60000



50000 40000 30000 20000 10000

2007 Year





Figure No. 14 - This graph indicates the 2007 and 2008 GHG emissions from natural gas consumption. 20



THERMS Usage per Month



1,000 800 600 400


200 0

ry ua


rch Ma

y Ma






m pte


b em v No

Months Figure No. 15 - Illustrates differences in meters used for heating and process loads.

The monthly CO2e Calculation Method heat content of the natural gas was provided on billings from the provider. The quantity of natural gas used, the monthly heat content of the gas, and the GWP of three GHG emissions associated with natural gas consumption – CO2, CH4, and NO2 – were used to calculate the baseline total of CO2e attributable to the University’s natural gas consumption. The billings were not pro-rated on a monthly basis in the same manner as electricity billings because this was not a requirement. As shown in CO2e Contribution Figure 1 within the Executive Summary, natural gas usage comprises approximately 22.5% of the total GHG emissions within this baseline inventory. An analysis of internal data shows a slight increase from CY07 to CY08, illustrated in Figure No. 14 to the left. Through initial analysis of this inventory, it appears that a majority of the emissions related to natural gas usage result from heating functions while some are the result of process loads. One example of a process load is an autoclave. “An autoclave is a device to sterilize equipment and supplies by subjecting them to high pressure steam at 121 C or more. The term autoclave is also used to describe an industrial machine in which elevated temperature and pressure are used in processing materials.”xix This type of breakdown between natural gas functions is useful for internal purposes. The seasonal variability differentiating a heating function from an autoclave function is illustrated in Figure No. 15 above.

Although this inventory was Next steps conducted for carbon neutrality purposes rather than costsavings purposes, our initial analysis has shown that some of the annual costs associated with natural gas meters on our three main campuses can be avoided by cancelling meters that are no longer in use. Moving forward, fugitive methane emissions from leaking gas transportation lines and facility valves owned by the university will be included in future GHG inventories and accounted for separately from combustion emissions. xvi Moving forward, the natural gas billings will be pro-rated on a monthly basis. This will allow the University to more accurately monitor and reduce its GHG emissions related to the use of natural gas. Moving forward, the function(s) of each individual natural gas meter will be verified and reported internally. The expectation is to improve the accuracy and usefulness of our GHG inventory by making this information publicly available for student analysis within university-related coursework.



refrigerant ghg emissions attritubutable to refrigerant

NC State University uses refrigerant for direct exchange units, heat pumps, air conditioning units and chillers. The university has five central thermal plants on campus which produce chilled water as well as steam. The chilled water is distributed to the majority of campus for building air conditioning. •

Yarbrough Plant - Main Campus

Cates Plant - Main Campus

West Chiller - Main Campus

Centennial Utility Plant - Centennial Campus

CBC Plant - Centennial Biomedical Campus

Data collection

NC State University Student Fee Organizations contract out refrigerant services. In some instances, Athletics, Housing, and Facilities Operations also contract out of house. Over 60% of campus is serviced by Facilities Operations where their warehouse keeps record of the cylinders of refrigerant purchased. Refrigerant is issued to each of the campuses’ six zone shops as a work request in the Facility Focus computer system, which enables the tracking of the new refrigerant quantity issued. Work requests are issued when a repair is needed; the issue, its location, the equipment number, type and amount of refrigerant used are entered in the system from a written work form. The form may also include the make, model, and serial number of equipment, the description of the service, and the total full charge of the equipment. When work is not performed in-house, it is in contract that the service providers keep full record of each job.




lbs of Refrigerant

The refrigerant records from outsourced companies as well as work logs from Facilities Operations were obtained for refrigerant usage calculation. Refrigerant Inventory at the end and beginning of 2008 were also attained from Facilities Operations but not from other departments due to their outsourcing of refrigerant work. For 2007, records for University Housing did not carry over from the old main server software to the new software used now. For both years, there were three known buildings that data was not able to be gathered and included in the baseline GHG inventory.

lbs of Refrigerant per Year 12000




6000 4000 2000 0




Figure No. 16 - Indicates the amount of refrigerants added to equipment for years 2007 and 2008.


