Carbon Footprint Analysis and GHG Inventory
Broome Community College, Binghamton, NY
Carbon Footprint Calculation Subcommittee of the BCC Sustainability
Steering Committee
Troy Jesse, Robert Lofthouse, Chris Burger, Tracy Curtis, Doug Garnar
and Peg Logalbo
Page 1
Table of Contents
I.
Introduction
5
II.
Methodology
5
II.1
Calculation Tools
5
II.2
Data Inputs
5
II.2.a Budget
5
II.2.b Energy Consumption
5
II.2.c Transportation
5
II.2.d Agriculture
6
II.2.e Solid Waste
6
III.
Results
III.1
III.2
IV.
6
Data Inputs
6
III.1.a Budget and Physical Data
6
III.1.b Energy Consumption
8
III.1.c Transportation
8
III.1.d Agriculture
10
III.1.e Solid Waste
10
Emissions Data
11
III.2.a Total eCO2 Emissions by Scope
11
III.2.b Emissions by Sector
11
Reducing the BCC Carbon Footprint
15
IV.1
Electricity
15
IV.2
Natural Gas
15
IV.3
Transportation
17
IV.4
Agriculture
18
IV.5
Solid Waste
18
V.
Conclusion
19
VI.
Acknowledgements
19
Page 3
I.
Introduction
An analysis of green house gas (GHG) emissions is a crucial first step in preparing a
strategy for reduction of these emissions. Upon becoming a signatory of the American Colleges
and Universities President’s Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), Broome Community College
pledged to actively pursue the goal of reducing the emissions produced by the College. This
report outlines the methodology and findings of the study, and includes recommendations for
reduction of the carbon footprint of Broome Community College.
II.
Methodology
II.1
Calculation Tools
GHG emissions were calculated using the Clean Air Cool Planet Campus Carbon
Calculator version 5. Data was collected for electricity use, natural gas use, fleet fuel
use, student and faculty commuting, fertilizer use and solid waste production.
II.2
Data Inputs
II.2.a Budget
Data for Operating budget and Energy budget were included.
II.2.b Energy Consumption
Data on energy consumption was kindly provided by Rick Armstrong, director of
Operations and Maintenance. Actual electricity and natural gas use from 2002-2007
were used in the calculations.
II.2.c
Transportation
Fleet fuel consumption, including gas and diesel, was provided for the year 2006.
All other years, 2002-2007, were based on this data.
Commuter fuel use was determined by use of a faculty/staff/student survey.
Fuel use was calculated using the efficiencies provided for by the Campus Carbon
Calculator. Actual numbers of students, faculty and staff at the campus were used to
extrapolate the survey data for the years 2002-2007.
Page 5
II.2.d Agriculture
The agricultural component of the carbon footprint is limited to fertilizer use on
campus. This data was provided for 2006, and subsequently used for all other years
2002-2007.
II.2.e Solid Waste
Solid waste data was extrapolated from a solid waste audit conducted on the
campus by the Ecology Club in 2006.
III.
Results
III.1
Data Inputs
III.1.a Budget and Physical Data
The overall budget for the years 2002-2007 can be seen in Table 1. The
operating budget data for 2002 is not reported. As Broome Community College is a
two-year college, we have no research budget to report.
In terms of physical space, the campus consists of 15 buildings, with a total
building space of 591,643 square feet.
Data on the student population can be seen in Table 2, the numbers of students
from 2002-2007 has remained relatively constant, with average enrollments of 6,282
full-time students, 2,358 part-time students and 1,998 summer students.
From the faculty and staff data in Table 3, it can be seen that the number of
faculty on campus has increased from 385 in 2002 to 406 in 2007. Similarly, the number
of staff increased from 275 to 280.
Page 6
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Operating Budget ($)
Energy Budget($)
830,257.00
1,025,384.00
1,089,799.00
1,197,528.00
1,291,901.00
1,168,299.63
37,761,705.00
38,888,684.00
40,188,907.00
42,710,685.00
44,705,060.00
Table 1. Operating Budget and Energy Budget used in Campus Carbon Footprint
Calculator.
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
FT
6,390
6,390
6,403
6,152
6,083
6,275
PT
2,378
2,378
2,441
2,332
2,283
2,335
Summer
2,083
2,083
2,028
1,984
1,894
1,913
Total
10,851
10,851
10,872
10,468
10,260
10,523
Table 2. Numbers of students attending campus. FT – full-time; PT – part-time.
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Faculty
385
385
407
396
394
406
Staff
275
275
266
273
275
280
Table 3. Population of Faculty and Staff at BCC.
