2020 carbon management implementation plan the university ... · foreword from the carbon trust...

2020 Carbon Management Implementation PlanThe University of Warwick

Date: March 2014Version: Final Draft

This page is intentionally left blank

2

Contents

Foreword by Professor Nigel Thrift, Vice Chancellor ........................................................................ 5

Foreword from the Carbon Trust .................................................................................................... 6

Executive summary ........................................................................................................................ 7

1. Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 10

1.1 Purpose of this plan................................................................................................................. 10

1.2 Process of producing the 2011 Carbon Management Implementation Plan.......................... 10

1.3 Process of updating the 2011 Carbon Management Implementation Plan............................ 11

1.4 Achievements so far ................................................................................................................ 12

1.5 Definitions ............................................................................................................................... 13

2. Carbon Management Strategy ............................................................................................... 15

2.1 Context and drivers for carbon management......................................................................... 15

2.2 Strategic themes...................................................................................................................... 17

2.3 Targets..................................................................................................................................... 17

3. Scope 1 and 2 Emissions Baseline and Projections.................................................................. 18

3.1 Scope ....................................................................................................................................... 18

3.2 Baseline and assumptions ....................................................................................................... 18

3.3 Campus expansion................................................................................................................... 20

3.4 Emissions projections.............................................................................................................. 21

3.5 Value at stake .......................................................................................................................... 21

4. Scope 3 ................................................................................................................................. 22

4.1 Objectives................................................................................................................................ 22

4.2 Supply Chain - Procurement.................................................................................................... 22

4.3 Process of Data Collation......................................................................................................... 22

4.4 Strategic Drivers ...................................................................................................................... 22

4.5 Existing Initiatives.................................................................................................................... 23

4.6 Water Use................................................................................................................................ 25

4.6.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 25

3

4.6.2 Emissions’ calculation ......................................................................................................... 25

4.6.3 Future Activities .................................................................................................................. 25

4.7 Waste....................................................................................................................................... 26

4.7.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 26

4.7.2 Methodology....................................................................................................................... 26

4.7.3 Emissions’ calculation ......................................................................................................... 27

4.7.4 Ongoing and Future Management ..................................................................................... 27

4.8 Commuting .................................................................................................................................... 27

4.8.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 27

4.8.2 Methodology....................................................................................................................... 28

4.8.3 Emissions’ Calculation......................................................................................................... 28


4.9 International Student Travel ......................................................................................................... 28

4.9.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 29

4.9.2 Methodology....................................................................................................................... 29


4.9.4 Future Management........................................................................................................... 30

4.10 Business Air Travel....................................................................................................................... 30

4.10.1 Background ......................................................................................................................... 30

4.10.2 Methodology....................................................................................................................... 30



5 Carbon Management Projects ............................................................................................... 31

5.1 Projects to reduce carbon emissions ...................................................................................... 31

5.2 Ownership and Responsibility ................................................................................................. 32

5.3 Projected achievement towards emissions reduction target ................................................. 32

5.4 Other potential carbon reduction measures........................................................................... 32

5.5 Corporate strategy and Policy alignment................................................................................ 32

5.6 Financial costs and sources of funding.................................................................................... 33

5.7 Additional resources................................................................................................................ 33

4

5.8 Success factors ........................................................................................................................ 34

5.9 Benefits and savings – quantified and unquantified............................................................... 34

6. Embedding Carbon Management........................................................................................... 35

6.1 Governors sign-off, reporting and delivery of the plan........................................................... 35

6.2 Data management................................................................................................................... 35

6.3 Curriculum and research links................................................................................................. 35

6.4 Succession planning for key roles............................................................................................ 36

6.5 Behavioural change ................................................................................................................. 36

7. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 38

Appendices .................................................................................................................................. 39

Appendix A: University Submission to EMS for 2005-06................................................................. 40

Appendix B: Waste Calculation .................................................................................................... 41

Appendix C: ARUP Carbon Assessment Report – Commuting ........................................................ 45

Appendix D: International Student Air Travel ............................................................................... 71

Appendix E: Business Air Travel ................................................................................................... 74

Appendix F: Carbon Management Matrix – Embedding. Current status highlighted........................ 77

Appendix G: Document Change Record 2013 - 2014 ...................................................................... 78

5

Foreword by Professor Nigel Thrift, Vice Chancellor

The University of Warwick is firmly committed to the principles of sustainability, with environmental,social and economic factors forming a key part of the University’s ongoing Strategy. The mitigation of,and adaptation to, the effects of future climate change permeates a large part of the University’soperation. We are actively engaged in developing low carbon solutions to address these challenges,through our research, teaching and consulting activities.

It is imperative that we “practice what we preach” and this 2020 Carbon ManagementImplementation Plan provides our carbon reduction roadmap to 2020. Having had a pioneeringinvolvement in the first tranche of the Carbon Trust’s Higher Education Carbon ManagementProgramme, the University has now set an aspirational target in seeking to more than halve its existingdirect carbon emissions in less than ten years. There is also the commitment to incorporate indirectcarbon emissions into the Plan in due course.

In order to achieve the carbon reduction target, this Plan necessarily encompasses a wide variety ofinitiatives. These range from highly technical infrastructure enhancements to behavioural changeprojects. It is incumbent on all members of Warwick’s community to take responsibility for reducingcarbon emissions and to consider ways of enhancing our future performance in a carbon-constrainedworld

I am delighted that through the successful implementation of this Plan, the University of Warwick willretain its position at the forefront of carbon management efforts across the sector and beyond.

Professor Nigel ThriftVice-Chancellor, University of Warwick

6

Foreword from the Carbon Trust

Cutting carbon emissions as part of the fight against climate change should be a key priority foruniversities - it's all about getting your own house in order and leading by example. The UKgovernment has identified the university sector as key to delivering carbon reduction across the UK inline with its Kyoto commitments.

The University of Warwick partnered with the Carbon Trust on this Carbon Management EnergyEfficiency programme in order to save money on energy and putting it to good use in other areas,whilst making a positive contribution to the environment by lowering its carbon emissions. ThisCarbon Management Plan commits the university to a target of reducing CO2e emissions in absoluteterms by 60% by 2020/21 compared to the 2005/6 baseline and underpins potential financial savingsto the University in excess of £7 million per annum by 2020/21.

There are those that can and those that do. Universities can contribute significantly to reducing CO2e

emissions. The Carbon Trust is very proud to support the University of Warwick in their ongoingimplementation of carbon management.

Richard RuggHead of Public Sector, Carbon Trust

7

Executive summary

Through this 2014 update to the Carbon Management Implementation Plan, the University of

Warwick aims to continue to transform its estate, operations and behaviours to deliver a low carbon

campus by 2020. This Plan is the successor to the University’s original Plan which covered the period

from 2006-07 to 2010-11 and resulted in the successful completion of a wide variety of projects aimed

at reducing the University’s carbon footprint. This update also provides the methodology for the

annual updating of the plan with the results being presented in an appendix which will be published

annually.

In 2005-06, Scope 1 and Scope 2 carbon emissions across the University of Warwick amounted to

46,540 tonnes CO2e. By 2008-09, they had reduced by 3% to 45,187 tonnes CO2e. When corrected for

growth in staff and student numbers, this corresponds to a 7.1% reduction and when corrected for the

growth in the University’s gross income this equates to a 19.7% reduction. The current baseline

calculations only cover Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions sources and omit emissions associated with

Scope 3. The University is, however, already undertaking actions to minimize its emissions in many of

these areas.

HEFCE has undertaken analysis of the sector’s recent carbon emissions. As the sector has grown

extensively since 1990 it considers that a sector wide target of 43% reduction in emissions by 2020/21

compared to 2005/6 should be considered equivalent to the existing UK Government target.

Notwithstanding this, the University of Warwick has available data relating to 1990 and has grown

faster than the sector average during the intervening period. As such, the University has committed to

match the Government target of a 34% reduction against 1990 levels. It has therefore committed to

achieve a 60% reduction in emissions by 2020/21 compared to a 2005/6 baseline.

The Estates Master plan sets out the University’s plans to grow over the period to 2020. Assumptions

for the campus expansion based on the Master Plan are used to project the increase in emissions up

to 2020/21. This projection is subsequently used to set the reduction required in Scope 1 and Scope 2

emissions to achieve the carbon reduction target and will be reviewed annually.

Energy costs are projected to 2020/21 accounting for planned estate changes and price increases for

two scenarios. 1) if no action is taken and 2) if the carbon reduction target is achieved. The cost

benefit, the value at stake in achieving the carbon reduction target, is then updated annually and

published in the Appendix to this document.

The scale of indirect (scope 3) emissions arising from specific aspects of the University’s activities has

been identified and the range of ongoing and planned management activities to mitigate their impact

has been highlighted.

The following table summarises the calculations that have been undertaken. A methodology is being

prepared to provide consistent updates Scope 3 emissions figures and update for 2012/13:

8

Emission SourceCalculated Emission (Tonnes

CO2e) for 2010-11

Water 628 tonnes

International Student Travel 8,503 tonnes

Business Air Travel 2,768 tonnes

Commuting 15,799 tonnes

Waste/Recycling 3,927 tonnes

Total 31,625 tonnes

A suite of potential carbon reduction projects have initially been identified to reduce Scope 1 and 2

emissions, ranging from building refurbishments and improved controls, to behavioural change

initiatives and low carbon energy generation. The list of projects underpinning this implementation

plan is not exhaustive, with all projects subject to scrutiny to ensure their ongoing appropriateness

from economic, social and/or environmental perspectives. These will be reviewed annually to ensure

cost and carbon reduction effectiveness is achieved. The expected emissions reduction will be

reviewed annually to confirm the percentage of the carbon reduction target which has been identified

and if significant further projects are required an options appraisal will be presented.

Funding is available to implement approved projects: Revenue and capital funding is allocated by the

University through the Estates Office for general energy saving projects. The level of funding is

reviewed yearly as part of the University financial planning process. The Carbon Management

Implementation Plan also benefits from £650,000 from the HEFCE/Salix Finance Revolving Green Fund;

an additional sum of £660,000 over the next eight years for general energy efficiency measures in

residences, conference venues and retail areas is included in the Estates Commercial Group 10 year

plan; and, subject to approval of viable projects, the University has made an outline commitment to

£2M per annum for “Energy Efficiency Related Improvements” over a five year period. £8.5M has

been committed to a new Energy Centre at the University. It is anticipated that new combined heat

and power engines will reduce the University’s annual Carbon emissions by 3,644 tonnes, equating to

10% of the 2020/21 target reduction.

Whilst these funds will allow implementation of many projects, significant additional investment will

be required to be made directly by the University if all the projects (particularly those requiring major

capital investments) are to be implemented. Robust business cases for these projects will be formally

presented to Finance & General Purposes Committee for the University to approve their funding.

The Carbon Challenge Group will, through its quarterly meetings, monitor the University’s carbon

emissions and ensure that they reduce as planned and recommend the necessary remedial actions if

they do not. This will be achieved through recommendations passed to the University’s Building

Committee for approval and ultimately through to Council (the University’s Governing body), who will

formally sign off the University’s approval of this plan. The University’s Environmental Policy and

Energy Policy both already address carbon reduction, and the University Strategy also makes explicit

reference to the requirement to reduce carbon emissions by over 50% by 2020.

It will also be important to ensure that staff and students continue to play their part in carbon

reduction through further inclusion of sustainability and carbon reduction into curriculum

9

development and undertaking research projects which address carbon reduction. There will be

continued innovation in the methods used to engage staff and students, delivering the required

behavioural change for achievement of this ambitious carbon reduction plan.

10

1. IntroductionThis Carbon Management Plan aims to provide a continuing impetus for the University of Warwick toput climate change into context for its community of staff and students, bringing the issue of reducingcarbon emissions to the forefront. This Plan will ensure that the University continues to measure,monitor and reduce its carbon footprint over the next ten years.

1.1 Purpose of this plan

In April 2005, the University of Warwick joined 19 other Universities in a pilot programme for HigherEducation Institutions run by the Carbon Trust. The Higher Education Carbon ManagementProgramme (HECMP) resulted in the derivation of a carbon emissions baseline for 2004-05 and thecompilation of a Carbon Management Implementation Plan which was subsequently endorsed by theCarbon Trust.

The original carbon management implementation plan ran for 5 years from 2006-07 to 2010-11 andresulted in the successful completion of a wide variety of projects aimed at reducing the University’scarbon footprint. The University achieved a relative reduction in carbon emissions which is presentedin detail in section 3.4. However, given the growth of the campus, absolute carbon emissions rose bycirca 2% per annum.

It should be noted that this original carbon management programme covered activities at the maincampus only. It specifically excluded the Horticultural Research International (HRI) sites atWellesbourne, Warwickshire and Kirton, Lincolnshire which were acquired in April 2004 by theUniversity of Warwick. HRI Kirton is no longer owned by the University but the Wellesbourne campushas been included in the Department of Life Sciences and is now included in this plan.

In January 2010, HEFCE published its Statement of Policy: “Carbon reduction target and strategy forhigher education in England” (HEFCE 2010/01) and subsequently established the link between capitalfunding and demonstrable carbon reduction. This included a requirement for institutions to “set theirown targets for 2020 for scope 1 and 2 emissions against a 2005 baseline”.

This document is the 2013 progress update to the 2011 Carbon Management Implementation Plan,which described how the University of Warwick plans to reduce its carbon emissions. It builds on thewealth of knowledge acquired through the HECMP.

1.2 Process of producing the 2011 Carbon Management Implementation Plan

During 2010/11 the University worked through a process to update the carbon management plancomprising:

1. Key members of the Estates Energy and Environment team within the University workedtogether with the Carbon Trust to produce the 2005-6 baseline, agree the likely projections ofemissions accounting for the Masterplan and to develop a suitable carbon reduction target forthe University, in line with UK Government targets.

2. Existing planned and potential projects to reduce carbon emissions were explored and furtherideas were generated by a workshop held within the University’s Estates Department. Thiswas developed into a programme of carbon reduction measures, providing a cost effectiveroute to emissions reduction.

11

3. The 2011 carbon management plan was then produced together with the Carbon Trust tosummarize the above steps and provide a record of the University’s carbon reductionactivities.

1.3 Process of updating the 2011 Carbon Management Implementation Plan

A methodology was developed to allow consistent annual updates to be produced to the 2011 CarbonManagement Implementation Plan (CMIP) (following the end of each academic year). All updates tothis plan are provided in the document “2020 Carbon Management Implementation Plan 20xxProgress Update – Appendix”. The methodology comprises the following six steps:

1. Updating the carbon footprint from scope 1 and 2 emissions sources

a) Compile the additional year’s emissions data for the University covering the scope 1 and 2

emissions sources described in section 3.1 of the CMIP.

b) Ensure any changes in greenhouse gas emissions factors from Defra/DECC are accounted for.