MT CO2e per Year of Refrigerant

8,548,500 MT CO2e






1,065 2007



Figure No. 17- Illustrates the amount of GHG emissions from 2007 and 2008. CO2e calculation method For the purpose of consistent calculation throughout all facets of campus, pounds of refrigerant added to the serviced equipment minus pounds recovered equated to pounds released except when installing new equipment or retiring old. The pounds released multiplied by the type of refrigerant’s global warming potential (GWP) obtained from U.S. EPA, converted from pounds to metric tons equated to the MTeCO2 emitted. When refrigerant was contaminated, it was noted and included in the baseline GHG Inventory but considered an anomaly and excluded from the Total GHG emissions reported. In addition to the contamination anomaly, one chiller on campus had a failure and released its entire refrigerant charge. This data was not included in the summary of all of the GHG emissions.

The over one-thousand pounds Next steps of contaminated refrigerant was Chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) R-11, which has the highest Global Warming and Ozone Depleting Potential of all refrigerants. It is used in very early, low pressure systems. R-11 and R-12 were phased out of production in 1996 and will be completely discontinued by 2015. An alternate for R-11, is the Hydrochlorofluorocarbon (HCFC), R-123. It has a GWP 20,000 times less than the alternative and an Ozone Depleting Potential that is 50 times less. Yet, R-123 will be eliminated by 2020. CFC R-22 will be abolished in 2010. If a chiller using CFCs is nearing the end of its life (20 years or more), it should be replaced as soon as possible.xx For future University GHG Inventories and proper refrigerant usage accountability, it is suggested that all areas of campus using refrigerant should submit a quarterly report to be verified and entered into a centralized, comprehensive database. Facilities Operations is currently training staff for such a program in which all necessary aforementioned data for proper calculation of the GHG inventory are recorded in hand written refrigerant usage logs and entered into Facility Focus. This includes recording recycled or reclaimed refrigerant, the total full charge of new equipment, charge of retiring equipment, and when refrigerant is traded amongst work zones.

CO 2e contribution

From the 2007 and 2008 data collected, the only contaminates occurred in 2008. Because the refrigerant was contaminated, more than one-thousand pounds were removed from their systems in place. Going by the aforementioned calculation method, the pounds released would also be over one-thousand pounds. However, in documentation, it was not noted what amount of refrigerant was able to be recycled and reused for future expenditure. The amount of refrigerant emitted or refrigerant unable to be utilized could be anywhere from 0 to 1083.4 pounds. The total amount of GHG emissions could therefore be anywhere from 8,548,500 to 4,234,220 MTeCO2 (Figure 17, above). The amount of GHG emissions attributable to refrigerant that were reported for the summary was 15,500 MTeCO2 due to anomalies which skewed the data.



fuel Consumption and impact of fuel oils on campus ghg emissions

NC State University receives the majority of its fuel through direct purchases, and archived purchase and usage records were used to develop this section of the university’s baseline inventory. The fuels we have inventoried include the following: ­

- Fuel oil No. 6


- Fuel oil No. 2


- Gasoline


- Biodiesel B20


- Diesel


- Ethanol E10


- Ethanol E85

NC State University’s fuel oil records are not maintained based on specific account or Data collection meter information, therefore neither meter readings nor fuel receipts were used to inventory GHG emissions attributable to fuel oil during CY 2008. Archived fuel oil purchase records for FY 06-07 and FY 07-08 were acquired from an Accounting Technician within the university’s Business Services unit. He receives and uses the billings for financial purposes. The records for the first part of FY 08-09 were not available because the University had not yet been billed for fuel oil purchases during the second half of CY 2008. Records and billings containing a breakdown of fuels used for assets with miscellaneous fuel keys, such as lawn mowers and weed eaters, were unobtainable. Therefore, emissions from these sources were calculated using a weighted average for total fuel consumption. The fuel usage reports were acquired from our Fleet Services unit and provided a breakdown of fuel usage by vehicle type. This was possible because every university asset that can be driven to the fuel station has an assigned fuel key. A database of all campus generators used in CY 2007 and CY 2008 including fuel type (Diesel, Gasoline, and Natural Gas), kilo wattage (KW), monthly run time (hrs), manufacturer, associated building and location was submitted by Utilities and Engineering for the purpose of the GHG Inventory. co 2e calculation method Air Quality to calculate fuel oil emissions.

xxi, xxii

We used the step-wise approach outlined by the North Carolina Division of

A portion of the fuel provided by Fleet Services is not completely tracked because many assets, such as lawn mowers and weed eaters, are filled with fuel obtained through miscellaneous fuel keys. These emissions were calculated using a weighted average for total fuel consumption. 24


The 17 natural gas generator emissions were assumed included in the Fuel Section because the natural gas meters included these units. Concerning the 87 diesel generators and the 1 gasoline generator, total fuel consumption was not provided but runtime hours were given. Horsepower (HP) was calculated by taking the given kW of the particular generator and multiplying it by the inverse of 0.745 kW since there are 745 watts in 1 HP. The HP was then multiplied by the total runtime (hrs/ yr) and CO2e Emission Factor (lb/hp-hr) for each generator. xxii The CO2e Emission Factor did not include Methane. To calculate the methane emissions, the HP and runtime was multiplied by the Total Organic Compound Emission Factor (as CH4).xxiii The sum of the CO2e and TOC converted to MT equate to the total MT of GHG emitted for the year.