Page 7
Total
660
660
673
669
669
686
III.1.b Energy Consumption
At this time, all electricity consumed by BCC is produced off-site. As can be seen
in Table 4, the kWh consumed from 2002-2007 has remained relatively constant. It
should be noted that in 2004, BCC was the Empire State Games Hockey venue; this is
reflected in the 9,366,000 kWh used that year.
The other utility used on campus is Natural Gas, primarily for hot water
generation and in the Chemistry and Biology laboratory classrooms. Over the six year
period from 2002-2007, a minimum of 31,384 MMBtu was used in 2002, and a
maximum of 39,369 MMBtu was used in 2003 (Table 4).
III.1.c Transportation
The amount of gasoline and diesel used for personal commuting and campus
travel is shown in Tables 5 and 6. The amount of fuel used by the college fleet was
taken from data for the year 2006. Since records of fleet fuel use were unavailable for
other years in the inventory, this fuel consumption was used for the entire inventory.
Commuter data was gathered using a survey that was given to all members of
the campus community. The average distance for all respondents was used to calculate
the amount of fuel used. The standard fuel efficiencies found in the Campus Carbon
Footprint calculator were used. Numbers of faculty, staff and students presented
previously were used in the calculations. Only FT and summer students were included.
The majority of students (86%) report driving personal vehicles to BCC (Table 7).
There is, however, some use of public transportation, namely buses. Approximately
14% of student survey respondents report using the bus system as some time during the
semester.
With respect to faculty and staff commuting, 100% reported using personal
vehicles. Of the survey respondents, 79% report driving alone, and 21% report sharing
rides with other employees (Table 7).
We have no data for air travel at this time.
Page 8
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Electricity (kWh)
8,703,800
9,065,000
9,366,000
8,947,400
8,805,800
8,869,301
Natural Gas (MMBtu)
31,384
39,369
37,312
35,926
34,570
35,675
Table 4. Consumption of electricity and natural gas by the BCC Campus.
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Miles
24,760,460
24,969,676
25,059,449
24,087,048
23,725,376
24,564,133
Gasoline
1,070,708
1,066,590
1,026,607
986,536
972,130
1,007,405
Diesel
60,715
59,799
59,778
57,590
56,498
57,989
Table 5. Commuting travel and fuel use by BCC students. This data includes fuel
consumption calculated for use by public transportation.
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Commuting
Miles
7,102,128
7,102,128
7,137,250
7,157,189
7,171,723
7,339,517
Gasoline
339,657
335,218
322,952
323,855
324,512
332,105
Fleet
Gasoline
9,514
9,514
9,514
9,514
9,514
9,514
Fleet Diesel
776
776
776
776
776
776
Table 6. Fuel consumption for the BCC College Fleet and Faculty/Staff Commuter
Travel. Fuel consumption data presented in Gallons.
Page 9
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Student Commuter Travel
Drive Alone
73%
73%
73%
73%
73%
73%
Car Pool
13%
13%
13%
13%
13%
13%
Public
14%
14%
14%
14%
14%
14%
Faculty/Staff Commuter
Travel
Drive Alone
Car Pool
79%
21%
79%
21%
79%
21%
79%
21%
79%
21%
79%
21%
Table 7. Breakdown of commuting habits and vehicle use for BCC Faculty, Staff and
Students.
III.1.d Agriculture
The contribution of agricultural sources of greenhouse emissions is limited to
fertilizer use on the BCC Campus. Based on data from 2007, 8,308 pounds of fertilizer
were used on the BCC campus. This data was used for all years 2002-2007, as grounds
keeping and horticultural practices have had little variation over this time period.
Of these 8,308 pounds of fertilizer, 28% was Nitrogen based, and no organic
fertilizers or compost were used.
III.1.e Solid Waste
Good quality data for solid waste production does not exist for all years 20022007, so, an approximation of a total of 24 short tons of waste was used for each year in
the study. The landfills in the area use methane capture, and recently some methane is
beginning to be used for electricity production. To reflect this, 23 short tons was used in
the calculations under methane capture and flaring, and 1 ton was used in the
calculations under methane capture and electric generation. Better quality data is being
gathered at this time for future inventory.
Page
10
III.2
Emissions Data
III.2.a Total eCO2 Emissions by Scope
The total eCO2 emissions divided by Scope produced in the 2002-2007 time
period can be seen in Table 8. Scope 1 emissions are those directly produced by
activities on campus and include natural gas use, fleet vehicle use and fertilizers. Scope
2 emissions include emissions from energy produced off-campus, for BCC, this is from
purchased electricity. Scope 3 emissions are made up of commuter travel emissions and
those from solid waste.