Data to be taken from the latest “Guidelines to Defra/DECC’s GHG conversion factors for

company reporting”.

c) Calculate both the change in absolute terms of the emissions and also relative to “staff and

student FTE” and “£ turnover”.

d) Review for any trends and describe any known major occurrences that account for changes in

emissions, quantifying where possible. For example, the CHP being out of operation for an

extended period lead to increased use of grid electricity of an estimated “x” tonnes or

unusually cold winter weather. Also, explain any implications of the changes in electricity

emissions factors as the national grid reduces the carbon intensity of electricity.

2. Updating the projected emissions accounting for planned estate changes

a) Review assumptions for rate of increase of carbon emissions based upon predicted University

growth in floor area/new building energy intensity. Data to be taken from the latest “Estates

Office: Growth Assumptions for direct cost budgets, Five Year Plan”. Any significant changes of

assumptions should be explained.

b) Account for any other significant new equipment or changes in activities at the University.

c) Assess any significant changes in the predicted rate at which the national grid will reduce the

carbon intensity of electricity.

d) Re-calculate the emissions savings needed to be made if the University is to achieve its carbon

reduction target, accounting for the planned estate changes. (The University is seeking to

match the Government target of a 34% reduction against 1990 levels and is therefore

committing to achieve a 60% reduction in emissions by 2020/21 compared to a 2005/6

baseline.)

3. Updating the value at stake

a) Review the current energy price predictions from Central Finance, accounting for any known

energy contract periods and using current assumptions for increases thereafter.

b) Update the future cost predictions and value at stake if the carbon reduction target is

achieved. Outline any additional savings in relation to carbon taxes (e.g. CRC EES, EU ETS and

CCL) or other energy provision costs.

12

4. Updating the carbon reduction projects

a) Update the carbon reduction project list ensuring particularly the completion stage, carbon

savings and costs are up to date. Particularly ensure that major projects are reviewed.

b) Update the NPV calculation using latest data from Central Finance.

c) Ensure any changes in greenhouse gas emissions factors from Defra/DECC are accounted for.

Data to be taken from the latest “Guidelines to Defra/DECC’s GHG conversion factors for

company reporting”. Particularly ensure any mixed fuel or unusual CO2e calculations included

are updated especially where this does not happen automatically.

d) Assess any significant changes in the predicted rate at which the national grid will reduce the

carbon intensity of electricity.

e) Review the utility prices and update with current prices where required.

f) Re-evaluate the NPV check to determine which projects are cost effective.

g) Update any changed persistence factors using data from, in order of priority, a) Salix Finance

b) Carbon Trust c) other sources.

h) Evaluate lifetime CO2e savings to determine which the most significant carbon reduction

projects are.

i) Update the MACC curve to analyse most cost and carbon effective projects and verify whether

sufficient projects have been identified to reach carbon reduction target. If insufficient

projects are identified, present options appraisal of potential solutions.

j) Use the MACC curve to update project implementation schedule and graph of achievement

towards carbon reduction target.

k) Update the risk register with significant risks (including legislative factors, incentives/taxes,

grid electricity carbon intensity changes, weather) to success of the carbon reduction projects.

l) Present a summary of the updated 5 year carbon reduction plan including: the total impact of

projects completed to date; planned projects for next 2 years and those under feasibility for

years 3 to 5 and strategy for any significant projects in later years.

5. Updating the carbon reduction financing

a) Provide an update on the funding availability.

b) Outline any additional resources required.

6. Embedding carbon management

c) Provide an update on progress in embedding carbon management into the University’s daily

operations.

d) Outline any significant plans or proposals for improvements.

1.4 Achievements so far

Installation of the combined heat and power (CHP) system in 2001 was significant in reducing theUniversity’s carbon emissions. The system provides the heat for buildings, domestic hot water andcooling using absorption chilling as well as approximately 50% of the campus annual electricityconsumption. Heating upgrades enabled the removal of inefficient boilers in residences as they werelinked to the district heating, also resulting in reduced maintenance costs. Efficiency of the district

13

heating system has been further improved through a £0.75 million extension to provide new coolingfacilities and thermal stores.Design work has begun on a further expansion of the University’s district heating network. A newenergy centre on the Cryfield side of the campus will increase the University’s combined heat andpower capacity and has been projected to reduce annual Carbon emissions by 3,644 tonnes andUtilities expenditure by approximately £650k per annum.

Numerous awareness-raising measures have also been implemented in recent years. In 2010/11, the“Let's Make It Happen” environmental awareness programme aimed to reduce energy consumptionacross the University through engagement of both staff and students. The programme has resulted insignificant energy, carbon and financial savings. Awareness raising has been led by the CarbonChallenge Group. Awareness measures taken have included:

switch it off week and energy saving week;

a Departmental energy saving competition;

a campaign to reduce our base load energy consumption on Christmas Day using data fromthe last 10 years; and

participating for the last 4 years in the Student Switch Off campaign, run in partnership withNUS. Halls of residence within the University compete against each other to save energy.

The University invested in five fully electric MegaVans, used for Food & Drink delivery, wastecollection around the campus, and by the University Security team. These have reduced emissionscompared to using conventional vehicles as they are powered by electricity produced on-site by theCHP. The University was also highly commended in Business in the Community's 2010 RegionalExcellence Award for Sustainable Travel implemented as a result of its Green Travel Plan.Implementing the car share scheme has saved millions of car miles and significant carbon emissionshave been avoided.

1.5 Definitions

The terms “carbon”, “carbon dioxide”, “CO2” and “CO2e” are used interchangeably in this document tomean carbon dioxide gas that is emitted either directly from the fuel combustion process (such asengine exhaust fumes), or where appropriate as an equivalent for emissions of other greenhousegases. It should be noted that over the last few years, greenhouse gas conversion factors have beenrevised annually (most recently in October 2011). In addition, reporting requirements for differentbodies vary. The 2005/06 baseline is reported in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) and it is theintention to standardize all future reporting and business case derivation to CO2e.

Through the original carbon management programme, the University has identified the activitiesresponsible for carbon emissions being released into the atmosphere. Convention divides theseactivities into three groups (known as “scopes”). The three scopes are:

Scope 1 (Direct emissions): Activities owned or controlled by the University that release emissionsstraight into the atmosphere. They are direct emissions. Examples of scope 1 emissions includeemissions from combustion in owned or controlled boilers, CHP engines, vehicles; emissions fromchemical production in owned or controlled process equipment.

Scope 2 (Energy indirect): Emissions being released into the atmosphere associated with theUniversity’s consumption of purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling. These are indirect emissions

14

that are a consequence of the University’s activities but which occur at sources that are not owned orcontrolled.

Scope 3 (Other indirect): Emissions that are a consequence of the University’s actions, which occur atsources which are not owned or controlled and which are not classed as scope 2 emissions. Examplesof scope 3 emissions are business travel by means not owned or controlled by the University, wastedisposal, or purchased materials.

15

2. Carbon Management Strategy

The University has developed this updated carbon management plan to respond to a range of drivers,

both internal and external. These are outlined in this section and their significance discussed. Also

outlined are the strategic themes, which explain the key areas in which the University will respond to

the drivers for carbon management. Finally, the target which will be adopted for carbon reduction

which quantifies the University’s response is explained.

2.1 Context and drivers for carbon management

Climate ChangeHuman-induced climate change is high on the agenda of many nations, with potentially devastatingenvironmental, social and economic repercussions. The release of carbon dioxide and other‘greenhouse gases’ is very likely to be the main cause of global warming, thus it is imperative thatindividuals and institutions take action to minimise contributions to atmospheric carbon dioxide. It islikely that changes to the climate of the UK and the rest of the world will affect Warwick both directlyand indirectly in the future. It is in the interests of the University’s corporate responsibility to reduceits contribution to the problem and to take a leading role in utilising low-carbon technology.

The UK committed, through the Kyoto Protocol, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A more stringentdomestic target was set under the Climate Change Act, requiring a reduction of 80% of UK CO2e

emissions by 2050, and by 34% of 1990 levels by 2020 (1990 baseline). The University of Warwick’semissions reduction efforts should be observed in the wider context of these national Governmentaltargets.

Sustainable DevelopmentThe University has made explicit reference to sustainability in its overall strategy, with the UniversityEnvironmental Policy having definite objectives and aims to progress over the coming years. TheCarbon Management Programme is an opportunity to quantify progress made in sustainabledevelopment, and also provides a tangible objective.

Rising energy costsThe University’s energy bill reached about £8.7 million in 2008/9. Although the contracts for electricityand gas have been fixed until the end of 2013 further campus expansion, volatile energy markets andcarbon taxes are likely to bring about substantial future increases in utility expenditure.

Future FundingHEFCE has committed the Higher Education Sector to Government targets in respect of scope 1 andscope 2 emissions. It has estimated that, given the growth of the sector since 1990, the Governmenttarget base year, that this is equivalent to a 43% reduction against 2005/6 levels. HEFCE also proposesthat the HE sector commits to making reductions in scope 3 emissions, with the intention of settingtargets for these emissions when measurement technology permits. The Department for Educationand Skills mandated HEFCE to promote sustainable development actively and to reflect it in thesecond capital funding allocation (CIF2) for Universities.

Value for money

16

As the public sector finances tighten, it is important that efficient use of public funds is made and costsavings are made wherever possible. Many carbon reduction measures correspond to efficiencyimprovements, yielding cost savings.

Climate Change LevyClimate Change Levy (CCL) adds a (tax) cost to overall utility expenditure. The impact of the CCL on theUniversity remains limited due to the operation of the Combined Heat and Power installation which itwas announced in the Budget 2012 will remain exempt from the Carbon Price Support rate applying toCCL. The CCL paid currently is an unnecessary expenditure that can be curtailed with investment inlow-carbon energy supplies.

Reduced ETS allowances in the futurePhase II of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme runs from 2008 to 2012 and it covers Scope 1 emissionsfrom combustion only as it accounts for energy consumption and generation. Its aim is to act as a capand trade emissions scheme to encourage energy efficiency. The University is included on the basis ofthe size of its CHP and district heating network, with an allowance of about 25,000 tonnes which itlargely consumes, the majority (70 to 80%) being for the gas utilised in the CHP. However futurereductions in emissions’ allowances could lead to a shortfall in credits, which combined with energyprice rises, could be costly. However there is also the opportunity for Warwick to meet its target,accumulate the extra credits and trade them, providing additional revenue.

Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy Efficiency Scheme (CRC EES)Since April 2010 any organisation that consumed more than 6,000 Mega Watt hours of half hourlymonitored electricity during 2008 has been legally obliged to participate in the CRC EES, theGovernment’s carbon trading scheme. This will cover the University’s emissions which are not alreadyreported under EU ETS. Participants in CRC EES will need to buy carbon allowances each year, basedon their energy consumption, to cover their emissions. The Government is currently reviewing thescheme with the aim of reducing the administrative burdens on business.

EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD)This came into force on 4th January 2006 and sets out to ‘promote the improvement of the energyperformance of buildings within the EU through cost effective measures’ and to ‘promote theconvergence of building standards towards those Member States which already have ambitious levels’implemented through specific measures and standards in the UK. The measures are:

calculating the energy performance of buildings;

the introduction of regular inspections of cooling, heating and boiler installations;

a set of performance standards applicable to both new and existing buildings; and

a certification scheme for both new and existing buildings.Energy performance certification is required for all new buildings and when existing buildings arerented out or sold on. There is also a requirement for public buildings (down to 250 m2 in 2015) toshow a display energy certificate (DEC) in a prominent position within the building. This certificatemust be renewed annually.

Building Regulations – Part LThey set out requirements for energy efficiency and the effective control of buildings and associatedplant. These regulations apply to both new buildings and refurbishments.

Campus expansionThe Estates’ Masterplan sets out the University’s plans to grow covering the period to 2020. Increasingthe building area on the campus will lead to increases in energy consumption, and resultant increases

17

in carbon dioxide emissions unless sufficient counter measures are taken. The assumptions used inestimating the impact of the planned changes is explained in section 3.3.

Reputation and ImageIt is important that institutional reputation and appeal for future recruitment of both students andstaff is considered. Further, the reputation to external stakeholders in taking action to reduce carbonemissions should be promoted going forward through effective communication of a coherent strategy.This will comprise:

an improved corporate image for the University (as a ‘green university’) through continuedparticipation in initiatives such as the People and Planet’s “Green League” and "Universitiesthat Count" in which the University was ranked in the top 5 in the 2010 benchmarkingexercise for its environmental and social responsibility;

continuing to encourage environmentally aware behaviour in staff and students; and

exploring the potential for more inclusive environmental progress across campus (integratingdepartments in the progression towards our carbon reduction objective).

2.2 Strategic themes

The strategic themes in reducing the University’s carbon emissions are:

1. Ensuring that the expansion of the University outlined in the Masterplan is as low carbon as

possible.

2. Ensuring that current activities are conducted as efficiently as possible so that emissions are

minimised.

3. That energy costs are minimised, providing efficient use of the University’s funding.

These themes will be explored in detail in this report.

2.3 Targets

HEFCE has undertaken analysis of the sector’s recent carbon emissions, as the sector has grown

extensively since 1990. It considers that a sector wide target of 43% reduction in emissions by

2020/21 compared to 2005/6 should be considered equivalent to the existing UK Government target.

However, the University of Warwick has available data relating to 1990 and has grown faster than the

sector average during the intervening period.

The University is seeking to match the Government target of a 34% reduction against 1990levels and is therefore committing to achieve a 60% reduction in emissions by 2020/21 compared

to a 2005/6 baseline.

18

3. Scope 1 and 2 Emissions Baseline and Projections

The carbon emissions included in the baseline are explained and the significance of different sourcesdiscussed. Then, the effect of the future growth of the University on its carbon emissions is explored.Finally, the significance of achieving the carbon reduction target is explained in terms of bothreduction in carbon emissions and energy costs.

3.1 Scope

This baseline covers emissions from activities at the main campus and the HRI Wellesbourne site.Material carbon emissions sources accounted for in this baseline (Scope 1 and 2 emissions only) are:

Scope 1

natural gas – gas-fuelled CHP (“energy centre gas”) and decentralised boilers, kitchens andlaboratories (“firm gas”);

fuel oil – heating oil; and

vehicle fuel oil – diesel, petrol.

Scope 2

grid electricity.

The emissions from gas, electricity and fuel oil use within buildings are based on the data submitted aspart of the Estate Management Statistics (www.opdems.ac.uk) (reproduced in Appendix A) and the2005/06 University of Warwick Energy Report.

Given the specific nature of this baseline calculation (for Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions only), itcurrently omits fugitive emissions (for example, from air conditioning systems). Followingappropriation of the necessary data, these will, in time, be included in the carbon reductionprogramme.

3.2 Baseline and assumptions

The following represents a summary of the direct Scope 1 carbon emissions produced by the

University of Warwick in 2005-06:

Fuel Use Main campus HRI Total Emission Factor Carbon Emission (tonnes)

Oil (kWh) 0 492,819 492,819 0.258 127

Gas (kWh) 131,992,705 12,506,525 144,499,230 0.185 26,732

Fleet Vehicles Main campus HRI Total Emission Factor Carbon Emission (tonnes)

Number of vehicles 125 51 176 2* 352

19

* The fleet emissions are estimated as 352 tonnes CO2e based upon a general 2 tonnes per vehicle per

annum, the number of vehicles operating across the University and the previous estimate of fleet

emissions calculated as part of the previous carbon management programme.