The function(s) of all fuel oil will be verified and reported internally. The expectation is to improve the accuracy and usefulness of our inventory by making this information publicly available for student analysis within universityrelated coursework. GHG emissions from fuel used to operate lawn-mowers and other assets that utilize miscellaneous fuel-keys will be monitored. Internally monitoring this fuel usage will improve the accuracy and usefulness of future GHG inventories and better evaluate our progress towards carbon neutrality. An E85 filling station has been established through Fleet Services and will begin dispensing fuel during FY 200910. Moving forward, the impact this sustainable fuel source has on our GHG emissions will be monitored internally and included in the next published GHG inventory. Developing a centralized motor pool would help in the tracking of the University’s vehicle fleet as well as provide better tracking of fuel consumption and GHG emissions.

<1 hp = .745 KW 1w= 1J/s=1Nm/s 1 hp = 550ft lb/s, 1 ft = .3048 m, 1 lb = 4.448 N, 1 hp = 550 * .3048m *4.448N/s = 745.66 * m*N/s = 745 J/s = 745 W = .745 kW 1/.745 kW=1.341> As shown in the total co2e contribution GHG emissions figure within the Executive Summary, fuel oil usage comprises approximately 1.3% of the total CO2e emissions within this baseline inventory. An analysis of unpublished internal data shows an increase from CY 2007 to CY 2008. Through initial analysis of this inventory, it appears that approximately 98% of the emissions related to fuel oil result from No. 6 heavy or residual oil used in the Utility Plants, while only 2% are the result of other fuel oils, such as No. 2 Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel, which is used for heating related purposes. Approximately 1% of total baseline GHG emissions are attributable to NC State University owned fleet vehicles. A value of 0.2% is from biodiesel fuel, while the other 0.8% is classified as diesel. Moving forward, the end-users who next steps receive a benefit from fuel oil purchases will be verified, and fuel oil consumption will be pro-rated on a monthly basis. This will allow the University to more accurately monitor and reduce its CO2e emissions related to the use of fuel oil. 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY


fertilizer nitrogen from fertilizers generates nitrous oxide

The University’s Grounds Management Department applies fertilizers to the majority of the campuses. The reason fertilizer is considered is that the nitrogen in the fertilizer can be transformed and emitted to the atmosphere as nitrous oxide. “Gaseous loss of N is the dominant mechanism in many agricultural production systems … The contribution of agriculture to the global N2O source is about 35 percent.”xxiii The Global Warming Potential of nitrous oxide is 310, which means that one pound of nitrous oxide is equivalent to 310 pounds of carbon dioxide. The Grounds Management Data collection Department tracks all of its fertilizer usage through purchasing records for financial reasons. Currently the number of fertilizer types utilized on campus is five, each has a different concentration of nitrogen. 26


co 2e contribution

The quantity of nitrogen used from the application of the fertilizers for Fiscal Year 2007 – 2008 was 2,625 pounds. This amount was then entered into Clean Air Cool Planet’s version 6 Campus Carbon Calculator and which estimated the GHG emissions to be approximately 11 metric tons equivalent carbon dioxide.

next steps

It is expected that the 2009 – 2010 fertilizer usage will be reduced due to the current economic environment. The Climate Action Plan will analyze the possibility to utilize fertilizers with lower nitrogen content.

Figure No. 18 - This graph illustrates the global population growth along with the utilization of fertilizers. Retrieved From: http://www.fertilizer.org/ifa/Home-Page/SUSTAINABILITY/Climate-change



electricity Ghg emissions from the use of electricity

mixture for 2004 is 50.5% Coal, 18.8% Natural Gas, 1.7% Oil, 1.9% Hydroelectricity, 1.9% Non-Hydro Renewables and the rest is nuclear generation.xv As guided by the Climate Registry Protocol, regional electric conversion factors were considered.xxiv They are preferable to power company conversion factors because the importation of electricity is considered. data collection

Progress Energy provided

the Electric Billing History for each meter from the University’s three campuses in addition to obtainable satellite institutes, totaling 146 meters. Purchased electricity data was collected for CYs 2007 and 2008 as well as December 2006 and January 2009 for means of including the prorated electricity usage as directed in the Climate Registry General Reporting xviii Protocol.