By far, the largest contributor to the GHG emissions by the BCC community is
from Scope 3. Of the 20,649 metric tons eCO2 produced in 2007, 60.8% was from Scope
3 emissions.
Total eCO2 emissions from Scope 1 sources can be seen in Table 9. The largest
contributor to Scope 1 emissions is natural gas use on the BCC campus.
Total eCO2 emissions from Scope 3 sources can be seen in Table 10. The largest
contributor to Scope 3 emissions is from student commutes to campus.
III.2.b Emissions by Sector
The total CO2 emissions for 2002-2007 can be seen in Figure 1. As previously
determined, transportation is the largest contributor to GHG emissions by the BCC
campus community. In Figure 2, the contributions of individual sectors to total CO2
emissions in 2007 are shown. It can be seen that by far the largest contribution to
overall CO2 emissions are student commuters, followed by electricity usage, faculty/staff
commuters and natural gas usage. Fleet emissions account for only 0.4% of CO2
emissions.
The total CH4 (methane) emissions can be seen in Figure 3. Once again, the
largest contributor to GHG emissions is transportation. In Figure 4, the contributions of
individual sectors to CH4 emissions are shown. Although commuting constitutes the
greatest portion of total methane emissions, solid waste contributes 9% to the overall
total.
Page
11
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Scope 1
1,764
2,186
2,078
2,004
1,932
1,991
Scope 2
5,986
6,234
6,441
6,153
6,056
6,100
Scope 3
13,208
13,107
12,660
12,294
12,161
12,559
Total
20,958
21,528
21,179
20,452
20,149
20,649
Table 8. Metric Tons of eCO2 emissions for the BCC Campus by Scope. Scope 1 –
contributions from natural gas consumption, fleet vehicles and fertilizer; Scope 2 –
contributions from electricity consumed; Scope 3 – contributions from commuter travel
and solid waste.
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Natural Gas
1,662
2,084
1,976
1,902
1,830
1,889
Agriculture
9
9
9
9
9
9
Fleet
93
93
93
93
93
93
Total
1,764
2,186
2,078
2,004
1,932
1,991
Table 9. Metric Tons of eCO2 emissions from Scope 1 sources.
Year
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Faculty/Staff
Commuting
3,032
2,989
2,884
2,893
2,899
2,967
Student
Commuting
10,170
10,113
9,770
9,395
9,255
9,585
Solid Waste
Total
6
6
6
6
6
6
13,208
13,107
12,660
12,294
12,161
12,559
Table 10. Metric Tons of eCO2 emissions from Scope 3 sources.
Page
12
Total Carbon Dioxide Emissions by Sector (kg CO2)
25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
0
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Purchased Electricity
Purchased Steam and Chilled water
On-campus Stationary
Transportation
2007
Solid Waste
Figure 1. Total CO2 emissions by sector, 2002-2007.
Contributions of Sectors to Total CO2 Emissions
14%
30%
Electricity
Natural Gas
Fleet
Student Commuters
47%
9%
Faculty/Staff Commuters
0%
Figure 2. Contributions of Individual Sectors to Total CO2 emissions in 2007.
Page
13
Total Methane Emissions by Sector (kg CH4)
3,500
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
0
2002
2003
Purchased Electricity
2004
2005
Natural Gas Used
Transportation
2006
Agriculture
2007
Solid Waste
Figure 3. Total Methane Emissions by Sector, 2002-2007
Contributions of Sectors to Total CH4 Emissions
1%
9%
1%
7%
Electricity
Natural Gas
20%
Fleet
Student Commuters
Faculty/Staff Commuters
62%
Solid Waste
Figure 4. Contributions of Individual Sectors to Total CH 4 emissions in 2007.
Page
14
Total nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions by sector for 2002-2007 are shown in Figure
5. As previously found, transportation is the largest contributor to GHG emissions. A
breakdown of contributions to total nitrous oxide by sector in 2007 can be seen in
Figure 6. Student commuters contribute 71% of the total nitrous oxide emissions,
followed by faculty/staff commuters at 21%. Agriculture contributes 3% to the overall
total N2O emissions, while purchased electricity and the campus fleet contribute 4% and
1 % to the overall total, respectively.
IV.
Reducing the BCC Carbon Footprint
IV.1
Electricity
Electricity usage accounts for 30% of the total CO2 emissions by the BCC Campus.
Fortunately, reduction of electricity usage can be fairly straightforward and certain
measures require little, if any, change in infrastructure.
The Carbon Footprint Subcommittee has made the following recommendations
to the BCC Sustainability Committee for reduction of CO2 emissions by electricity
consumption:






Installation of motion-sensitive light controls in classrooms.
Shutdown of computers and electronic equipment during idle periods.