In 2005-06, Scope 1 carbon emissions across the University of Warwick amounted to: 27,212 tonnes

CO2e.

The following represents a summary of the indirect Scope 2 carbon emissions associated with the use

of bought-in (grid) electricity at the University of Warwick in 2005-06:

Electricity Main

campus

HRI Total Emission

Factor

Carbon Emission

(tonnes)

Grid Electricity

(kWh)

29,899,372 7,347,640 37,247,012 0.519** 19,328

** Revised carbon emission factor (DEFRA, 2013) – average of 2005 and 2006 figures

In 2005-06, Scope 2 carbon emissions across the University of Warwick amounted to 19,328 tonnes

CO2e.


46,540 tonnes CO2e.

The following pie chart illustrates the composition of the scope 1 and 2 baseline carbon footprint from

2005-06 and shows that emissions from buildings dominate the fleet emissions:

Scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions 2005-06

Data has also been compiled for the scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions for subsequent years and will besummarized in an annually updated appendix to this report.


45,187 tonnes CO2e i.e. reduced by 3% compared to 2005/6.

20

The University however grew from 2005/6 to 2008/9 as shown in the following table:

2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9

Staff and student FTE 20,979 20,881 21,275 21,920

£ income £310,601,000 £330,511,000 £350,181,000 £375,656,000

This therefore means that the emissions reduced to a greater extent in relative terms as illustrated inthe following table:

2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9 Reductionfrom 2005/6

to 2008/9(%)

Emissions in absoluteterms (tonnes CO2e)

46,540 44,662 46,497 45,187 2.9

Per staff and student FTE 2.22 2.14 2.19 2.06 7.1

Per £1000 income 0.150 0.135 0.133 0.120 19.7

Both the absolute and relative progress in emissions reduction will be provided in the annuallyupdated appendix to this report.

3.3 Campus expansion

The Estates Masterplan sets out the University’s plans to grow covering the period to 2020. The main

relevant issue is that there is planned to be an additional 171,000 m² of building space.

For the purposes of this plan, it has been assumed that:

this new building space will be highly efficient, meeting BREEAM Excellent and EPC A rated

target;

this will however involve additional consumption of energy; and

there will be energy used for the buildings plus the new activities occurring within them.

This has resulted in the following being used to model the potential increase in carbon emissions:

47kWh/m2 per annum for electricity and 122 kWh/m2 per annum for heating, based upon

metered consumption in CTU, Bluebell Residences and MAS buildings.

that the increase in area, therefore emissions, is based on new buildings included in the latest

5 year plan and linear thereafter to 2020/21; and

21

that there was no change in energy consumption from the existing buildings.

These assumptions will be reviewed annually against the “Estates Office: Growth Assumptions fordirect cost budgets, Five Year Plan”. Any significant changes, for example, once actual constructionplans for a year are known, will be incorporated into these assumptions and will be provided in theannually updated appendix to this report.

3.4 Emissions projections

The assumptions for the campus expansion (which are taken from Estates Office: Growth Assumptions

for direct cost budgets, Five Year Plan) together with any other significant changes will result in the

projection of emissions to 2020/21. This is updated annually and will be presented in the annually

updated appendix to this report. The reduction in CO2e emissions required to achieve the target

emissions reduction will then be calculated.

3.5 Value at stake

Data was obtained from the Estates Office records for the cost of energy consumption for 2008/9 to

2010/11. The University’s predictions of energy cost increases for subsequent years were obtained

from the University Central Finance Office. Estimates were then made for the corresponding increases

in energy cost accounting for the increase in energy consumption corresponding to the planned estate

changes and allowing for cost increases each year. Similarly, estimates were made of the reduction in

energy cost accounting for the reduction in consumption corresponding to achieving the carbon

reduction target and allowing for cost increases each year. This allows the value at stake (in terms of

annual energy cost savings) if the carbon reduction target is achieved to be calculated. This is updated

annually and will be presented in the annually updated appendix to this report. The cost of carbon

taxes (CCL, CRC EES, EU ETS etc.) are not included in this value at stake calculation due to their long

term uncertainty. To deliver the energy savings, a series of projects will be implemented as described

in section 5. The cost of carbon taxes is included in the corresponding business cases.

22

4. Scope 3For this update of the Carbon Plan the 2012 document “Addendum to 2020 Carbon Management

Implementation Plan – Indirect (Scope 3) Carbon Emissions” has been amalgamated into this

document.

4.1 Objectives

This element of the carbon management plan seeks to:

quantify the scale of indirect emissions arising from the University’s activities; and highlight the range of ongoing and planned management activities to mitigate the impact

associated with these activities.

The Addendum considers the following indirect sources of carbon emissions:

waste generated by the University; materials recycling (paper, glass, metals etc not entering the general waste stream); water use across the University; commuting ( by staff and students); international student transfer to/from University; and business air travel (by staff).

4.2 Supply Chain - Procurement

The following indirect sources of carbon emissions have not been included at the present time:

suppliers’ travel ( for site works and goods supply); conference delegate travel; and embedded carbon of goods purchased on behalf of the University.

It is intended to develop the University of Warwick base line for the emissions above in line with theguidelines issued by HEFCE and HESA.

4.3 Process of Data Collation

The University has worked through a process in establishing robust indirect carbon emissions’ data toinput into this carbon management plan comprising:

Key members of the University administration have provided quantitative data in relation totheir areas of activity;

Existing methods of capturing quantitative data have been used wherever possible – forexample travel survey data, academic statistics etc; and

Professional expertise in relation to specific areas of activity has been sought where required.

suppliers’ travel ( for site works and goods supply);

conference delegate travel; and

embedded carbon.

4.4 Strategic Drivers

23

Sustainability remains a significant feature and core goal of the University Strategy, with the overall

carbon reduction target constituting one of the key objectives therein. The carbon management

strategy also links to other areas of policy, including energy, transport, waste, procurement,

recruitment etc. Only by adopting a holistic approach to the management of this area can we

realistically move towards lower carbon operations.

4.5 Existing Initiatives

At the time of publication of the 2020 Carbon Management Implementation Plan, , the University was

already undertaking actions to minimize its emissions in many of these areas, setting targets as part of

its overarching Environmental Policy. Some quantitative data was already available to enable the

calculation of the associated carbon emissions. This was largely driven by the requirement to

complete annual return as part of the Estates Management Statistics. Other areas however required

processes to be set up to capture the required information and, in the intervening twelve month

period; some of this work has been undertaken.

The table overleaf provides a summary of the data that was already being collated across the

University:

24

Emissions source Status at March 2011

Waste generated by theUniversity

Data available (tonnes of waste to landfill and incinerated).Waste minimisation activities have been undertaken and continue toreflect positively upon total waste volumes.

Materials recycling (paper,glass and metals notentering the general wastestream)

Data already available (tonnes of waste recycled, by material).Recycling targets have already been set and exceeded as recycling hasincreased and is in excess of 30%.

Indirect emissionsassociated with water useacross the University

Data already available (m3 water).Targets have been established to reduce relative water consumption.

Commuting ( by staff andstudents)

A travel survey was done in 2005 and repeated in December 2010 witha high response rate. The impact of these journeys is being addressedby the Green Travel Plan through measures such as student car share,ensuring bus services cover campus, encouraging use of bikes, electricscooters and public transport. A target has been set to continue tointroduce initiatives.

Data relating to the transport of international students to and from theUniversity is included in the Academic Statistics, but the environmentalimpact of this transport had not been quantified.

Travel (by staff) A travel survey was done in 2005 and repeated in December 2010 witha high response rate. This had not been used together with the staffnumbers to extrapolate the total number of daily commuting journeys.Data was to be made available on travel for business purposes fromthe approved travel suppliers. Investigations were being made to findthe best way to capture information on business travel booked byindividuals independently through travel expense reclaims.

Suppliers’ travel (for siteworks and goods supply)

Data was not available for these journeys. Some work had howeverbeen undertaken, for example in the rationalisation of the stationerysupply chain and waste compactor removal from across the campus tosignificantly reduce delivery vehicle movements onto and around thecampus.

Conference delegate travel Data was not available for these journeys.

Embedded carbon throughprocurement

Quantitative data relating to the goods and services procured onbehalf of the University was not available.

25

4.6 Water Use.

4.6.1 Background

The University of Warwick is aware of the direct and indirect effects associated with the water used in

its day-to-day operational activities. Overall water use has been monitored, measured and reported in

its Annual Energy Audit since the early 1980’s. Water efficiency techniques have been deployed

across the University’s operation, primarily to reduce water use and consequently to make financial

savings.

Severn Trent Water Ltd is responsible for supplying potable water to the University. In 2010-11,

operations on the main campus consumed a total of 589,021 cubic metres of potable water. In the

same period, the Wellesbourne campus consumed 15,235 cubic metres of potable water. Total

potable water use across the University has therefore been calculated to be 604,256 cubic metres.

4.6.2 Emissions’ calculation

In order to calculate Scope 3 emissions associated with the supply and treatment of water across the

University, reference has been made to Annex 9 of DEFRA / DECC’s GHG Conversion Factors for

Company Reporting (2011).

The following carbon emission factors have been applied to the water supplied to and subsequently

treated from the University:

Water supply - 0.340 kgCO2e per cubic metre;

Water treatment - 0.700 kgCO2e per cubic metre

The following Scope 3 total indirect greenhouse gases are therefore associated with the University’s

water use during academic year 2010-11:

Volume (m3) Total kg CO2e

Water supply 604,256 205,447

Water treatment 604,256 422,979

Total 628,426

The total indirect carbon emissions associated with the supply and treatment of water across the

University of Warwick in 2010-11 was therefore 628 tonnes.

4.6.3 Future Activities

As an integral part of its Environmental Policy, the University is committed to ongoing improvements

in its use of water. The range of activities will include:

Preventative maintenance of the University distribution network;

Ongoing replacement of inefficient equipment with lower water use alternatives;

26

Regular leak detection surveys;

Logging of differential pressures and flows across the distribution network to identify

anomalies;

Completion of a water balance across the main campus to further define water distribution;

Prioritisation of effort in worst performing areas of the University Estate.

4.7 Waste

4.7.1 Background

The University of Warwick is responsible for the production of a wide range of different waste

streams. Waste volumes emanating from day to day operational activities are monitored, measured

and reported annually. The figures for academic year 2010-11 have been used to estimate Scope 3

emissions arising from this source.

Although monitoring of hazardous waste and capital project-related construction waste is undertaken,these figures are not collated centrally and have not been incorporated at this stage.

4.7.2 Methodology

In order to calculate Scope 3 waste-related emissions, reference has been made to Annex 9 of DEFRA /

DECC’s GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting (2011). There were significant changes to the

methodologies and assumptions used in deriving the emission factors between the previous (2010)

and the 2011 update and, as a result, some of the factors changed significantly.

Data relating to the following waste streams, emanating from day to day operational activities, is

collated centrally:

Batteries (post-consumer, non-automotive)

Glass

Scrap Metal

Mixed commercial and industrial waste

Mixed municipal waste

Paper

Textiles

Mixed WEEE (waste electrical and electronic equipment)

Wood

The destinations of these materials having left the University are also recorded. With this information,

it has been possible to complete Table 9d of Annex 9. The table including waste data from the

University for 2010-11 is included as Appendix B.

The table is split into two halves, with the top half containing the emissions factors for different

materials and treatment technologies. These are then used to calculate the emissions which are

calculated in the bottom half of the table. A figure for the total net CO2e emissions is produced, which

can then be reported.

27

4.7.3 Emissions’ calculation

The grand total net Scope 3 CO2e emissions produced as a result of the operational waste and recycling

activities across the University is 3,927 tonnes.

4.7.4 Ongoing and Future Management

Over the last five years, the University has focused much attention on attempts to optimise its waste

management processes. It has set targets to reduce the amount of waste materials emanating from

its operational activity and also increase the percentage rate of recycling. During this time, the

general waste volume has shown a downward trend and the recycling rate has risen from circa 22% to

35%.

The waste and recycling targets were reviewed in autumn 2011 and now comprise:

For the University recycling rate to exceed 50% by 2012-13; and

To reduce waste to landfill to 5% of total “waste” produced by 2012-13.

The new operational waste and recycling contract (effective from 1st January 2012) will see even

greater emphasis placed on the improvement of recycling processes across the University. A focus on

the segregation of food waste and the removal of organic contaminants should enable dry mixed

recycling rates to also increase. The University will continue to favour closed loop recycling over open

loop recycling.

Work is also ongoing to effect front-end procurement modifications, such that the disposal of surplus

materials (especially packaging) are not the University’s responsibility. In specifying take-back clauses

in supply contracts, it is hoped that these materials are diverted away from disposal and made

available for reuse.

4.8 Commuting

During 2010-11, the University of Warwick employed over 4,300 members of staff and had 18,900students (FTE). The environmental impact associated with the commuting journeys of these staff andstudent members to and from the University is significant. This section highlights the indirect carbonemissions associated with commuting to and from the University on a periodic (largely daily) basis.

4.8.1 Background

Through its planning obligations, Warwick’s future strategic development depends on the successful

implementation of a sustainable transport strategy and its Green Travel Plan. In terms of targets to

demonstrate progress, there are a series of future modal share targets that the University must meet.

Biennial comprehensive travel surveys of staff and students provide the evidence base. The original

survey to support the development masterplan was undertaken by ARUP in 2005 and followed up by

the same professional services consultancy in Autumn 2010.

The Autumn 2010 database provided the opportunity to estimate indirect carbon emissions associated

with this travel. ARUP was therefore engaged to review the data, adopt a suitable methodology in line

with industry-best practice and estimate the quantum of emissions involved. A copy of the full ARUP

carbon assessment report is reproduced in Appendix C.

28

4.8.2 Methodology

A three stage methodology was developed to estimate the total carbon produced by staff and

students, as a result of commuter journeys to the University:

Stage 1 utilised the results of the 2010 survey to produce typical distances travelled by each

transport mode;

Stage 2 applied the Stage 1 results to the total staff and student populations in 2010 to

produce a total annual distance travelled by each mode; and

Stage 3 then converted the annual distance travelled to a carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) of

greenhouse gases.

Although there are inherent difficulties in the completion of such an exercise, the adopted

methodology was considered as robust as could be expected and has been shown to be broadly in line

with recommendations published on behalf of HEFCE in January 2012 (Measuring scope 3 carbon

emissions – transport: A guide to good practice (HEFCE 2012/02)).