NC State University utilizes electricity for lighting, cooling, equipment and appliances. As the campus continues to grow and new buildings are added, facilities and appliances are upgraded to address the increased campus energy demand. Although, there are photovoltaic research and nuclear energy programs on campus, the University has no significant electricity generation facilities on any section of University Grounds. NC State University’s Main, Centennial, and Centennial Biomedical Campuses purchase all of their electricity from the commercial power company, Progress Energy. According to the EPA’s 2004 eGRID Subregional Fuel Mix Comparison (updated in April 2007), the Southeastern Electric Reliability Council (SERC) Virginia/Carolina region’s fuel source 28 NC STATE UNIVERSITY

co2e calculation method The electricity meter data was compiled and used for internal calculation performed in MS Excel where the electric bill history for each meter and calculations for prorated usage were listed separately. When kWh consumption data and read dates were not provided for a particular month or months, it was clearly noted and color-coded accordingly for clarification and verification purposes. It was assumed that if there was no kWh consumption data provided, no electricity consumption took place. A summary was made including each meter’s location, address, account number, service base, and meter ID as defined by the Progress Energy electric bill history. The corresponding campus was addressed as being sanctioned as one of the following: Main, Centennial, CBC, or Satellite. Centennial Biomedical Campus did not include the West Research Annex as displayed in Figure 12 on page 19, and was determined part of Main Campus as labeled on the meter location. Only 37 satellite research facility meters were obtainable for the study.

Also provided in the summary were the University’s CY 2007 and CY 2008 total usage (kWh), maximum and minimum demand (kW), and total cost charged by Progress Energy all in which were not prorated (not necessarily beginning on the first day of the year and ending on the last). The Climate Registry Protocol was followed to calculate the 2007 and 2008 emissions totals where total kWh usage employed the consideration for proration when data was available. Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Methane (CH4), and Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions for each meter were calculated by using the Virginia/ Carolina 2004 eGRID Emissions Factors (Figure No. 19 to the right).xxv By multiplying the emission factor by the converted prorated usage from kWh to MWh, and converting the weight emissions from pounds to metric tons, indirect emissions from each meter were calculated and summed for each GHG. The CO2 equivalent (CO2e) was calculated by summing the individual gasses’ emission weights and multiplying it by the corresponding global warming potential (GWP) where CO2 = 1, CH4 = 21 and NO2 = 310.

Figure No. 19- Map depicting the US EPA Grid regions.

co 2e contribution

Electricity has proved to be the source of the majority of not only Scope 2 emissions, but of all Scope emissions. The Total CO2e from Purchased Electricity in 2007 was 136,629 MTeCO2. In 2008, both the energy demand as well as the CO2e emissions increased by 5%, totaling to 274,377 kWh and 143,494 MT of CO2e (Figure 20, below). As the NC State University population grew 3.2% and the square footage less than 2%, the CO2e MT/GSF grew 3%. Next steps

At nine of the ten meters where there was absolutely no kWh consumption recorded, a charge was still applied. It is suggested that these meters be shut down if no electricity is utilized at these locations.

Total CO2e/ Gross Square Foot From Purchased Electricity

Total CO2e From Purchased Electricity 150000







Metric Tons CO2e


Metric Tons CO2e

In most cases, a clear address is provided for each meter but the meter is not specific to that location or more importantly, a specific building. The 146 meter data mainly considered the coverage area of multiple, unspecified buildings. It is recommended that meter coverage of all buildings be examined for purposes of problem area analysis for the CAP and quality control for the University’s Facilities Operations Department.















Figure No. 20 - Indicates the GHG emissions for electricity for 2007 and 2008.



air travel and commuting ghg emissions for air travel and commuting are the largest contributors to scope III in the inventory

The ACUPCC requests that signatory Universities report GHG emissions for air travel and commuting. The University keeps track of its air travel by two business travel agencies. During the collection of the data it was determined that personnel also purchase airfares with grant funds and University credit cards. This data could not be obtained for calculation of GHG emissions. The University has a significant population of students that live on or near campus and the rest of the University population commutes. Current parking space requirements are based on state and local codes.



data collection

To determine the GHG emissions from air travel, the two business travel agencies provided the 2007 – 2008 Fiscal Year flight information, which included date, departure location, arrival location, and NC State personnel. The total number of flights that were analyzed was 12,682. The commuting analysis is based on surveys developed by the University’s Department of Transportation, information from the University Planning and Analysis department, and University Housing records.

co2e calculation methodology

Figure No. 2 in the co2e contribution Executive Summary indicates that the air travel emissions comprises 2.7 % of the University’s GHG emissions, which is approximately 7,300 MTeCO2. As Illustrated in Figure No. 2 commuting is approximately 11.8 % of the total GHG emissions or about 32,000 MTeCO2.