Purchasing policies requiring Energy Star certification for all new equipment
where applicable.
Education of employees to reduce electricity consumption.
Purchasing policies requiring a portion of electricity from renewable
technologies.
Requirements that new buildings be constructed with at least LEED Gold
certification.
Other steps in process are installation of a co-generation plant, installation of
solar panels and feasibility studies of wind generation on campus.
IV.2
Natural Gas
Natural Gas usage accounts for 9% of the total CO2 emissions and 7% of the total
CH4 emissions from the BCC Campus.
Page
15
Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions by Sector (kg N2O)
1,000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
2002
2003
2004
Purchased Electricity
2005
Natural Gas Used
2006
Transportation
2007
Agriculture
Figure 5. Total Nitrous Oxide Emissions by Sector, 2002-2007
Contributions of Sectors to Total N2O Emissions
0% 1%
3% 4%
Electricity
21%
Natural Gas
Fleet
Student Commuters
Faculty/Staff Commuters
Agriculture
71%
Figure 6. Contributions of Individual Sectors to Total N 2O emissions in 2007.
Page
16
The Carbon Footprint Subcommittee has made the following recommendations
to the BCC Sustainability Committee for reduction of CH4 emissions:





IV.3
Installation of improved heating and cooling controls in classrooms, including
timers and/or other sensors.
Replacement of inefficient heating systems.
Exploration of use of energy efficient technologies, such as geothermal heating
and solar water heating.
Requirements that new buildings be constructed with at least LEED Gold
certification.
Establishment of a recycling and composting program, reducing the amount of
solid waste taken to landfills.
Transportation
By far, the largest contributor to GHG Emissions on the BCC Campus is the
Transportation Sector; commuting by students, faculty and staff accounts for 61% of
total CO2 emissions, 82% of total CH4 emissions, and 92% of total N2O emissions.
The Carbon Footprint Subcommittee has made the following recommendations
to the BCC Sustainability Committee for reduction of emissions due to transportation:









Purchase of hybrid vehicles for use by the campus fleet
Use of electric vehicles by campus services for use on-campus
Exploration of the production and use of alternative fuels, including used
vegetable oil and biodiesel by campus vehicles
Improved travel procedures, minimizing air travel and requiring the purchase of
carbon offsets
Promotion of carpooling and ride sharing by students, faculty and staff
Promotion of the use of public transportation, including the feasibility of
providing discount or free bus passes to students
Increasing the offerings of online courses
Reducing the campus work week to four days
The construction of dormitories on campus to reduce the number of students
who must commute
As of this writing, BCC has already purchased one Toyota Prius for use by Faculty
and Staff.
Page
17
IV.4
Agriculture
Although agricultural sources of emissions account for a small percentage of the
overall GHG emissions from the BCC Campus, they do provide a measurable component,
accounting for 3% of Nitrous Oxide emissions.
The Carbon Footprint Subcommittee has made the following recommendations
to the BCC Sustainability Committee for reduction of emissions due to agriculture
related activities:




The use of organic and natural fertilizers.
Reduction of fertilizer and pesticide use
Use of native plants in new landscaping projects
Adoption of minimal mowing policies where applicable
As of this writing, a proposal has been drafted to reduce and/or discontinue
mowing in certain areas of campus.
IV.5
Solid Waste
Emissions related to disposal of solid waste account for 9% of methane
emissions from the BCC Campus. Although this contribution may be small, a reduction
in solid waste would have impacts across other sectors, and accordingly, solid waste
reduction is a priority focus of the BCC Campus.
The Carbon Footprint Subcommittee has made the following recommendations
to the BCC Sustainability Committee for reduction of emissions due to solid waste
handling:





Establishment of a campus-wide recycling program
Establishment of a campus-wide composting program
Purchase of new printers that perform double-sided printing
Purchase of goods produced from recycled materials
Exploration of new waste-hauling contracts favoring recycling and methane
capture and electric production
As of this writing, office paper is recycled, and recycling procedures and
proposals are being developed.
Page
18
V.
Conclusion
Broome Community College is committed to reducing its impact on the
environment. The Sustainability Committee is actively pursuing the establishment of
policies and procedures that will ensure the reduction of GHG production by the campus
community.
VI.
Acknowledgements
The Carbon Footprint Calculation Committee would like to thank the following
individuals for their assistance and guidance in the preparation of this report. Without
these individuals, this GHG inventory would have been impossible.






Rick Armstrong
Tim Millard
Susan Maguire
Regina Losinger
Dr. Lawrence Spraggs
Dr. Daniel Hayes
Page
19