4.8.3 Emissions’ Calculation

The detailed calculations undertaken to quantify total carbon emissions associated with staff and

student commuting are reproduced in Appendix B. These are broken down into staff, undergraduate

and postgraduate students. The results for 2010-11 showed that a total of 15,799 tonnes of CO2e was

produced by staff and students commuting to the University. Per capita emissions were 1.36 tonnes

for staff, 0.37 tonnes for undergraduate students and 0.79 tonnes for postgraduate students.


The Green Travel Plan requirements are summarised as follows:

Appoint Travel Coordinator (Completed);

Reduce availability of car parking and increase cost (In progress);

Encourage car sharing and improve social links across departments (In progress);

Encourage public transport use, walking and cycling (In progress);

Other measures - business mileage, pool vehicles, work practices (In progress).

By the end of 2010, the University had already exceeded its 2013 targets for car driver modal share

(all), public transport use (all), walking (staff) and cycling (students). This bears testament to the

ongoing promotion of sustainable transport alternatives and is backed up by traffic count data at key

junctions in the vicinity of the main campus.

Progress against the requirements of the Green Travel Plan will continue to be regularly reported

through the University’s risk management and governance structures.

4.9 International Student Travel

This section highlights the indirect carbon emissions associated with air travel undertaken by

international students to and from the UK to undertake studies at the University of Warwick.

29

4.9.1 Background

The ambition to make “every student an international student” forms an integral part of the University

of Warwick’s ongoing strategy. In 2010-11, approximately 34% of those students enrolling at the

University were deemed to be overseas students (originating from countries outside the UK). As a

consequence of this strategic aim, the University is indirectly responsible for emissions associated with

the transport of these students to/from Warwick. Given the starting location of international

students, this travel to/from the University for the start of the academic year and back home at the

end of the year is predominantly by air.

4.9.2 Methodology

The International Office is largely responsible for monitoring and reporting the intake of international

students to Warwick, together with their welfare whilst at the University. The country of origin of all

students arriving at the University in 2010-11 is recorded in Table 2.4 of the annually-produced

Academic Statistics. The figures for 2011 were used as the basis for the calculation of Scope 3

emissions associated with international student travel.

Given the current availability of data, the following assumptions were necessarily made:

All international students travelled by air to the UK.

UK students did not travel to the University by air;

Each international student took a single flight to and a single flight from the UK during the

academic year;

Since information relating to the departure airport is currently not recorded, the distance

calculation was based on a generic distance from the country of origin; and

The arrival airport in the UK is Heathrow.

Using an air travel calculator, distances from countries to Heathrow were calculated for each student.

These passenger air kilometres were then used to calculate indirect Scope 3 emissions using Table 6l

of Annex 6 of DEFRA / DECC’s GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting (2011).

Given the nature of the student population involved, it was considered safe to assume that the vast

majority of flights would be in economy class. The passenger km distance was initially multiplied by

1.09 (9% km uplift factor) to take into account non-direct routes and then by the respective CO2e

emission factor for short haul international flights from European countries and long haul

international flights from non-European countries. Table 6l shows the following average figures:

Short haul international (European) flights - 0.09229 kgCO2e per passenger km

Long haul international (non-European) flights - 0.08137 kgCO2e per passenger km.


The detailed calculations undertaken to quantify total air kilometres are reproduced in Appendix D.

30

These calculations show that, in 2010-11, the total emission associated with international student air

travel to and from the University was estimated to be 8,503 tonnes of CO2e.

4.9.4 Future Management

The indirect carbon emissions associated with international student travel are considered an

inevitable consequence of the University’s global leadership aspirations. Notwithstanding this, the

University of Warwick is committed to:

Sector-leadership in the provision of distance and online learning alternatives to traditional

teaching methods;

Awareness-raising regarding the variation in emissions associated with the fleets maintained by

different airline operators.

4.10 Business Air Travel

This section highlights the indirect carbon emissions associated with business-related air travel

undertaken by staff and some students through their work at the University of Warwick.

4.10.1 Background

As a leading global University, Warwick prides itself on its international connectivity. The University

strategy articulates the desire “to make Warwick an international beacon by embedding

internationalism into every area of the University's mission”. Business travel by staff and students is

an essential consequence of this strategy.

During 2008, the University conducted a tender exercise to provide the University of Warwick with

travel advice and bookings. Co-operative Travel Management and Key Travel were successful in the

tendering process. A stipulation of the contract award was that management information relating to

the environmental impact of the travel undertaken was to be provided. As such, annual reports are

now provided to the University detailing the travel bookings made and the resultant carbon emissions

resulting from these bookings.

4.10.2 Methodology

The carbon-related management information reports for 2010-11 have been provided by both Co-op

and Key. A selection of these reports is reproduced in Appendix E.

Data relating to travel booked independently by staff members (and reclaimed through expenses) and

travel paid for by third parties is currently not collated centrally.

The calculations undertaken are based on data included in Table 6l of Annex 6 of DEFRA / DECC’s GHG

Conversion Factors for Company Reporting. The 9% km uplift factor (to take into account non-direct

routes) has been applied to the distance figures and then multiplied by the respective carbon emission

31

factor.


The detailed calculations undertaken to quantify total air kilometres are summarized below:

Travel Company Total Passenger Air KilometresRecorded

Calculated Emissions(Tonnes of CO2e)

Co-operative Travel

Management17,201,777 1,905 tonnes

Key Travel 7,185,256 863 tonnes

Total 24,387,033 2,768 tonnes


Indirect carbon emissions associated with business travel are considered an inevitable consequence of

the University’s core business. Notwithstanding this, efforts are ongoing to reduce the requirement for

staff members to travel.

A variety of communication methods are currently used to aid decision making. For example, the

following information is displayed on the Purchasing Office website – “Please help reduce trips; please

ensure staff travel only when necessary; where possible, travel should be avoided and video

conferencing should be arranged as an alternative”.

In recent years, the University has invested significantly in video conferencing and telepresence suites.

In addition to five state-of-the-art videoconferencing suites, the following information is provided on

the IT Services site: “Warwick is leading the way with telepresence and this service will be the first of

its kind in UK higher education. The aims of providing such facilities are to significantly reduce travel

expenditure and wasted time while supporting increased internal and external collaboration”.

As the University’s carbon management strategy and carbon accounting techniques develop further,

the University of Warwick will undertake further work to categorise and quantify other Scope 3 carbon

emission sources and further develop plans to reduce emissions from these sources.

5 Carbon Management Projects

Successfully reducing the University’s carbon emissions by the amount necessary to achieve the targetwill require the implementation of projects across all aspects of the University’s activities. Themeasures are described and their cumulative effect shown.

5.1 Projects to reduce carbon emissions

A suite of potential carbon reduction projects, categorized in a series of eight themes, have initially

been identified. It should be stressed that the list of projects underpinning this implementation plan

32

is not exhaustive, with all projects subject to ongoing refinement and assessment to ensure their

continued appropriateness from economic, social and/or environmental perspectives. The

methodology outlined in section 1.3 will be used to continuously assess the projects viability and

priority.

A summary of the project themes and the ownership of each area are given below with the full detailsof the projects outlined the annually updated appendix to this report:

Building improvement to reduce heat consumption (Director of Estates)

IT services reduction of electricity consumption (Director of IT Services)

Lighting reduction of electricity consumption (Director of Estates)

Cooling changes to reduce heat and electricity consumption (Director of Estates)

Behaviour changes in academic and non-academic areas to reduce utilities demand (CarbonChallenge Group)

Low carbon energy generation (Director of Estates)

Estates Modifications to reduce Utilities Demand & Cost (Director of Estates)

Fleet (Director of Estates)

The success of the projects will be ensured by regular monitoring of building energy performance bythe Energy Manager and fleet fuel consumption by the Transport Manager to ensure that the changesresult in the reductions expected. This is explained further in section 6.2.

5.2 Ownership and Responsibility

The successful implementation of this plan will demand collaboration across the entire University.

Strategic responsibility for specific delivery areas is detailed above in section 5.1. Monitoring of

performance against planned reductions will be the responsibility of the Carbon Challenge Group, as

detailed in section 6.1.

5.3 Projected achievement towards emissions reduction target

The estimated effect of implementing the projects outlined above on the University’s carbon

footprint, accounting for the project phasing, investment and payback information is detailed in the

annually updated appendix to this report. It shows the cumulative effect of the projects identified in

terms of a percentage of the University’s carbon reduction target that has been identified for action

through the projects identified.

5.4 Other potential carbon reduction measures

In addition to the measures outlined above there are measures which have been identified but thesavings from which have not yet been quantified. These will be described in the annually updatedappendix to this report. In the case of significant projects being required an options appraisal will bepresented.

5.5 Corporate strategy and Policy alignment

33

The University of Warwick is firmly committed to delivering all aspects of sustainability. The University

Strategy (Vision 2015) commits Warwick to becoming a "living demonstration of the principles of

environmental sustainability".

In May 2007, the University developed its Environmental Targets against which to effectively measure

its environmental performance. The Environment & Amenities' Committee reviews and updates the

Environmental Policy and targets on an annual basis. The University’s Environmental Policy already

has carbon reduction embedded into it. The targets cover areas including awareness, energy use,

carbon reduction and green transport. The Environmental Policy is also supported by an Energy Policy

which sets specific aims and objectives for improving energy efficiency and reducing carbon emissions.

The University Strategy makes explicit reference to the requirement to reduce carbon emissions:

“Halve projected carbon emissions by 2020. Environmental sustainability and energy reduction remain

a key focus for the University. Even better use will be made of new and existing buildings and facilities.

We will halve the University’s projected carbon emissions by 2020 and everyone will be encouraged to

take an active role in achieving key environmental goals.”

5.6 Financial costs and sources of funding

To implement the carbon reduction projects described in section 5.1 will require significant capital

investment. A summary of the planned project phasing, estimated investment costs and projected

savings is given in the annually updated appendix to this report.

A budget in excess of £150,000 per year is allocated by the University through the Estates Office for

general energy saving projects and major maintenance works whose specification embeds energy and

carbon efficiency. In addition, there is £650,000 available through the HEFCE/Salix Finance Revolving

Green Fund, with savings to be reinvested in compliant energy-saving projects. The University has

also received £857,000 in Salix loans which are repayable through savings achieved. An additional

sum for general energy efficiency measures in residences, conference venues and retail areas is

included in the Estates Commercial Group 10 year plan. Over the next eight years, this amounts to

£660,000 (average £82,500 per year).

During early 2011, and subject to approval of viable projects, the University made an outline

commitment to at least £2 million per annum for “Energy Efficiency Related Improvements” over a

five year period. This approval will take account of economic, social and environmental factors in

ensuring optimal benefit for the University.

Whilst these identified funds will allow implementation of many projects significant additional

investment will be required to be made directly by the University if all the projects (particularly those

requiring major capital investments) are to be implemented. Robust business cases for these projects

will be formally presented to Finance & General Purposes Committee for the University to approve

their funding.

5.7 Additional resources

34

In addition to the capital investment and operational costs of these measures, it is essential that

sufficient staff time and resource is devoted to implement the measures. As such many Estates

Department staff will be involved with the technical management and implementation of the planned

measures. In addition, the Environment Manager, Energy Manager and Transport Manager will be

involved in ensuring the detailed programme of measures are successful and the planned reductions

achieved.

5.8 Success factors

There are a range of factors which are key to ensuring the successful achievement of the carbonreduction target:

some projects are only cost effective if they are implemented at the time of other buildingrefurbishment activities. Therefore, for some projects it will be important that their phasing islinked to these refurbishments;

the assumptions around the energy consumption of the new building will depend upon thetypes of building that are required which is not known at this stage;

currently the specific types of new activities that will be undertaken in the campus expansionare not known. They will significantly influence the future energy demands depending upontheir nature and are currently not accounted for in the projections; and

behavioural change savings require continued effort and innovation to ensure their continueddelivery. Ensuring staff and student buy-in is key to their delivery. The proposed measures toensure this are described in section 6.5.

5.9 Benefits and savings – quantified and unquantified

The successful implementation of the carbon reduction projects described in section 5.1 will result, by2019/20 in significant annual savings as shown in the annually updated appendix to this report.

As well as quantified benefits there are additional benefits which cannot be measured in terms ofreduced emissions or cost savings. These are:

enhanced reputation for the University;

improved building comfort for staff and students; and

reduced exposure to volatility in energy costs.

35

6. Embedding Carbon Management

Appendix F contains the carbon management embedding matrix. The highlighted entries summarise

the current status of the University for each area in relation to carbon management. This plan aims to

improve the rating in each area as follows:

Area Current status Anticipated status by

end of plan

Sections detailing how

this is achieved

Policy 4 5 5.5

Organisation 3 to 4 5 5.7, 6.1, 6.3, 6.5

Information and data 3 to 4 5 4, 6.1, 6.2

Communication and

training

4 5 6.5

Finance 4 5 5.6, 5.8, 5.9

Monitoring and

evaluation

4 to 5 5 6.1

6.1 Governors sign-off, reporting and delivery of the plan

The Carbon Challenge Group will ensure the successful implementation of this carbon management

plan. Under the Chairmanship of Professor Tim Jones, the Group will meet quarterly.

The remit of the Carbon Challenge Group is to monitor the University’s carbon emissions and ensure

that they reduce as planned and recommend the necessary remedial actions if they do not. They will

make recommendations to achieve this which will be passed to the University’s Building Committee

for approval and through ultimately to Council (the University’s Governing body) who will formally

sign off the University’s approval of this plan. The Group will consider carbon reduction projects, and

agree their prioritization and scheduling. It will then recommend them for funding through the

appropriate routes.

6.2 Data management

The Estates Office already maintains records on utility use and the fleet. The University is developing a

remote monitoring system and, to raise awareness, will publicise the data collected. Approximately

50% of all of electricity supplies and just over 62% of all of gas supplies are viewable online together

with an estimate of the CO2e emissions for these supplies. This information will allow improved

analysis of building energy consumption by staff and students, as well as by Estates Office staff.

6.3 Curriculum and research links

The University already has integrated carbon reduction, energy management and sustainability into itswide variety of curricula, for example through the Warwick Business School Global Energy MBA and

36

optional undergraduate module in Business Ethics. There is scope for further inclusion of sustainabilityand carbon reduction into curriculum development.

There are a range of research projects across the University which address carbon reduction:

Science City Energy Efficiency Project: This involves capital investment in researchinfrastructure relating to the development and demonstration of energy efficienttechnologies. The new facilities and equipment can be accessed by any interested academicsand businesses. The investment aims to develop and promote a regional hub for academic andindustrial expertise in energy efficiency and demand reduction as part of the Government’smission to achieve a strong knowledge-based economy.

Low Carbon Society Initiative: This is a cross-faculty group, focusing upon the developmentand deployment of new technology, the establishment of national and international politicalframeworks, the use of economic instruments, and behavioural change.

Nuclear fusion power: The Department of Physics is working together with UKAEA Culham ona new centre of excellence in fusion plasma physics. The project will develop theunderstanding of hot plasmas required to sustain nuclear fusion.