The commuting analysis utilized the Department of Transportation’s surveys, the University Planning and Analysis’ data on student, faculty and staff populations, and University Housing records of the number of students housed on campus. The surveys included estimated distances traveled to NC State University, mode of transportation, and days traveled to campus per week with percentages stated for each range of values. These percentages were then applied to the number of staff and faculty directly and for the student population minus the campus housed population, which provided the number of miles traveled. The number of miles traveled was then entered into the Clean Air Cool Planet’s Campus Carbon Calculator version 6, which determined the GHG emissions for each type of transportation system utilized.

next steps

The air travel emissions are based on calculations from xxvi which Tufts Climate Initiative recommends Atmosfair, as one of the “Excellent” air travel calculators.xxvii The flight data that was provided was for one way flights in case the arrival destination was not the same as the return departure location.

Based on the current economic environment and travel restrictions, it is estimated that GHG emissions for air travel and commuting will dramatically be reduced for the 2009 – 2010 Fiscal Year. The campus has promoted a Smart Commuting program to increase utilization of the University’s bus transportation system. The NC State University Department of Transportation has also analyzed the use of and implemented alternative fuels for the campus buses to reduce the impact on the environment.



The Waste Reduction and Recycling office (WRR), a part of the Grounds Management Department, tracks the amount of solid waste, composting and recycling for the University. A diversion rate explains the amount of waste that is kept out of the waste stream due to reducing, reusing or recycling materials. The diversion rate for NC State University is currently more than 40%. The University also participates in the Recyclemania competition, where colleges and universities across the country compete to recycle and NC State University was ranked 17th out of 400 schools in our first participation.xxviii, xxix During the 2nd year of participation, the University had an increase of 61% in paper recycling. The University’s water usage is tracked for financial reasons. In 2008 NC State University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill competed to see which university could save the most amount of water, where the universities combined saved eleven million gallons of water and NC State University had the greatest conservation per student per day.xxx 32


data collection

The Waste Reduction and Recycling office collects, manages and tracks its amount of solid waste, construction and demolition debris, composting and recycling on campus. Through in house operations for these streams of waste and commodities, WRR is able to easily track accurate weights of disposal. Facility Operation’s Business Services tracks and pays the bills for the University’s water consumption.

co2e calculation methodology

The solid waste, paper recycling and composting amounts were totalized for Fiscal Year 2007 – 2008 and imputed into Clean Air Cool Planet’s Campus Carbon Calculator version 6. The water consumption bills were summed for Fiscal Year 2007 – 2008 and the water consumption usage was converted to wastewater by utilizing a factor of 70%xxxi and imputed into the Campus Carbon Calculator version 6 as wastewater treated by aerobic biological treatment.xxxii


Tonnage of Solid Waste vs. Paper Recycled and Compost 4,249

Short Tons



2000 1,238





The Waste Reduction and Recycling office and University Housekeeping will complete the Deskside Recycling program throughout campus, for which they anticipate improved paper collection. The Deskside Recycling program provides a small bin for mixed paper for staff and faculty offices on campus. Waste Reduction and Recycling is able to track most waste, recycling and compost due to in-house operations. However, there are departments on campus that have outside contractors collect their waste/recycling and do not report weights to WRR, which may or may not be a significant total. WRR is in the process of educating and contacting such departments to educate them on the necessity of reporting. Through more accurate reporting, a rise in weights for both paper and waste is anticipated. The University will also participate in the Waste Minimization category of Recyclemania for the 2010 competition.

