Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

$$ Billion Dollar Green Challenge UO Financial Stewardship Small Group Project Presentation April 2013.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "$$ Billion Dollar Green Challenge UO Financial Stewardship Small Group Project Presentation April 2013."— Presentation transcript:

1 $$ Billion Dollar Green Challenge UO Financial Stewardship Small Group Project Presentation April 2013

2 Billion Dollar Green Challenge  Overview of the program  Case Studies from participating institutions  University of Oregon’s project  Recommendations  Q & A

3 Program Overview The Billion Dollar Green Challenge Participation:  39 Institutions: Colleges, universities and other non-profits  $68 million committed to date  36 distinguished member advisory council

4 Program Overview The Billion Dollar Green Challenge Goals: invest a combined total of one billion dollars in self-managed revolving funds that finance energy efficiency improvements

5 Program Overview The Billion Dollar Green Challenge Process: Green revolving funds invest in energy efficiency projects to reduce energy consumption on campus and reinvest the money saved in future projects.

6 Program Overview The Billion Dollar Green Challenge Proposed Benefits:  Reduction of carbon emissions and resource consumption  Financial savings  Creating re-investment funding  Educational opportunity – research/teaching  Foster culture of sustainability and resource efficiency  Additional membership benefits

7 Accounting Loan vs. Accounting Model  In 2011, Sustainable Endowments Institute suggested two accounting categories  For the 2012 survey, schools placed their funds into one of those categories

8 Loan Model  The project applicant agrees to borrow from the fund  Funds are transferred to the project proponent’s budget  Loan repayment typically managed through budget transfers  Twenty-one institutions report they use the loan model

9 Accounting Model  Funds are transferred to the project applicant  Repayment is handled through transfer of funds to the GRF From centrally-managed budget where savings were generated Example: from a utility budget  Handled by the central finance/budget office  Used where projects create operational savings in budgets that are managed centrally  Thirty-nine funds use the accounting model

10 Estimating and Verifying Project Performance  Estimated engineering data 10 schools use this method  Individual building meters 7 schools use this method  Combination meter/engineering data 38 schools use this method

11 Case Studies  Lane Community College - Accounting Initial investment 2006, $122,000 o Focused on conservation creating Energy Carryover Fund o realized savings when current year electricity and natural gas expenditures are less than current year budget. o rebates and other incentives for energy-focused projects deposited into the fund

12 Case Studies  Oregon State University – LOAN model o Initial investment 2010, $1,000,000 o SERLF – student run, student funded* o Provides local source low interest financing to accelerate sustainable energy projects on the OSU campus. o provide student learning, demonstrate environmental leadership and economic benefit. o hands-on education for graduates studying energy efficiency and renewable energy. o The minimum funding per project $5,000. *OSU Student Sustainability Initiative (SSI) Fee Board

13 Case Studies  California Institute of Technology – Accounting Model  Initial Investment: 2008, $25,000  The Caltech Energy Conservation Investment Program (CECIP) funded by Institute’s endowment, (via the Capital Revolving Fund) then reimbursed from avoided utility costs  energy conservation projects must have a return on investment greater than 15%, exhibit verifiable savings via metering and must not be part of a planned capital project.  allocation has grown to roughly $8,000,000, which at its projected peak will finance over $30,000,000 in energy conservation measures.  project selection, detailed training, a rigorous system of checks and balances and an emphasis on measurable results, effectively embeds energy conservation into the organization. *OSU Student Sustainability Initiative (SSI) Fee Board

14 Case Studies ROI from participating institutions Return on investment between 20 percent ( Georgia IT, UNC Chapel Hill ) and 57 percent ( Boston U ). George Washington U Green Campus Fund investment: $141,000; upgrade the lighting (2010); $100,000/year savings. Projected lifespan: 8 years, original investment will generate ~$800,000 savings = reinvestment

15 The Oregon Model for Sustainable Development  Net Zero Increase in Campus Energy Use from New Development Increased energy consumption from new construction… …energy- saving mitigation in existing buildings …offset by…

16 The Oregon Model for Sustainable Development  Affect on Campus Wide Energy Costs Increased utilities costs for new construction Included in operating funds budgeted for new facilities + Reduced utilities costs due to mitigation in existing building Reduces spend on utilities for existing run rates -

17 The Oregon Model for Sustainable Development  Central Energy Fund (CEF) set up to pay for energy-saving mitigation in existing buildings  Funded by new construction project surcharge and Central Administration  Managed by Campus Operations

18 The Oregon Model for Sustainable Development  Balancing the Energy and Cash “Banks” Campus Wide – How it’s supposed to work Energy Central Energy Fund New Construction Energy Saving Mitigation 10% of CEF is from construction projects/90% from Central Admin

19 UO’s First Energy-Saving Mitigation Project Under the Model  Lighting project to replace T12 lamps with T8 lamps in 45 buildings  Anticipated savings based on EWEB’s engineering model of 1.41 megawatts per year .10 per kilowatt savings = $141,000/year

20 The Oregon Model for Sustainable Development  Problems with the application of UO’s Model as a Green Revolving Fund Energy Central Energy Fund New Construction Energy Saving Mitigation Central Admin funds borrowed from Central Power Station Depreciation

21 Funding Recommendations  Create a true Revolving Fund seeded with funds dedicated for that purpose New Construction Energy Saving Mitigation Energy Project Funds Grants or Gifts Central Admin

22 Fund Management Recommendations  Identify cost savings  Utilize estimated savings established by experts, consultants, or product information o Reduces the challenges caused by inconsistent availability of infrastructure o Creates a cushion to protect against under- performing projects and rate fluctuations  Determine payback period and amount

23 Fund Management Recommendations  Repayment Model o Department Projects - Use the Accounting Model

24 Fund Management Recommendations  Repayment Model o Auxiliary Projects - Use the Loan Model

25 Conclusion – Commit!  Enhance the Triple Bottom Line

26 Questions? Thank you for your participation in our presentation  Kassia Dellabough – Director, A&AA PODS  Suzanne Dodge – Accountant 2, Campus Operations  Terri Libert – Accountant 2 – Law School  Molly Lockhart – Property Control Coordinator, Business Affairs  R. Kevin Marbury – Director, Physical Education & Recreation  Lynne Romans – Public Relations Specialist - Biology  John Salmon – Associate General Counsel, General Counsel For copies of the executive summary For program info see


Download ppt "$$ Billion Dollar Green Challenge UO Financial Stewardship Small Group Project Presentation April 2013."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google