Renewable Energy: The School of Engineering has expertise in renewable energy sources(wind, water, and hydrogen), heat transfer and energy efficiency while the WarwickManufacturing Group specialises in the development of fuel cells and energy efficiency intransportation, including novel technologies and hybrid drive trains.

Warwick Institute for Sustainable Energy and Resources (WISER): WISER provides a forum forthe development and pursuit of energy-related multidisciplinary research, development,demonstration and deployment activities. It incorporates research staff from across theUniversity. Including on electric and hybrid vehicles, biofuels and materials for energy storage.Centre for the study of globalisation and regionalization runs a series of climate change policyseminars.

Energy Policy: Within Warwick Business School there are a variety of research interests aroundenergy policy, sustainable development, climate change and economic regulation.

Warwick Manufacturing Group’s International Automotive Research Centre is researchingusing locally-produced materials, such as agricultural crops, industrial waste and substancessuch as supermarket vegetable oils as the basis for fuels, composites and plastics, with themain emphasis on applications within the automotive industry.

The Water & Environmental Resources Research Group undertakes engineering design fordeveloping countries, (animal traction, water/ wind power), low cost transport, appropriatetechnology.

The School of Life Sciences offers numerous undergraduate modules, postgraduate coursesand research opportunities around climate change mitigation and adaptation.

6.4 Succession planning for key roles

Ensuring continuity of action is essential for successful implementation of this carbon management

plan. The chair of the Carbon Challenge Group will be responsible for ensuring that replacement

members are appointed in a timely manner to its committee.

The Director of Estates will ensure that succession planning for key staff (Environment, Energy and

Transport Managers) is undertaken and that they are fully conversant with this Carbon Management

Plan.

6.5 Behavioural change

37

The University has already undertaken a range of programmes designed to promote behavioural

change. Many of these are led by the Environment/Transport/Energy Managers working together with

staff and students. The current measures include:

High profile digital displays of energy use;

Energy monitor loan scheme;

Switch It Off Week;

Departmental energy saving competition;

Warwick Footprint campaign;

Energy Saving Week;

Campaign to reduce the base load energy consumption on Christmas Day;

Student Switch Off in residences;

Sustainability advice available upon the Environment section of the website;

Environmental E-Bulletin published twice a year; and

Measures to promote sustainable travel.

Education and awareness. Through programs such as Green Steps @ Warwick and bycollaboration with academia to develop Education for Sustainability.

Staff engagement through the energy champion network.

New methods to engage staff and students will be developed on an ongoing basis throughout theperiod of this carbon management plan. In particular it will be necessary to develop targetedawareness campaigns to engage key groups such as cleaners and laboratory users on the specificworking practice changes that they can make. A Behaviour Action Plan is being developed, with apresentation already made to the University Carbon Challenge Group. A set of communicationmaterial/intranet pages are being prepared and resource (1/2 FTE) is in place to support theimplementation.

38

7. Conclusion

Through implementing the measures described in this carbon management plan, the University ofWarwick aims to play its part in taking action to mitigate the effects of climate change. The Universitywill reduce significantly its scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions (by 60% by 2020/21 compared to its2005/6 baseline) in order to match current Government targets. The base line analysis and furtherwork required to reduce Scope 3 emissions is embedded in the present report and will be subject tothe same monitoring and reporting as scopes 1 and 2.

39

Appendices

40

Appendix A: University Submission to EMS for 2005-06

Appendix B: Waste Calculation2011 Guidelines to Defra / DECC's GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting; Annex 9 - Other UK Conversion Factor Tables; Table 9d

Life-Cycle Conversion Factors for Waste Disposal

Waste fraction

Scope 3 Additional Information

Production Emissions

(avoidance excl

disposal), kg CO2e 2

Net kg CO2e emitted per tonne of waste treated / disposed of (including avoided impacts) by method 1: Net Benefit of

Recycling Versus

Landfill

Net Benefit of

Recycling Versus

Landfill Alternative

Recycling

(Open Loop)

excl. avoided

impacts

(Preparation for)

Re-use, kg

CO2e

Recycling Energy Recovery

Composting LandfillOpen

Loop3,6

Closed

Loop3 Combustion

Anaerobic

Digestion (AD)

Aggregates (Rubble) 8 No Data -4 0 -4 4

Batteries (Post Consumer Non Automotive) No Data No Data No Data 75 -487 No Data

Books 955 No Data -157 -529 57 580 -736 No Data

Glass 895 No Data -197 -366 26 26 -392 (Col'r Sep'd) -223 (Mix'd Col's)

Metal: Aluminium cans and foil (excl forming) 9,844 -9,245 31 21 -9,267

Metal: Mixed Cans 4,778 -3,889 31 21 -3,911

Metal: Scrap Metal 3,169 -2,241 29 20 -2,261

Metal: Steel Cans 2,708 -1,702 31 21 -1,723

Mineral Oil 1,401 -725 -1,195 0 -725

Mixed commercial and industrial waste 1,613 -1,082 -347 -50 -30 199 -1,281

Mixed municipal waste 2,053 257 -1,679 -37 -50 -15 290 -1,969

Organic Waste: Food and Drink Waste 3,590 -89 -162 -39 450 -489 (Compost) -612 (AD) 257

Organic Waste: Garden Waste -63 -119 -42 213 -255 (Compost) -331 (AD)

Organic Waste: Mixed Food and Garden Waste -67 -126 -42 254 -296 (Compost) -380 (AD)

Paper and board: Board (Av. board: 78% corrugate, 22% 1,038 No Data -240 -529 57 580 -820

Paper and board: Mixed (assumed 25% paper, 75% board) 1,017 No Data -219 -529 57 580 -799 798

Paper and board: Paper 955 No Data -157 -529 57 580 -736 798

Plasterboard 120 -67 72 -139 798

Plastics: Average plastics 3,179 -282 -1,171 1,197 34 -1,205

Plastics: Average plastic film (incl bags) 2,591 -447 -1,042 1,057 34 -1,076 714

Plastics: Average plastic rigid (incl bottles) 3,281 -230 -1,170 1,057 34 -1,204 620

Plastics: HDPE (incl forming) 2,789 -433 -1,127 1,057 34 -1,161 620

Plastics: LDPE and LLDPE (incl forming) 2,612 -458 -1,064 1,057 34 -1,098 620

Plastics: PET (incl forming) 4,368 -187 -1,671 1,833 34 -1,705 620

Plastics: PP (incl forming) 3,254 12 -914 1,357 34 -948 620

Plastics: PS (incl forming) 4,548 368 -1,205 1,067 34 -1,240 1.957

Plastics: PVC (incl forming) 3,136 14 -854 1,833 34 -888 620

Silt / Soil 4 16 35 20 -24 16

Textiles 5 22,310 -13,769 -13,769 600 300 -14,069

Tyres 3,410 -2,900 23 0 31

WEEE - Fridges and Freezers 3,814 No Data -656 17 -656 3,142

WEEE - Large 537 No Data -1,249 No Data 17 -1,266 -712

WEEE - Mixed 1,149 No Data -1,357 No Data 17 -1,374 -209

WEEE – Small 1,761 No Data -1,465 No Data 17 -1,482 295

Wood 666 -599 No Data -523 -817 285 792 -1,244 285

of 7

Waste fractionTotal Tonnes of

waste PRODUCED

Tonnes of waste treated /disposed of by method 4: Total Net kgCO2e

emissions by waste

fraction

(Preparation for)

Re-use, kg

CO2e

Recycling Energy Recovery

Composting LandfillOpen

Loop3,6 Closed Loop3 Combustion (incl

avoided impacts)

Anaerobic

Digestion

Aggregates (Rubble) 314.5 315 2,516Batteries (Post Consumer Non Automotive) 11.1 11 0Books 0Glass 88.9 89 46,969Metal: Aluminium cans and foil (excl forming) 0Metal: Mixed Cans 0Metal: Scrap Metal 56.8 57 52,694Metal: Steel Cans 0Mineral Oil 9.6 10 6,490Mixed commercial and industrial waste 223.0 223 404,076Mixed municipal waste 1,655.4 208 189 1,258 3,086,904Organic Waste: Food and Drink Waste 0Organic Waste: Garden Waste 0Organic Waste: Mixed Food and Garden Waste 0Paper and board: Board (Av. board: 78% corrugate, 22% cartonboard) 0Paper and board: Mixed (assumed 25% paper, 75% board) 0Paper and board: Paper 290.7 291 231,979Plasterboard 0Plastics: Average plastics 0Plastics: Average plastic film (incl bags) 0Plastics: Average plastic rigid (incl bottles) 0Plastics: HDPE (incl forming) 0Plastics: LDPE and LLDPE (incl forming) 0Plastics: PET (incl forming) 0Plastics: PP (incl forming) 0Plastics: PS (incl forming) 0Plastics: PVC (incl forming) 0Silt / Soil 0Textiles 5 5.9 6 50,394Tyres 0WEEE - Fridges and Freezers 0WEEE - Large 0WEEE - Mixed 37.7 38 43,313WEEE - Small 0Wood 28.9 29 1,928Total Net kgCO2e emissions by category 4,504,764 -98,546 53,513 -530,234 -46,612 0 0 44,377

Grand Total Net kgCO2e emissions 3,927,263

Sources The life-cycle conversion factors for waste disposal were collated and developed by WRAP (2011) More information on WRAP can be found at: http://www.wrap.org.uk/Notes The data summarised in the table covers the life cycle stages highlighted below. It excludes use of the product as this will be variable. For example, plastic may be used as automotive parts or as drinks packaging amongst other things. Ifit is used as drinks packaging it will require filling. As it is not known what the final use of the material is, this section of the life cycle is excluded for all materials. For some products forming is also excluded. Metals may be made into variousproducts by different methods, excluded from these figures. There have been significant changes to the methodologies and assumptions used in deriving the emission factors between the previous (2010) and the current (2011) update. As aresult, some of the factors have changed significantly. Further more detailed information will be provided in the methodology paper for the 2011 update to be made available from Defra's website at:http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/economy/business-efficiency/reportingThere are essentially zero Scope 1 emissions for waste.1Impact of other treatments can be found in: http://www.defra.gov.uk/publications/files/pb13548-economic-principles-wr110613.pdf2Savings from embodied fossil energy resulting from avoiding waste are the negative of these figures.3Open loop recycling is the process of recycling material into other products. Closed loop recycling is the process of recycling material back into the same product.4On average in the UK 88% of non-recycled waste goes to landfill and 12% goes to energy recovery (combustion).5The waste production figure for textiles currently does not account for the split of material types on the UK market. Improvements will be made to this figure in future updates. Benefit of recycling and reuse is based on 60% reused, 30% recycled

(replacing paper towels), 10% landfill. Of the items reused, 80% are assumed to avoid new items.6For Open Loop Recycling, any calculation of impact should include the avoided raw material (e.g. if glass is used in aggregate, the impact is the open loop recycling emissions, minus the production of aggregates and any avoided waste managementemissions). The figures presented in the main table include estimates resulting from avoided raw material based on the typical/average expected situation for different waste fractions.The figures presented separately (under 'Additional Information') for Open Loop Recycling excluding avoided impacts have been provided for to facilitate more precise bespoke calculations (not included in these Annexes) consistent with PAS2050 if this is required, as opposed to the default assumptions.

Key

HDPE High-density

polyethylene

LDPE Low-density

polyethylene

LLDPE Linear Low-density

polyethylene

PET Polyethylene

terephthalate

PP Polypropylene

PS Polystyrene

PVC Polyvinyl Chloride

WEEE Waste Electrical and

Electronic Equipment

Further additional information on Life Cycle Conversion Factors for Waste Disposal:

Table 9d provides emissions factors for reporting on emissions from waste disposal. These emissions would fall into the Scope 3 emissions of a reporting

company. As with all Scope 3 emissions, these are life-cycle emissions factors and therefore cannot be directly compared to Scope1 or 2 /direct emissions factors in

other annexes. These figures are estimates to be used in the absence of data specific to your goods and services. If you have more accurate information for your

products, then please refer to the more accurate data for reporting your emissions.

The table is split into two halves. The top half contains all the emissions factors which are used to calculate the emissions which are calculated in the bottom half of

the table. The (yellow) box in the bottom right corner gives the total net CO2 emissions which can be reported in your GHG emissions report.

It is essential that, where possible, data is used to cover both the production of the materials used by an organisation, and the waste generated by an organisation.

See diagram below for the life cycle stages covered.

The first column of figures include emissions related to the materials purchased by an organisation that are subsequently transferred to the waste stream for

treatment or disposal. This includes the emissions from the following life cycle stages: extraction, primary processing, manufacturing and transportation. It

excludes the use phase. The first column (yellow) will automatically total the tonnes of material sent through for waste treatment or disposal and is used to

calculate the emissions associated with the production of the original materials. The rest of the blue columns deal with the emissions from different waste disposal

routes. Enter the tonnes of waste sent to each waste disposal stream in the relevant blue boxes. The totals are calculated in the yellow boxes.

By quantifying both material use and emissions from waste management, the benefits of waste prevention and more effective management may be estimated. If

only waste management emissions are calculated, the benefit of waste prevention will not be adequately covered.

Some of the figures in table 9d are negative numbers. This is because the recycling or energy recovery process avoids the production of primary materials and

combustion of fossil fuels. The figures do not include avoided emissions from alternative waste management.

These figures should be used for site based reporting only. They should not be added together along a supply chain, as material use would be counted several times

along a supply chain.

The data provided for recycling, energy recovery and landfill are based on absolute emissions for these options. Therefore, to identify the benefit of one option

versus another (e.g. recycling versus landfill), the benefit is the difference between the two columns.

For further information on the factors in table 9d, please refer to the methodology paper for the 2011 update, which will be made available from:

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/economy/business-efficiency/reporting

A high level overview of the life cycle of materials and products is shown in figure 1 below. Figure 1:

Appendix C: ARUP Carbon Assessment Report – Commuting

The University of Warwick

Carbon Assessment

Carbon Produced as a Result of Commuting by Staff and Students 2010

Rev A | 8 November 2011

This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client.

It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party.

Job number 115438

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd The Arup Campus Blythe Gate Blythe Valley Park Solihull West Midlands B90 8AE United Kingdom www.arup.com

The University of Warwick Carbon AssessmentCarbon Produced as a Result of Commuting by Staff and Students 2010

Report | Rev A | 8 November 2011

J:\115000\115438-00\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-13 CARBON ASSESSMENT JUL11\ISSUED\UOW CARBON FROM COMMUTING ASSESSMENT REPORT_REVA_ISSUED_2011-11-08.DOCX

Contents

Page

Executive Summary i

1 Introduction 1

2 Methodology and Analysis 2

2.1 Source Data 2

2.2 Methodology 2

2.3 Key Assumptions 2

2.4 Utilising the 2010 Survey 3

3 Results 6

3.1 Total GHG Emissions 2010 6

3.2 Per Capita GHG Emissions 2010 9

4 Summary and Conclusions 10

Appendices

Appendix A

Rail - Journey to Origin Station Mode Assumptions

Appendix B

2011 Guidelines to Defra / DECC's GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting


REPORT | Rev A | 8 November 2011

J:\115000\115438-00\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-13 CARBON ASSESSMENT JUL11\ISSUED\UOW CARBON FROM COMMUTING ASSESSMENT REPORT_REVA_ISSUED_2011-11-08.DOCX Page i

Executive Summary

As part of its 2020 Carbon Management Programme, the University of Warwick commissioned Arup to undertake an initial assessment of the emissions resulting from commuting to the University by staff and students. A methodology was developed to calculate the average distances commuted by each mode using postcode and mode information from the 2010 staff and student travel survey. The results were then factored to represent the total staff and student populations of the University and a further factor applied to convert distance by mode into Green House Gas emissions of CO2E in accordance with Defra guidelines.

