Transcript The Green Points Program

Status of CalCAP
Implementation
Judy Chess, UC Berkeley
UC/CSU/CCC Sustainability Conference July 2008
August 1, 2008
The UC Project Management Institute is a Registered
Provider with The American Institute of Architects
Continuing Education Systems. Credit earned on
completion of this program will be reported to CES Records
for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for non-AIA
members are available upon request
([email protected]).
This program is registered with the AIA-CES for continuing professional education.
As such, it does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval
or endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of
handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product. Questions related to
specific materials, methods and services will be addressed at the conclusion of this
presentation.
Climate Action Partnership
CACS initiated a feasibility study in 2006-07
that led to Chancellor’s Climate Action
Commitment in April 2007.
 Inventory Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions
 Engage with campus decision-makers/stakeholders
 Analyze GHG emissions reduction scenarios
 Evaluate options to meet targets
 Evaluate financial feasibility
 Develop institutional model for implementation
CalCAP Focused on GHG
 Carbon is a criteria for choosing
projects
 Internationally recognized standard
 Carbon can provide an easy metric to
measure progress
 Campus used conservative estimates
 scale and scope of projects
 cost (middle or high range)
 benefits (did not count environmental or
programmatic benefits from carbon reduction)
2007 UCB Emissions Inventory
http://sustainability.berkeley.edu/calcap/
GHG emissions were
approximately 208,000
metric tons of CO2
equivalent. For a campus
population of 49,000, this
corresponds to 12
kgCO2/person/day.
Carbon Footprint vs. Emissions Inventory
Scenarios analyzed in feasibility study
Assumptions:
•
Emissions expect to grow to 225,000 based on 2020 LRDP
•
Use 1990 levels as base year
Target: Reduce to 1990 Levels by 2014
Emissions Reduction Options
A. Infrastructure Projects
Energy efficiency – e.g. Strategic Energy Plan --
Retrofits (lighting, HVAC) , solar, Energy Star
B. Behavioral Projects
Campus energy efficiency - e.g. Energy conservation
campaigns, bike plan
C. Renewable Energy Certificates/Credits
(RECs)
Certificates for electricity from renewable sources – e.g.
wind/solar generated electricity , LEED Credit EA 6
D. Carbon Offsets:
Methods of reducing carbon emissions (on or off-site)
e.g. Methane capture technology
Projects analyzed for both GHG
emissions & financial returns
Implementation Recommendation
Install Energy Star
(EPA) computer settings (assuming about
10,000 computers)
Perform survey of CoGen plant
steam capture and repair
Introduce Fleet Biking
Increase utilization
of videoconference room(s)
Total NPV
Annual GHG
Reduction
Potential
Levelized Annual
Cost/Annual GHG
Reduction
(12,706,000 )
2,582
(295)
(258,000 )
642
(66)
(527,000
3
(31,657)
(664,000 )
114
(348)
Projects ranked according to 6 criteria:
1. $/Metric ton GHG reduction
2. Capital Cost
3. Annual Savings
4. Simple payback
5. Total Net Present Value
6. Annual GHG Reduction Potential
Assessing Project Mix
+
--
Infrastructure
Projects
Campus
investment,
paybacks and
savings
Upfront cost
Behavioral
Projects
Campus
collaboration
Coordination
expense – labor
intensive
Renewable Energy
Certificates/Credits
(RECs)
Credit for 100%
renewable at
low cost
Annual cost of
purchase without
ownership
Carbon Offsets
Credit for
reducing
emissions at
low cost
Reduction may
not be
permanent or
real
Campus Energy Efficiency Projects
UC/IOU Statewide Energy Partnership
• Increases available IOU funding from previous
partnerships’ $23M over six years to a projected $300M
(scalable based on UC plan need) over next six years
• Financing via Office of the President
• Development of Central Funding Mechanism
• Portfolio analysis by funding source (e.g. Purchased
Utilities, auxiliaries e.g. Housing, Athletics
Campus Energy Efficiency Projects
• Building by building project list, e.g.:
– Measures by air handler
– Measures by lamp and ballast type
• Project cost; savings (annual kWh,
therms); incentives; returns
• Cogeneration effects
13
Campus Energy Efficiency Projects
• Standard Air Handler Projects
–
–
–
–
Conventional Air Handlers
Laboratory Air Handlers and Hoods
Hospital Air Handlers
Kitchen Ventilation
• Standard Lighting Projects
–
–
–
–
–
Lamp and Ballast
Occupancy Controls
Daylight Harvesting
Parking Lot Conversion
Gym Conversion
14
Lessons
Use data you have; improve over time
Collaboration and broad participation
Remain focused and practical…
…Still set ambitious target
Leverage energy of students
Create institutional bridge(s) to
implementation
Shared accountability
Where We Stand Now - 2008-09
 Project implementation: SEP - Some projects started
(2006-08) or planned that will get campus 50% of the
way (2009-14)
 On-going monitoring and reporting: Data needs vigilance;
transparency requires increased reporting; FS, Budget
Office, Office of Sustainability
 Funding challenges: Diffuse versus centralized
sustainability fund; Office of Sustainability work program
 Academic context - Turnover of students – student initiative,
energy and labor support (Building Sustainability @ Cal, LEED EB),
faculty engagement
UCB Sustainability: Beyond GHG
 Teaching
• Over 450 environmental courses
• Multiple student-led courses: Building Sustainability @ Cal,
CalCAP
 Research
• Energy Biosciences Institute
• Joint Bioenergy Institutive
• Helios
 Other Initiatives
• FS -- Water conservation; Comfort cooling policy; LEED
standards; energy eff. in laboratories
• Waste reduction and recycling
• Food
• Green Purchasing
QUESTIONS?
This concludes the American Institute of Architects Continuing Education Systems
Program.
UC Project Management Institute is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects
Continuing Education Systems