Solid Waste

Paper Recycled


Type of Waste/Commodity Figure No. 21 - This graph indicates the University’s amount of solid waste, paper recycled and compost material for Fiscal Year 2007-2008 co 2e contribution

The solid waste GHG emissions represent 0.4% of the University’s total emissions, which is approximately 1,200 MTeCO2. From the paper recycling amounts the Campus Carbon Calculator calculated the amount of emissions from paper purchasing, which was approximately 2.1 MTeCO2 which is equivalent to 0.001% of the University’s total emissions. The only calculated emissions offset for the University is composting, which is estimated to offset 568 MTeCO2 and is equivalent to 0.2% of NC State University’s total emissions. The GHG emissions associated from wastewater were estimated to be 95.3 MTeCO2 or 0.04% of the University’s total emissions. 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY 33

peer institutions how our ghg emissions compare to other universities

Comparison of Peer Institutions in MT CO2e 600000


500000 400000 300000 200000 100000 0

NC State `08

UNC Chapel Hill `07

U. Maryland `07

Harvard `07

Peer Institutions

U. California U. Pennsylvania Berkeley `06 `06

Figure No. 22 - How NC State University compares to other universities.

peer institutions

Today, North Carolina State University has an enrollment of more than 33,000 students and an on-campus population of over 39,900 people, making it the largest university in the State of North Carolina. NC State University is the 26th largest university in the world. xxxiii As an extensive research and land grant institution, NC State University is unique not only in its size but also by the number of outreach satellite research facilities spread across the state, totaling over 100. The peer institutions selected for assessment include University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, University of Maryland, University of Pennsylvania, Harvard, and University of California, Berkeley. Water and energy competitions have been conducted between UNC and NC State University.



UNC was chosen for comparison because of this and for the fact that it is the second largest university in the UNC system. University of Maryland is also comparative in size and is considered an official peer by NC State University Planning and Analysis. University of Pennsylvania was reviewed because it is another Mid-Atlantic university. Harvard was chosen because it sets an example by being one of the lowest GHG emission emitting universities in the nation, taking a Green Campus Initiative. UC Berkeley was unique in that it was the first university to have a detailed inventory publication and maintain on-campus Combustion Turbines. All have completed GHG inventories over the past several years. Figure 22 above compares the GHG emissions data for select institutions.

University of California, Berkeley sets the example for universities, emitting the least amount of GHG emissions. Having only 1% of its purchased electricity powered from coal, UCB also purchases renewable energy credits and carbon offsets. Their university also invests in behavior projects by introducing fleet biking, campus composting, expanding their electric vehicle fleet, increasing occupant awareness and electricity curtailment. Berkeley also monitors HVAC systems and automated lighting, has a cogeneration steam plant, and solar panels on available roof space. Harvard purchases renewable energy certificates which can be factored into their electricity conversion factor. University of Pennsylvania has invested in wind-generated power, 26% of the renewable energy satisfied campus demand, drastically reducing GHG emissions from energy consumption.



Looking forward As we highlight and summarize our findings from this baseline GHG inventory of CY 08, we recognize the opportunities to identify ways to improve the methods by which we monitor and report our progress towards climate neutrality. We expect to make progress on the following initiatives in the near future and through the implementation of our long-term Climate Action Plan (CAP).

Each section of inventory methodology this publication that addresses a Campus GHG Emission Source includes a description of “Next Steps.� The proactive recommendations described within these sections are intended to improve the methods by which we will continue to monitor and report our GHG emissions. Data entry was recognized as the main source of possible errors within this inventory. Moving forward, manual data entry will be phased-out of our GHG inventory procedures by increasing the number of digital utility meters. We recognize that other emissions Sources one limitation of this baseline inventory is the exclusion of a select few Scope III emissions sources, such as product use. We will determine how to develop the capacity to monitor and report on these emissions moving forward. We will also develop a comprehensive list of satellite extension research facilities and calculate the emissions attributable to all buildings >50,000 gross square feet. We will expand our research efforts research and other projects that will be necessary to achieve climate neutrality. Research efforts may include offsetting strategies such as aforestation, energy production from methane, solar, and bio-fuels. Our CAP will include a description of actions required to expand these efforts and projects and explain how they will be financed.xxxiv As an ACUPCC signatory, we plan curriculum to make climate neutrality part of the curriculum and other educational experiences for all students. Our CAP will include a description of this plan and explain how it will be financed.xxxv



We recognize that sustainable energy sustainable energy sources allow us to manage our GHG emissions more effectively. A sustainable energy technologies economic cluster will be established through the work of the NC Solar Center, and the selection of an Energy Performance Contractor will allow us to conduct projects to install Energy Conservation Measures.xxxiv Our long-term goal is Climate impact to reduce our impact on the climate through potential combinations of increased efficiency, new technologies, and capital projects. One of the reductions that will need to be adopted by the NC State University community is to try to reduce energy consumption. Additional specific mitigation strategies will be described in our CAP. We will soon be developing a Climate Action cap Plan. The CAP will include a description of our current emissions trajectory, set a target date for climate neutrality, and develop a plan for measuring actual achieved progress and review/update of the CAP. It will also offer mitigation strategies showing how carbon neutrality will be achieved and how we will finance the mitigation strategies.xxxv In the future we will need to Next steps implement the recommendations of the Climate Action Plan and to meet the needs of the University while striving financially to reduce costs.