The results for 2010 showed that 15,799.4 metric tonnes of CO2e in total was produced by staff and students commuting to the university. Per capita emissions were 1.36 metric tonnes for staff, 0.37 metric tonnes for undergraduate students and 0.79 metric tonnes for postgraduate students.

Future staff and student travel surveys, planned in order to measure the impact of the Travel Plan, will facilitate monitoring of GHG emissions. The 2010 travel survey data is robust and gives a good baseline for going forward and future assessments.



J:\115000\115438-00\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-13 CARBON ASSESSMENT JUL11\ISSUED\UOW CARBON FROM COMMUTING ASSESSMENT REPORT_REVA_ISSUED_2011-11-08.DOCX Page 1

1 Introduction

For some years the University of Warwick (the University), along with 19 similar institutions, has been involved in a voluntary programme to consider carbon emissions resulting from its activities. In 2006, the University produced its first Carbon Management Implementation Plan which ran for 5 years from 2006-07 to 2010-11 and resulted in the successful completion of a wide variety of projects aimed at reducing the University’s carbon footprint.

In January 2010, the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) published its Statement of Policy: ‘Carbon reduction target and strategy for higher education in England’ and subsequently established a link between capital funding and demonstrable carbon reduction. This included a requirement for institutions to set targets for direct emissions (Scope 1) and indirect energy emissions (Scope 2). In terms of Scope 3 emissions, (indirect emissions that are a consequence of the University’s actions but which occur at sources which are not owned or controlled) HEFCE has commissioned consultants to consider appropriate baselines and targets.

The University’s second Carbon Management Implementation Plan, covering the period up to 2020, was launched in March 2011 and aims to reduce Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 60% (against 2005-06 levels) by 2020. The plan sets out actions to facilitate capture of information in order to incorporate Scope 3 emissions in the University’s future carbon reduction programme and prepare for the likely requirement to include Scope 3 targets in future HEFCE submissions.

In July 2011 the University commissioned Arup to undertake an initial assessment of the emissions resulting from commuting to the University by staff and students.

Following this introduction;

Chapter 2 sets out the methodology followed,

Chapter 3 provides the results, and

Chapter 4 gives a summary and conclusions.

Appendices are provided at the back of the report.




2 Methodology and Analysis

2.1 Source Data The key sources of data on which this assessment is based are:

‘2010 Staff and Student Travel Survey’ (Arup, May 2011) containing details of travel mode, postcode and days travelled per week;

Staff information comprising postcodes and numbers in Full Time Equivalents provided by the University

Student postcode information provided by the University;

Student numbers in Full Time Equivalents taken from the statutory accounts 2010/11; and

‘2011 Guidelines to Defra / DECC’s GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting’ (AEA, August 2011).

2.2 Methodology A three-stage methodology has been developed to estimate the total carbon produced by staff and students as a result of commuter journeys to the University.

Stage 1 utilises the results of the 2010 survey to produce typical distances travelled by each mode.

Stage 2 then applies the Stage 1 results to the total staff and student populations in 2010 to produce a total annual distance travelled by each mode.

Stage 3 then converts the annual distance travelled to a Carbon Dioxide equivalent (CO2e) of green house gases (GHG).

The outputs are presented in a series of tables and graphs showing GHG as CO2e in total and disaggregated by mode and staff/students.

2.3 Key Assumptions The key assumptions used in this assessment are listed below:

The staff and students that responded to the 2010 travel survey are representative of the total staff and student populations in that year in terms of travel patterns;

Walking and cycling do not produce CO2 impact in terms of commuting and have not been assessed. However, they have been retained in the survey population to maintain the correct modal shares;

Staff and students that normally travel to the Life Sciences site at Wellesbourne are excluded as insufficient data was available;

It is assumed that staff attend the University for 46 weeks of the year; and

It is assumed that undergraduate and postgraduate students attend the University for 30 weeks of the year.




2.4 Utilising the 2010 Survey The 2010 Travel Survey provided the basis for calculating the typical distance travelled by the following modes to the University:

Car;

Motorcycle;

Taxi;

Bus; and

Rail

All road-based modes were assessed using the same methodology but a different approach was employed for rail travel in order to include the non-rail portions of the journey between home and station, and the University and station.

2.4.1 Road-based Modes Methodology

The general methodology used for all modes (excluding rail) is detailed below:

The data was filtered to remove any incomplete data entries;

Based on the postcodes entered in the survey, the direct distance between the home location and the University was calculated based on national grid coordinates;

These distances were then calculated into a typical daily commute distance, factored by the number of days travelled to the University by each mode; and

A random sample of 50 postcodes was used to generate a conversion factor of 1.46 in order to factor up the direct distance to the true driven distance.

The typical journey distance by each non-rail mode is shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Typical Daily Distance (km) Travelled by (Non –Rail) Mode

Car Car Share Taxi Motorcycle Bus

Staff 36.4 12.9 11.0 30.4 20.8 Undergraduate Student 35.9 8.3 0.0 9.8 24.1

Postgraduate Student 38.3 7.5 0.0 0.0 16.2

2.4.2 Rail Mode Methodology

The available data does not contain information about the modes used to travel from home location to origin rail station for those who travel the majority of their commute by train. The mode used for the home to station part of the journey was estimated based on the home postcode location compared to the origin railway station. These assumptions are shown in Appendix A.

Based on these assumptions the following process was followed;




The rail travel distance was measured between origin and destination stations (given in the survey);

The distance from destination station to the University was calculated by mode (given in the travel survey);

The travel distances for the various modes used for the complete journey were calculated; and

The road based modes used for the journey to the station were factored to take into account differences between direct distance and driven distance.

The typical complete journey travel distances for rail users are shown in Table 2.

Table 2: Typical Daily Distance (km) Travelled by Mode for Rail Users

Train Car Bus Tube Taxi

Staff 88.6 0.7 13.8 3.1 0.3

Undergraduate Student 52.8 0.0 12.7 0.0 0.0

Postgraduate Student 40.5 3.8 14.7 7.1 0.0

2.4.3 2010 Annual Distance Calculation

Following the calculation of the typical daily distance by each mode, the outputs were converted to annual distance by applying the following steps. The Full Time Equivalents of staff and student numbers provided by the University are shown in Table 3.

Table 3: 2010 Staff and Student Numbers

2010

Staff (FTE) 4375

Undergraduate (FTE) 12,392

Postgraduate (FTE) 6759

The number of people who travel by each mode has been calculated based on the modal split from the travel survey. This is shown in Table 4.

Table 4: Number of people by each CO2 producing mode (ie. excludes walking & cycling)

Car Car share as driver or passenger

Taxi Motorcycle Bus Train

Staff 2476 580 3 31 518 139

Undergraduate 1084 1207 61 20 7321 41

Postgraduate 836 563 0 0 2560 154

The figures in Table 4 are combined with Tables 1 and 2 to calculate the distance travelled by each mode for a typical day, as shown in Table 5.




Table 5: Typical Day Commuted Distance (km)

Car Taxi Motorcycle Bus Train Tube

Staff 97,688.20 78.60 937.80 12,675.31 12,288.32 431.63

Undergraduate 48,932.70 0.00 200.79 177,214.56 2,161.02 0.00

Postgraduate 36,879.87 0.00 0.00 43,754.22 6,223.09 1,095.37

Based on the assumption that staff attend site 46 weeks of the year and students 30 weeks of the year, the daily commuted distance has been factored to give the annual figures shown in Table 6.

Table 6: Annual Commuted Distances (km)

Annual Total (km)

Car Taxi M/c Bus Train Tube

Staff 22,468,287 18,077 215,694 2,915,321 2,826,313 99,276

Undergraduate 7,339,905 0 30,119 26,582,183 324,153 0

Postgraduate 5,531,981 0 0 6,563,133 933,463 164,306

Total 35,340,173 18,077 245,813 36,060,637 4,083,929 263,581




3 Results

3.1 Total GHG Emissions 2010 The annual commuted distances have been combined with rates in the ‘2011 Guidelines to Defra / DECC’s GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting’ (see Appendix B) to provide the following outputs, as shown in Table 7.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) - calculated as part of the direct emissions;

Methane (CH4) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O) - both calculated as part of the direct emissions and expressed as CO2e;

Direct emissions – from the combustion of the fuel, it is assumed that these will also fall into Scope 3 as vehicles are not owned or controlled by the University. These are expressed as CO2e;

Indirect emissions – those associated with production, transport and retail of the fuel. These are expressed as CO2e; and

Grand total GHG expressed as CO2e.

Table 7: Annual carbon outputs for staff and students 2010 (metric tonnes)

Popn

Mode CO2

(m tonnes CO2)

CH4

(m tonnes CO2e)

N2O

(m tonnes CO2e)

Total Direct GHG

(m tonnes CO2e)

Total Indirect GHG

(m tonnes CO2e)

Grand Total GHG

(m tonnes CO2e)

Staff Car 4,568.3 2.7 25.8 4,596.8 830.7 5,427.4

Taxi 2.1 0.0 0.0 2.1 0.4 2.6

M/C 25.0 0.5 0.1 25.7 4.5 30.2

Bus 249.7 0.2 1.6 251.6 48.0 299.5

Train 150.9 0.2 8.6 159.7 23.0 182.7

Tube 7.3 0.0 0.0 7.3 1.0 8.3

U/G Car 1,492.3 0.9 8.4 1,501.7 271.4 1,773.0

Taxi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

M/C 3.5 0.1 0.0 3.6 0.6 4.2

Bus 2,277.0 2.1 14.9 2,294.0 437.3 2,731.3

Train 17.3 0.0 1.0 18.3 2.6 21.0

Tube 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

P/G Car 1,124.8 0.7 6.4 1,131.8 204.5 1,336.3

Taxi 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

M/C 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Bus 3,089.0 2.9 20.2 3,112.0 593.2 3,705.2

Train 218.1 0.2 12.4 230.7 33.3 264.0

Tube 12.0 0.0 0.1 12.1 1.6 13.7




This gives the total GHG for commuting to the university in 2010 of 15,799.4 metric tonnes of CO2e, as shown in Table 8.

Table 8: Total GHG emissions 2010 (metric tonnes)

Mode

Total GHG CO2e (metric tonnes)

Car 8,536.8

Taxi 2.6

Motorcycle 34.4

Bus 6,736.1

Train 467.6

Tube 22.0

Total 15,799.4

Figures 1, 2 and 3 show the proportion of GHG CO2e produced by the commuting of staff, undergraduate and postgraduate students.

Figure 1: Staff Commuting – Total GHG (2010)

91%

0%

1% 5% 3% 0%

2010 Staff - Total GHG CO2e Proportions by Mode

Car

Taxi

Motorcycle

Bus

Train

Tube




Figure 2: Undergraduate commuting – Total GHG (2010)

Figure 3: Postgraduate commuting – Total GHG (2010)

In summary, the major source of GHG emissions for staff comes from commuting by car. This is in contrast to undergraduate and postgraduate students where the major source of GHG emissions results from commuting by bus.

39%

0%

0%

60%

1% 0%

2010 Undergraduate - Total GHG CO2e Proportions by Mode

Car

Taxi

Motorcycle

Bus

Train

Tube

25%

0%

0%

70%

5%

0%

2010 Postgraduate - Total GHG CO2e Proportions by Mode

Car

Taxi

Motorcycle

Bus

Train

Tube




3.2 Per Capita GHG Emissions 2010 The total GHG emissions have been divided by the FTE numbers of staff, undergraduate students and postgraduate students in 2010 as shown in Table 3 to produce 2010 GHG emissions per head of population, as shown in Table 9.

Table 9: Annual per capita GHG emissions 2010 (metric tonnes)

Annual GHG CO2e per capita 2010 (metric tonnes)

Staff 1.360186

Undergraduate Student 0.365512

Postgraduate Student 0.787046

Commuting by staff produce the largest amount of GHG emissions per head of population at 1.36 metric tonnes, followed by postgraduate students at 0.79 metric tonnes and by undergraduate students 0.37 metric tonnes. This reflects the relatively high level of car use by staff compared to the student groups.




4 Summary and Conclusions

As part of its 2020 Carbon Management Programme, the University of Warwick commissioned Arup to undertake an initial assessment of the emissions resulting from commuting to the University by staff and students. A three-stage methodology was developed:

Stage 1 utilised the results of the 2010 staff and student travel survey to produce typical distances travelled by each mode;

Stage 2 then applied the Stage 1 results to the total staff and student populations for 2005 and 2010 to produce a total annual distance travelled by each mode; and

Stage 3 then converted the annual distance travelled to a Carbon Dioxide equivalent (CO2e) of green house gases (GHG).

The results for 2010 showed that 15,799.4 metric tonnes of CO2e in total was produced by staff and students commuting to the university. Per capita emissions were 1.36 metric tonnes for staff, 0.37 metric tonnes for undergraduate students and 0.79 metric tonnes for postgraduate students.

Future staff and student travel surveys, planned in order to measure the impact of the Travel Plan, will facilitate monitoring of GHG emissions. The 2010 travel survey data is robust and gives a good baseline for going forward and future assessments.

Appendix A

Rail - Journey to Origin Station Mode Assumptions



J:\115000\115438-00\4 INTERNAL PROJECT DATA\4-13 CARBON ASSESSMENT JUL11\ISSUED\UOW CARBON FROM COMMUTING ASSESSMENT REPORT_REVA_ISSUED_2011-11-08.DOCX Page A1

Respondent ID Origin Station Mode for 1st leg of journey

1246579034 London Tube


1246510257 New Street Bus

1245162769 Derby Bus

1245009106 Rugby Cycle




1244898723 Rugby Cycle

1243658619 Banbury Cycle

1241370960 Leicester Walk


1240953962 Long Eaton Car

1238558414 Oxford Cycle

1238554192 Bedworth Cycle



1234596839 Reading Bus


1234322532 London Cycle

1234101361 New Street bus





1237729093 Leicester Cycle




1244911902 New Street Cycle



1237443043 Rugby Walk









1238633889 Berkswell Car

1236526980 Derby Cycle

1233216288 Bedworth Car

1235479028 Leamington Spa Bus

1240934508 Oxford Bus

1245689984 Paddington Tube

1243601606 Bicester Car



1235445052 Leamington Spa Car

Appendix B



Annex 6 - Passenger Transport Conversion TablesLast updated: Jun-11

How to use this Annex

Annex 6 Scopes & Boundaries:

How do I determine UK rail travel distances (in miles) where start and destination stations are known?

