1. DRAFT, April 14 –All data are preliminary, need verification Class Project Report Sustainable Air Quality, EECE 449/549, Spring 2008 Washington University, St. Louis, MO Carbon Footprint of Danforth Campus Instructors: Professor Rudolf B. Husar, Erin M. Robinson For more details see the class wikiclass wiki Students: Devki Desai Martin Groenewegen Tyler Nading Kate Nelson Matt Sculnick Alyssa Smith Varun Yadav

2. Common Concerns, Differing Emphases –What Is To Be Sustained –What Is To Be Developed –The Links Between –For How Long? Goals for a Sustainability Transition –Meeting Human Needs, Education, Research –Preserving Life Support Systems –The Transition to Sustainability as Social Learning Class Outline Follows the NAS Report: Our Common Journey…Sustainability Transition (link)

3. Class Project: Carbon Footprint of Danforth Campus Objectives: 1.Develop and Apply Carbon Emission Estimation Model 2.Estimate Carbon Footprint of Danforth Campus 3.Calculate the Potential Carbon Cost with Chicago Climate Exchange 4.Compare the Estimates to Other College Campuses

4. Washington University Carbon Footprint The impact on carbon arises from on-campus energy use and from transportation On Campus Energy Use Carbon Impact Students Heating Cooling Appliances Faculty/Staff Transportation Carbon Impact Commuting Air Travel University Fleet

5. On Campus Energy Use Kate Nelson Alyssa Smith

6. Danforth Campus Population From 1990-2005 the Campus population has fluctuated between 14-16,000 people Students account for 80 percent of the population on campus

7. University Expenditures and Building Area Expenditures Include: Research, Academic, Student Support, O/M of Physical Plant Between 1990-2005, the expenditures increased by 70% 60% increase 70% increase During the same time period, the building area (sq ft) has increased by 60 percent.

8. Danforth Campus Electric Energy and Fuel Consumption Purchased electricity increased 90% between 1990-2005. The total energy for electricity includes losses in the power plant and during transmission. Fuel used on campus for heating and hot water: coal, oil and natural gas. In 1993, the University made several upgrades: –Switched from coal to natural gas –Switched to electric chillers –Shut off steam plant from May-October hot water

9. Causality Framework for University Carbon Footprint – Buildings (link) The carbon impact of on-campus energy is due to direct fuel consumption and indirectly from electricity use The overall carbon impact for on campus energy consumption has increased 50% from 1990-2007 Electricity use contributed about 80 percent to the on-campus carbon impact Population Students Activities $ Expend./yr Buildings Sq. Ft Fuel Cons. BTU/yr C Emission Ton C/yr Fuel Cons. BTU/yr C Emission Ton C/yr Electr. Cons Kw-Hr/yr $/StudentSq. Ft./$BTU/Sq.Ft. Kw-hr/Sq.Ft. BTU/Kw-hr Carbon/BTU

10. Carbon Emission Summary – Energy Use on Campus

11. The student population has remained roughly constant since 1990 However, the expenditures/student have increased by 60 percent The building area has grown in proportion to the expenditures, while the energy use/sq ft and the C emission factor have remained constant Evidently, the key driver for carbon emission growth of 60%?) was the growth in the physical campus expansion

12. Transportation Devki Desai Tyler Nading Varun Yadav

13. Causality Framework for University Carbon Footprint - Transportation Overall the transportation carbon emissions have remained roughly at 1990 level Population People Transportation Miles Fuel Cons. Gal./yr C Emission Ton C/yr Miles/PersonGal./MileCarbon/Gal

14. Carbon Emission – Danforth Campus Carbon Emissions have increased almost 60% from 1990 to 2005. Electricity is the main component of emissions and also drives the emissions trends

15. Washington University and the Chicago Climate Exchange Matt Sculnick

16. Other University Comparison Martin Groenewegen Tyler Nading

17. Total Emission Comparison between Universities Data from 14 campuses show that the carbon impact is roughly proportional to the campus size. Our data indicate that WU emissions/area are comparable to the other schools

18. Transportation Emission Comparison between Universities Transportation carbon emission estimates for ten campuses indicate a relationship to school population Washington University estimates are uncertain and given as a range based on two calculation methods Evidently, the WU transportation carbon emissions are also comparable to the other colleges.

19. Working Toward a Sustainable Transition Alyssa Smith