contact us

If you have questions, concerns, or suggestions pertaining to this publication or future reports on our GHG emissions, please let us know. Assistant Vice Chancellor of Facilities Operations Jack Colby Director of Utilities Infrastructure Jeff Hightower Director, University Sustainability Office Tracy Dixon Mailing Address: NC State University GHG Inventory Campus Box 7536 Raleigh, NC 27695-7536 Physical Address: NC State University Administrative Services III 2701 Sullivan Drive Raleigh, NC 27695-7536 Find more information about this report here: http://www.ncsu.edu/sustainability/ghginventory.php Get involved in helping to reduce our climate impact: http://www.ncsu.edu/sustainability/climate_impact.php Submit Questions and Solutions: E-Mail: climate_impact@ncsu.edu 2008 GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY


references & acronyms references


Water Vapor Feedback and Global Warming, Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, http://arjournals.annualreviews.org/doi/full/10.1146/

annurev.energy.25.1.441 , (Accessed 10 April 2009) ii

UNEP/GRID-Arendal, Greenhouse effect, UNEP/GRID-Arendal Maps and Graphics Library, http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/greenhouse-effect ,

(Accessed 10 April 2009) iii

IPCC Assessment Report 4 – Synthesis Report 2007, http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-syr.htm , (Accessed 10 April 2009)


IPCC Assessment Report 4 – Working Group 2007, http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm , (Accessed 10 April 2009)


United Nations Environment Programme – Ozone Secretariat, http://ozone.unep.org/Ratification_status/ , (Accessed 10 April 2009)


United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/status_of_ratification/items/2613.php ,

(Accessed 10 April 2009) vii

United Nations Press Release, “Industrialized countries to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 5.2%”, December 1997, http://unfccc.int/cop3/fccc/info/

indust.htm , (Accessed 10 April 2009) viii


The Climate Registry (TCR), http://www.theclimateregistry.org/ , (Accessed 10 April 2009)

American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment, http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/html/commitment.php , (Accessed 17

June 2009) x

Final Report, The University of North Carolina Tomorrow Commission, http://www.northcarolina.edu/nctomorrow/UNCT_Final_Report.pdf , (Accessed 10

April 2009) xi

The University of North Carolina Sustainability Committee, http://uncfacultyassembly.northcarolina.edu/html/Sustainability_Committee_memo_and_

draft.pdf , (Accessed 10 April 2009) xii

Faculty Climate Change Reports, The University of North Carolina, (Accessed 10 April 2009)


General Reporting Protocol, Version 1.1, TCR, http://www.theclimateregistry.org/downloads/GRP.pdf , (Accessed 30 June 2009)


The GHG Protocol for Project Accounting, The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, WRI, http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/project-protocol , (Accessed 11

May 2009)




How clean is the electricity I use? - Power Profiler, input zip code ‘27695’ and ‘Progress Energy’, EPA, http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-and-you/

how-clean.html xvi

Climate Leaders GHG Inventory Protocol Core Module Guidance: Direct Emissions from Stationary Combustion Sources, EPA, http://www.epa.gov/

stateply/documents/resources/stationarycombustionguidance.pdf , (Accessed 11 May 2009) xvii

Emissions Factors, Global Warming Potentials, Unit Conversions, Emissions, and Related Facts, compiled by ICF Consulting. North Carolina

Department of Environment and Natural Resources, Division of Pollution Prevention and Environmental Assistance, http://www.p2pays.org/ref/07/06861. pdf , (Accessed 03 June 2009) xviii


General Reporting Protocol, Version 1.1, TCR, Chapter 14, p. 101, http://www.theclimateregistry.org/downloads/GRP.pdf , (Accessed 30 June 2009)

Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoclave , (Accessed 14 April 2008)


Are you ready for the CFC phase-out?, The Free Library.com, http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Are&you&ready&for&the&CFC&phase-out%3F-a015783165

, (Accessed 11 May 2009) xxi

Greenhouse Gas Emission Guidelines: Stationary Comustion Sources April 2009, North Carolina Division of Air Quality. http://daq.state.nc.us/monitor/

eminv/forms/Stationary_Combustion_Sources.pdf , (Accessed 14 April 2009) xxii

Emissions Factors & AP 42, EPA, http://www.epa.gov/ttn/chief/ap42/index.html , (Accessed 11 June 2009)