4. In the timetable, refer to the 'Miles' columns on the left to determine mileage between your starting and destination stations.

How were these factors calculated?

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/economy/business-efficiency/reportingOR from the Greenhouse Gas Protocol's website at:http://www.ghgprotocol.org/standards/corporate-standard

Emissions can be calculated either from fuel use (see Table 6a), which is the most accurate method of calculation, or estimated from distance travelled using UK average emission factors for different modes of transport (other Tables 6b - 6j). For public transport (Tables 6k and 6l) emissions are presented per passenger, rather than per vehicle. Therefore enter passenger kilometres travelled to calculate emissions (e.g. if one person travels 500km, then passenger kilometres travelled are 500. If three people travel the same distance passenger kilometres travelled are 1500).

3. Use your mouse cursor to click on the appropriate train route in the 'Table' column that matches your starting and destination stations. This should open a corresponding timetable with rail distances.

Simply multiply activity (either fuel used, kilometres travelled or passenger kilometres travelled) by the appropriate conversion factor. An excel spreadsheet is provided for ease of use at http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/economy/business-efficiency/reporting

For further explanation on how these emission factors have been derived, please refer to the GHG conversion factor methodology paper available here: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/economy/business-efficiency/reporting

Scope 1: Direct emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O from the combustion of fuel from owned/controlled transport.Scope 3: Indirect emissions associated with the extraction and transport of primary fuels as well as the refining, distribution, storage and retail of finished fuels. Emission factors are based on data from the JEC Well-To-Wheels study, for further information see: http://ies.jrc.ec.europa.eu/jec-research-collaboration/about-jec.html

Further information on scopes, control and leased assets is available in the introduction to these Annexes, and from Defra's website in the guidance on reporting at:

Scope 1 OR Scope 3: Direct emissions from transport can fall into either Scope 1 or Scope 3, depending on the vehicle ownership/level of control. For vehicles owned or directly controlled by a reporting company, direct emissions should be reported under Scope 1. However, emissions resulting from transport-related activities in vehicles not owned or controlled by the reporting entity should be reported under Scope 3. Examples of direct emissions from passenger transport that would be reported under Scope 3 include:

- Employees commuting to and from work;

A further consideration is the treatment of leased assets (e.g. vehicles), which depends on the organisational boundaries set and the control approach.

- Employee business travel by non-owned means, i.e. public transport such as: bus, rail, ferry and taxi and air travel (except for the companies actually owning/controlling the fleet / operating the services);

In general it is recommended that the 'control' approach is used in order to decide whether to report emissions as Scope 1 or Scope 3. The control approach is itself divided into two methods – financial and operational (where the financial control approach is the one most commonly recommended).

- A company has financial control over an operation if the company has the ability to direct the financial and operating policies of the operation with a view to gaining economic benefits from its activities.- A company has operational control over an operation if the company or one of its subsidiaries has the full authority to introduce and implement its operating policies at the operation.

In the transport sector, ‘open book accounts’ provide a very good illustration of the financial and operational control methods. In the case of an open book account, a transport operator provides vehicles to a customer, but the customer pays the fuel bill for those vehicles directly, rather than simply paying the transport operator for the logistics service.In the open book situation, the customer has financial control, but the transport operator has operational control. The customer and the transport operator will have to decide whether the emissions resulting from these transport operations are the customer’s or the transport operator’s Scope 1. Whichever method is used, it is very important that it is clearly stated in all reporting, and that it is consistently applied by both organisations.

1. Click on web link: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/3828.aspx2. Select the Route Index under Train Timetables

Page 1 of 9



Table 6a Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes

CO2 CH4 N2OTotal Direct

GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG CO2 CH4 N2OTotal Direct

GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG

Total units used x kg CO2 per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

Total kg CO2 Total kg CO2e

Total kg CO2e

Total kg CO2e Total kg CO2e Total kg CO2e

Petrol (retail station biofuel blend) 2.2352 0.0034 0.0064 2.2450 0.4220 2.6670

2.3018 0.0034 0.0065 2.3117 0.4110 2.7227

Diesel (retail station biofuel blend) 2.5530 0.0012 0.0183 2.5725 0.5348 3.1073

2.6480 0.0012 0.0184 2.6676 0.5085 3.1761

2.7020 0.0040 0.0016 2.7076 0.3988 3.1064

1.4884 0.0010 0.0023 1.4918 0.1868 1.6786

0 0 0 0 0 0

Sources

Notes

Table 6b Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes

1 CO2 CH4 N2OTotal Direct

GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG

Total units travelled x kg CO2 per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.27378 0.00026 0.00135 0.27539 0.04888 0.32427

x 0.17012 0.00016 0.00084 0.17112 0.03037 0.20149

x 0.33972 0.00026 0.00135 0.34133 0.06066 0.40199

x 0.21109 0.00016 0.00084 0.21209 0.03769 0.24978

x 0.47970 0.00026 0.00135 0.48131 0.08563 0.56694

x 0.29807 0.00016 0.00084 0.29907 0.05321 0.35228

x 0.33416 0.00026 0.00135 0.33577 0.05966 0.39543

x 0.20764 0.00016 0.00084 0.20864 0.03707 0.24571

0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 6c Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.23064 0.00008 0.00269 0.23340 0.04424 0.27764

x 0.14331 0.00005 0.00167 0.14503 0.02749 0.17252

x 0.28844 0.00008 0.00269 0.29121 0.05535 0.34656

x 0.17923 0.00005 0.00167 0.18095 0.03439 0.21534

x 0.38877 0.00008 0.00269 0.39154 0.07459 0.46613

x 0.24157 0.00005 0.00167 0.24329 0.04635 0.28964

x 0.30870 0.00008 0.00269 0.31147 0.05922 0.37069

x 0.19182 0.00005 0.00167 0.19354 0.03680 0.23034

0 0 0 0 0 0

* Note: In the UK biofuels are added to virtually all of the transport fuel sold by filling stations (and by most fuel wholesalers) and this has the effect of slightly reducing thegreenhouse gas emissions of the fuel. This is reflected in the emission factors above. For fuel purchased at filling stations you should use the factor labelled "retail station biofuelblend". If you are purchasing pure petrol or diesel which you know has not been blended with biofuels then you should use the factor labelled "100% mineral fuel".

litres

litres

Scope 1 OR Scope 3

Scope 1 OR Scope 3 Scope 1 OR Scope 3

UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2009 (AEA, 2011), available at: http://naei.defra.gov.uk/

Units

litres

litres

Units

miles

Average petrol car

km

Scope 1 OR Scope 3

Digest of UK Energy Statistics 2010 (DECC), available at: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/publications/dukes/dukes.aspx

Carbon factors for fuels (UKPIA, 2004)

km

Small petrol car, up to 1.4 litre engine

Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Petrol Cars

Large petrol cars, above 2.0 litres

Medium petrol car, from 1.4 - 2.0 litres

1 imperial gallon (UK) = 4.546 litres

km

Size of car

km

miles

Units

miles

km

miles

Petrol (100% mineral petrol)

Diesel (100% mineral diesel)

Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)

Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG)

Total

kg

litres

Scope 1 OR Scope 3Standard Road Transport Fuel Conversion Factors

Fuel used*

Small diesel car, up to 1.7 litre or under

Size of car

Average diesel car

Scope 1 OR Scope 3Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Diesel Cars

Medium diesel car, from 1.7 to 2.0 litre

Emission factors for petrol and diesel from public refuelling stations have been estimated based on information from the most recent reportingon the Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation (RTFO). See Annex 1 for more detailed information.

Total for petrol cars

miles

km

miles

km

miles

km

miles

Large diesel car, over 2.0 litre

Total for diesel cars

Page 2 of 9



Table 6d Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.18870 0.00014 0.00135 0.19019 0.03370 0.22389

x 0.11725 0.00009 0.00084 0.11818 0.02094 0.13912

x 0.33722 0.00018 0.00135 0.33875 0.06021 0.39896

x 0.20954 0.00011 0.00084 0.21049 0.03741 0.24790

x 0.22217 0.00017 0.00135 0.22370 0.03967 0.26337

x 0.13805 0.00011 0.00084 0.13900 0.02465 0.16365

x 0.30574 0.00055 0.00185 0.30814 0.03829 0.34643

x 0.18998 0.00034 0.00115 0.19147 0.02379 0.21526

x 0.43172 0.00055 0.00185 0.43412 0.05406 0.48818

x 0.26826 0.00034 0.00115 0.26975 0.03359 0.30334

x 0.34049 0.00055 0.00185 0.34289 0.04263 0.38552

x 0.21157 0.00034 0.00115 0.21306 0.02649 0.23955

x 0.27177 0.00129 0.00185 0.27491 0.03985 0.31476

x 0.16887 0.00080 0.00115 0.17082 0.02476 0.19558

x 0.38375 0.00129 0.00185 0.38689 0.05626 0.44315

x 0.23845 0.00080 0.00115 0.24040 0.03496 0.27536

x 0.30265 0.00129 0.00185 0.30579 0.04437 0.35016

x 0.18806 0.00080 0.00115 0.19001 0.02757 0.21758

0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 6e Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.26659 0.00023 0.00166 0.26847 0.04781 0.31628

x 0.16565 0.00014 0.00103 0.16682 0.02971 0.19653

x 0.32224 0.00019 0.00187 0.32430 0.05863 0.38293

x 0.20023 0.00012 0.00116 0.20151 0.03643 0.23794

x 0.43129 0.00016 0.00211 0.43356 0.07936 0.51292

x 0.26799 0.00010 0.00131 0.26940 0.04931 0.31871

x 0.32721 0.00019 0.00185 0.32926 0.05950 0.38876

x 0.20332 0.00012 0.00115 0.20459 0.03697 0.24156

0 0 0 0 0 0

SourcesNotes

Type of alternative fuel car

Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Alternative Fuel Cars

Average petrol hybrid car km

Large petrol hybrid car

miles

Scope 1 OR Scope 3

Total for alternative fuel cars

Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Cars (unknown fuel)

Medium CNG car

Medium LPG car

Units

Medium LPG or CNG car kmLarge LPG car

Units

Large petrol hybrid car

miles

Medium petrol hybrid car

km

miles

Average LPG car

Average petrol hybrid car

Scope 1 OR Scope 3

milesAverage LPG or CNG car km

Average LPG or CNG car

Medium LPG or CNG car


More accurate calculation of emissions can be made using the actual fuel consumed, where available, and the emission factors in Table 6a. Alternatively if afigure for a specific car's fuel consumption (e.g. in miles per gallon, mpg) is known, then the CO 2 can be calculated from the total mileage and the Table 6a factors.

miles

km

miles

km

Average small car (unknown fuel)

miles

km

Large LPG or CNG car km

miles

km

Medium petrol hybrid car

miles

km

miles

km

miles

Factors developed by AEA and agreed with Department for Transport (2011)

Total for average cars

According to the Energy Saving Trust (EST), LPG and CNG cars results in 10-15% reduction in CO2 relative to petrol cars, similar to diesel vehicles. New factorsfor LPG and CNG cars were calculated based on an average 12.5% reduction in CO2 emissions relative to the emission factors for petrol cars from Table 6b. Dueto the significant size and weight of the LPG and CNG fuel tanks only medium and large sized vehicles are available.

Size of car

Large CNG car

miles

km

Average CNG car

Large LPG or CNG car

km

Average car (unknown fuel)

Average medium car (unknown fuel)

Real world effects not covered in regular test cycles include use of accessories (air conditioning, lights, heaters, etc), vehicle payload (only driver +25kg isconsidered in tests, no passengers or further luggage), poor maintenance (tyre under inflation, maladjusted tracking, etc), gradients (tests effectively assume alevel road), weather, harsher driving style, etc.

These factors are estimated average values for the UK car fleet in 2010 travelling on average trips in the UK. They are calculated based on data from SMMT onnew car CO2 emissions from 1998 to 2010 combined with factors from TRL as functions of average speed of vehicle derived from test data under real worldtesting cycles and an uplift of 15% agreed with DfT to take into account further real-world driving effects on emissions relative to test-cycle based data. Furtherwork is ongoing to understand this uplift in more detail and revise it if necessary in the future.

Emission factors for CH4 and N2O are based on UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory values for 2009 (AEA, 2011), available at: http://naei.defra.gov.uk/

Average large car (unknown fuel)

miles

Page 3 of 9



Table 6f Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.25233 0.00026 0.00135 0.25394 0.04506 0.29900

x 0.15679 0.00016 0.00084 0.15779 0.02800 0.18579

x 0.27357 0.00026 0.00135 0.27518 0.04884 0.32403

x 0.16999 0.00016 0.00084 0.17099 0.03035 0.20134

x 0.32272 0.00026 0.00135 0.32433 0.05763 0.38196

x 0.20053 0.00016 0.00084 0.20153 0.03581 0.23734

x 0.36799 0.00026 0.00135 0.36960 0.06571 0.43531

x 0.22866 0.00016 0.00084 0.22966 0.04083 0.27049

x 0.43559 0.00026 0.00135 0.43719 0.07778 0.51497

x 0.27066 0.00016 0.00084 0.27166 0.04833 0.31999

x 0.55593 0.00026 0.00135 0.55754 0.09926 0.65681

x 0.34544 0.00016 0.00084 0.34644 0.06168 0.40812

x 0.40950 0.00026 0.00135 0.41111 0.07311 0.48422

x 0.25445 0.00016 0.00084 0.25545 0.04543 0.30088

x 0.46006 0.00026 0.00135 0.46167 0.08214 0.54381

x 0.28587 0.00016 0.00084 0.28687 0.05104 0.33791

x 0.37091 0.00026 0.00135 0.37251 0.06622 0.43874

x 0.23047 0.00016 0.00084 0.23147 0.04115 0.27262

0 0 0 0 0 0

Table 6g Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.16620 0.00008 0.00269 0.16897 0.03191 0.20088

x 0.10327 0.00005 0.00167 0.10499 0.01983 0.12482

x 0.22845 0.00008 0.00269 0.23121 0.04387 0.27509

x 0.14195 0.00005 0.00167 0.14367 0.02726 0.17093

x 0.26207 0.00008 0.00269 0.26483 0.05032 0.31516

x 0.16284 0.00005 0.00167 0.16456 0.03127 0.19583

x 0.28868 0.00008 0.00269 0.29145 0.05544 0.34689

x 0.17938 0.00005 0.00167 0.18110 0.03445 0.21555

x 0.33993 0.00008 0.00269 0.34269 0.06527 0.40797

x 0.21122 0.00005 0.00167 0.21294 0.04056 0.25350

x 0.40069 0.00008 0.00269 0.40346 0.07694 0.48041

x 0.24898 0.00005 0.00167 0.25070 0.04781 0.29851

x 0.27933 0.00008 0.00269 0.28210 0.05364 0.33574

x 0.17357 0.00005 0.00167 0.17529 0.03333 0.20862

x 0.42467 0.00008 0.00269 0.42744 0.08155 0.50899

x 0.26388 0.00005 0.00167 0.26560 0.05067 0.31627

x 0.32932 0.00008 0.00269 0.33209 0.06325 0.39534

x 0.20463 0.00005 0.00167 0.20635 0.03930 0.24565

0 0 0 0 0 0

Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Petrol Cars by Market Segment