Global Estimates of Gaseous Emissions of NH3, NO and N2O from Agricultural Land, International Fertilizer Industry Association (IFA), http://www.

fertilizer.org/ifa/Home-Page/LIBRARY/Publications.html/Global-Estimates-of-Gaseous-Emissions-of-NH3-NO-and-N2O-from-Agricultural-Land.html , (Accessed 05 June 2009) xxiv

General Verification Protocol, Version 1.0, TCR, Chapter 14, p. 99, http://www.theclimateregistry.org/downloads/GVP.pdf , (Accessed 11 May 2009)


OpenEco, https://www.openeco.org, < https://www.openeco.org/downloads/private/af3fd5b10926a588f/20cb2a3bb70e11/EPA_eGRID_2004_factors.

xls > xxvi

Atmosfair, http://www.atmosfair.de/index.php?id=9&L=3 , (Accessed 03 June 2009)


Voluntary Offsets For Air-Travel Carbon Emissions: Evaluations and Recommendations of Thirteen Offset Companies, Stockholm Environment

Institute, http://www.tufts.edu/tie/carbonoffsets/TCI-offset-handout.htm , (Accessed 03 June 2009)



references & acronyms xxviii


Recyclemania, http://www.recyclemania.org/ , (Accessed 05 June 2009)

2007/2008 Annual Sustainability Report, North Carolina State University, http://www.ncsu.edu/sustainability/index.php , p.24 (Accessed 05 June 2009)


NC State Wins Water Challenge, North Carolina State University, Creative Services, http://www.ncsu.edu/featured-stories/engaging-society/mar-2008/

water-conservation/index.php , (Accessed 08 June 2009) xxxi

Corbitt, Robert, Standard Handbook of Environmental Engineering, 2nd ed. Chicago: McGraw-Hill Professional, 1990, p. 620.


2007/2008 City of Raleigh Wastewater System Report, City of Raleigh Public Utilities Department, http://www.raleighnc.gov/portal/server.pt/gateway/

PTARGS_0_2_135791_0_0_18/Waste_Water_System_Report_2007-2008.doc , (Accessed 27 April 2009) xxxiii

Ranking of World Universities, Cybermetrics Lab, http://www.webometrics.info/rank_by_country.asp?country=us , (Accessed 03 June 2009)


2007/2008 Annual Sustainability Report, North Carolina State University, http://www.ncsu.edu/sustainability/index.php , p. 30. (Accessed 03 June

2009) xxxv

NC State Climate Action Plan (CAP) Proposal submitted by Affiliated Engineers, Inc. March 2009. p. 15.

The GHG Protocol for Project Accounting, The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, WRI, http://www.ghgprotocol.org/files/ghg_project_protocol.pdf , (Accessed 11 May 2009) General Verification Protocol, Version 1.1, TCR, http://www.theclimateregistry.org/downloads/GVP.pdf , (Accessed 11 May 2009) United States Green Buildings Council, http://www.usgbc.org/ , (Accessed 13 April 2009) United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Energy Star Partner, http://www.energystar.gov/ , (Accessed 13 April 2009)




American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment Climate Action Plan Campus Environmental Sustainability Team chlorofluorocarbons greenhouse gas Global Warming Potential hydrochlorofluorocarbons hydrofluorocarbons Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Microsoft metric tons of equivalent carbon dioxide Ozone Depletion Potential perfluorocarbons parts per billion parts per million The Climate Registry United States Environmental Protection Agency United States Green Buildings Council Wolfpack Environmental Student Association World Resources Institute


ELECTRONIC AVAILABILITY This document is available online at ncsu.edu/sustainability/ghginventory.php. We printed minimal copies of this inventory to minimize the GHG emissions associated with its publication. Please consider the impact of printing before doing so. FEEDBACK We encourage readers of this inventory to provide us with their own insight into how we manage our GHG emissions for carbon neutrality. Please provide your insight to the university at ncsu.edu/sustainability/climate_impact.php EQUAL OPPORTUNITY STATEMENT NC State University is dedicated to equality of opportunity. The university does not condone discrimination against students, employees or applicants in any form. NC State University commits itself to positive action to secure equal opportunity regardless of race, color, creed, national origin, religion, sex, age or disability. In addition, NC State University welcomes all persons without regard to sexual orientation.