miles

Total for diesel carskm

km

miles

km

miles

H. Dual Purpose 4x4

G. Sports

G. Sports

H. Dual Purpose 4x4

E. Executive

F. Luxury

miles

E. Executive

B. Supermini

km

I. MPV

F. Luxury


I. MPV

F. Luxury

G. Sports

G. Sports

H. Dual Purpose 4x4

km

km

miles

km

Market segment of car

Scope 1 OR Scope 3

A. Mini km

km

milesI. MPV

B. Supermini

C. Lower Medium

miles

miles


E. Executive

km

miles

km

miles

miles

km

C. Lower Medium

D. Upper Medium

D. Upper Medium

A. Mini

Units

miles

H. Dual Purpose 4x4

D. Upper Medium

D. Upper Medium

km

miles

E. Executive

F. Luxury

Scope 1 OR Scope 3

A. Mini

B. Supermini

A. Mini

Units

miles

km

C. Lower Medium

C. Lower Medium

B. Supermini km

miles

I. MPV

Total for petrol cars

Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Diesel Cars by Market Segment

km

miles

km

miles

km

miles

Page 4 of 9



Table 6h Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.25112 0.00024 0.00145 0.25281 0.04406 0.29688

x 0.15604 0.00015 0.00090 0.15709 0.02738 0.18447

x 0.26866 0.00023 0.00166 0.27055 0.04772 0.31826

x 0.16694 0.00014 0.00103 0.16811 0.02965 0.19776

x 0.30397 0.00021 0.00175 0.30594 0.05539 0.36133

x 0.18888 0.00013 0.00109 0.19010 0.03442 0.22452

x 0.33143 0.00019 0.00187 0.33349 0.06177 0.39525

x 0.20594 0.00012 0.00116 0.20722 0.03838 0.24560

x 0.38945 0.00016 0.00211 0.39171 0.07068 0.46240

x 0.24199 0.00010 0.00131 0.24340 0.04392 0.28732

x 0.51336 0.00016 0.00211 0.51563 0.08658 0.60222

x 0.31899 0.00010 0.00131 0.32040 0.05380 0.37420

x 0.40472 0.00016 0.00211 0.40699 0.06206 0.46904

x 0.25148 0.00010 0.00131 0.25289 0.03856 0.29145

x 0.43787 0.00016 0.00211 0.44014 0.08180 0.52194

x 0.27208 0.00010 0.00131 0.27349 0.05083 0.32432

x 0.34828 0.00018 0.00198 0.35043 0.06481 0.41524

x 0.21641 0.00011 0.00123 0.21775 0.04027 0.25802

0 0 0 0 0 0

SourcesNotes

km

km

miles


km

miles

km

miles

km

miles

Total for cars (unknown fuel)

miles

H. Dual Purpose 4x4

I. MPV

kmI. MPV

Units

miles

km

miles

F. Luxury

B. Supermini

km

miles

km

miles

E. Executive

F. Luxury

B. Supermini

C. Lower Medium

C. Lower Medium

D. Upper Medium

D. Upper Medium

E. Executive

Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Cars (unknown fuel) by Market Segment

More accurate calculation of emissions can be made using the actual fuel consumed, where available, and the emission factors in Table 6a. Alternatively if afigure for a specific car's fuel consumption (e.g. in miles per gallon, mpg) is known, then the CO 2 can be calculated from the total mileage and the Table 6a factors.

The market segment categories are the standard segments as defined by SMMT (UK Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders). These factors are estimatedaverage values for the UK car fleet in 2010 travelling on average trips in the UK. They are calculated based on data from SMMT on new car CO2 emissions from1998 to 2010 by SMMT. An uplift of 15% agreed with DfT to take into account further real-world driving effects on emissions relative to test-cycle based data (asunder Tables 6b-6e). Further work is ongoing to understand this uplift in more detail and revise it if necessary in the future.

There is a substantial variation in emission factors across market classes due to significant variations in engine size and vehicle weight. The Department forTransport considers the emission factors by fuel and engine size to often be a closer match to actual emissions. It is preferable to use the emission factors byengine size provided in Tables 6b and 6c over the market class based factors where possible.

Scope 1 OR Scope 3Scope 1 OR Scope 3



A. Mini

A. Mini

G. Sports

G. Sports

H. Dual Purpose 4x4

Page 5 of 9



Table 6i Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.32292 0.00052 0.00204 0.32548 0.06251 0.38799

x 0.20065 0.00032 0.00127 0.20225 0.03884 0.24109

x 0.33980 0.00052 0.00204 0.34236 0.06574 0.40810

x 0.21114 0.00032 0.00127 0.21273 0.04085 0.25358

x 0.41326 0.00057 0.00458 0.41842 0.08035 0.49877

x 0.25679 0.00035 0.00285 0.25999 0.04993 0.30992

x 0.34287 0.00052 0.00237 0.34577 0.06640 0.41217

x 0.21305 0.00033 0.00148 0.21485 0.04126 0.25611

x 0.25049 0.00009 0.00173 0.25232 0.04846 0.30078

x 0.15565 0.00006 0.00108 0.15678 0.03011 0.18689

x 0.36201 0.00009 0.00250 0.36460 0.07002 0.43462

x 0.22494 0.00006 0.00155 0.22655 0.04351 0.27006

x 0.43163 0.00009 0.00298 0.43470 0.08348 0.51818

x 0.26820 0.00006 0.00185 0.27011 0.05187 0.32198

x 0.40252 0.00009 0.00278 0.40539 0.07784 0.48323

x 0.25011 0.00006 0.00173 0.25190 0.04837 0.30027

x 0.42265 0.00111 0.00325 0.42701 0.05359 0.48060

x 0.26262 0.00069 0.00202 0.26533 0.03330 0.29863

x 0.38239 0.00262 0.00325 0.38826 0.05731 0.44557

x 0.23761 0.00163 0.00202 0.24126 0.03561 0.27687

x 0.39882 0.00012 0.00276 0.40169 0.07714 0.47883

x 0.24781 0.00007 0.00171 0.24960 0.04793 0.29753

0 0 0 0 0 0

SourcesNotes

Table 6j Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG


kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit

kg CO2e per unit


Total kg CO2e


x 0.13678 0.00393 0.00058 0.14128 0.02443 0.16571

x 0.08499 0.00244 0.00036 0.08779 0.01518 0.10297

x 0.16602 0.00436 0.00100 0.17138 0.02964 0.20102

x 0.10316 0.00271 0.00062 0.10649 0.01842 0.12491

x 0.22087 0.00332 0.00100 0.22518 0.03945 0.26463

x 0.13724 0.00206 0.00062 0.13992 0.02451 0.16443

x 0.18678 0.00396 0.00097 0.19171 0.03335 0.22506

x 0.11606 0.00246 0.00060 0.11912 0.02072 0.13984

0 0 0 0 0 0

SourcesNotes

miles


Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Vans (Light Commercial Vehicles)

miles

miles

km

Average petrol motorbike (unknown engine size)

Small petrol motorbike (mopeds/scooters up to 125cc)

Medium petrol motorbike (125-500cc)

LPG or CNG van up to 3.5 tonne

Average van up to 3.5 tonne

Diesel van up to 3.5 tonne

km

miles

km

Units

miles

km

miles

Large petrol motorbike (over 500cc)

km

Total for motorcycleskm

miles

Size of motorcycle

km

miles

miles

km

miles

km

Passenger Road Transport Conversion Factors: Motorcycles

miles

km

These factors are based on calculations of average emissions data by size category, based data provided by Clear (http://www.clear-offset.com) of almost 1200datapoints, over 300 different bikes from 50-1500cc, and from 25 manufacturers from a mix of magazine road test reports and user reported data.

More accurate calculation of emissions can be made using the actual fuel consumed, where available, and the emission factors in Table 5a. Alternatively if afigure for a specific motorbike's fuel consumption (e.g. in miles per gallon, mpg) is known, then the CO2 can be calculated from the total mileage and the Table 6afactors.

km

miles

Petrol van (Class I), up to 1.305 tonne

Petrol van up to 3.5 tonne

Diesel van (Class I), up to 1.305 tonne

Petrol van (Class III), 1.74 to 3.5 tonne

Petrol van up to 3.5 tonne

km

miles

km

Type of van

Scope 1 OR Scope 3


km

Petrol van (Class II), 1.305 to 1.74 tonne

Units

miles




Emission factors for petrol and diesel light good vehicles (vans up to 3.5 tonnes) were calculated based on the new emission factors used in the NationalAtmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI) and Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2009 (AEA, 2011). These test cycle based emission factors were then uplifted by15% to represent ‘real-world’ emissions, consistent with the approach used for cars agreed with DfT. Emission factors for LPG and CNG vans were estimated tobe similar to diesel vehicles, as indicated by EST for cars. The average van emission factor was calculated on the basis of the relative NAEI vehicle km for petroland diesel LGVs for 2009.

Average van up to 3.5 tonne

Total for vans

CNG van up to 3.5 tonne

Scope 1 OR Scope 3

Diesel van up to 3.5 tonne

LPG van up to 3.5 tonne milesLPG or CNG van up to 3.5 tonne km

Diesel van (Class II), 1.305 to 1.74 tonne

Diesel van (Class III), 1.74 to 3.5 tonne

Page 6 of 9



Table 6k Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG

Method of travel Vehicle km

travelled (vkm)1

x kg CO2 per

vkm1

kg CO2e

per vkm1

kg CO2e

per vkm1

kg CO2e per

vkm1

kg CO2e per

vkm1

kg CO2e per

vkm1


Total kg CO2e


x 0.21040 0.00005 0.00167 0.21212 0.02431 0.23643

x 0.24157 0.00005 0.00167 0.24329 0.04639 0.28968

Method of travel Passenger km travelled (pkm)

x kg CO2 per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm


Total kg CO2e


x 0.15029 0.00004 0.00119 0.15151 0.02886 0.18038

x 0.19871 0.00011 0.00056 0.19938 0.03548 0.23486

x 0.18433 0.00020 0.00135 0.18588 0.03540 0.22128

x 0.08566 0.00008 0.00056 0.08630 0.01645 0.10275

x 0.14754 0.00016 0.00107 0.14877 0.02833 0.17710

x 0.03000 0.00007 0.00057 0.03064 0.00576 0.03641

x 0.05340 0.00006 0.00303 0.05649 0.00815 0.06464

x 0.01502 0.00001 0.00009 0.01512 0.00200 0.01712

x 0.07101 0.00003 0.00044 0.07148 0.00944 0.08092

x 0.07313 0.00003 0.00045 0.07361 0.00972 0.08333

x 0.01912 0.00001 0.00015 0.01928 0.00324 0.02252

x 0.13216 0.00004 0.00102 0.13322 0.02243 0.15565

x 0.11516 0.00004 0.00088 0.11608 0.01954 0.13562

0 0 0 0 0 0

SourcesNotes

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

All:

The factor for local buses was calculated based on actual fuel consumption data submitted by bus operators to the DfT as part of their Bus Service OperatorsGrant (BSOG) claims and DfT bus statistics.

Total

Average local bus

National rail 6

International rail (Eurostar) 7

Light rail and tram 8

Ferry (Large RoPax) 10 Foot passengers

vkm (vehicle-km) is a measure of vehicle activity, representing the movement of a vehicle over a distance; pkm (passenger-km) is a measure of the total distancetravelled by passengers on a vehicle and is calculated by multiplying the number of passengers by the vehicle-km.

Regular taxi

Local bus (not London) 3

Black cab

Average (all passengers)

Car passengers

Local London bus 4

Taxi 2

Bus

London Underground 9

RailCoach 5

Regular taxi

Black cab

Taxi, Bus, Rail and Ferry Passenger Transport Conversion FactorsScope 3

Emission factors for taxis were estimated on the basis of an average of the emission factors of medium and large cars from Table 6c and occupancy of 1.4 (CfIT,2002). The emission factors for black cabs are based on the large car emission factor (consistent with the VCA dataset for London Taxis International vehicles)and an average passenger occupancy of 1.5 (average 2.5 people per cab from LTI website, 2008).

The London bus factor is calculated using the same methodology as for other local buses using DfT's BSOG dataset and statistics.


The London Underground rail factor is recalculated using the updated 2009 grid rolling average from figures in the Transport for London 2010 environmentalreport available at: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/publications/1478.aspx

The factors for RoPax ferries (Roll-on Roll-off ferries with additional passenger capacity) are based on data provided by Best Foot Forward from work for thePassenger Shipping Association (PSA) carried out in 2007/8. The calculated figure is based on ferry service operator provided data on fuel consumption andpassengers transported, but does not include any data for passenger only ferry services, which would be expected to have significantly higher emission factors per

The emission factor for coach transport is the figure from the National Express Group's Corporate Responsibility Report, available at: http://www.nationalexpressgroup.com/nx1/corporate/environment/climate . National Express are responsible for the majority of long-distance coach services in the UK, so this figure is expected to be broadly representative of the overall average.

The emission factor for international rail is based on electricity grid average emission factors. Eurostar's published figures differ from the figure quoted in the tableabove as they are calculated using the individual conversion factors as specified by each electricity supplier across each network section upon which they operate.For further information please visit: http://www.eurostar.com/UK/uk/leisure/about_eurostar/environment/greener_than_flying.jsp

The light rail and tram factors were based on an average of factors for the Docklands Light Rail (DLR) service, the Manchester Metrolink, Tyne and Wear Metro,Glasgow Underground, Supertram, Midland Metro and the Croydon Tramlink. The factors for the Tyne and Wear, Glasgow, Midland, Supertram and Manchestertram and light rail systems were based on annual electricity consumption and passenger km data provided by the network operators in 2008 (referring mostly toconsumption in 2007/08) and a CO2 emission factor for grid rolling average electricity from Table 3c. DLR and Croydon Tramlink figures were recalculated usingthe updated 2009 grid rolling average from those available in the Transport for London 2010 environmental report available at:http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/publications/1478.aspx

The national rail factor refers to an average emission per passenger kilometre for diesel and electric trains in 2007/08. The CO2 value for passenger rail is basedon currently available information on CO2 emissions by diesel and electric passenger trains in the UK in 2007/08 produced by ORR (Office of the Rail Regulator)and is available in Chapter 9 of National Rail Trends at http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.2026Emission factors for freight rail (from the same source) are provided in Annex 7, Table 7f.

Department for Transport, Transport for London and AEA (2011)

Scope 3

Taxi 2

Page 7 of 9



Table 6l Scope 3 All Scopes Scope 3 All Scopes


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total


GHGTotal Indirect

GHGGrand Total

GHG

Method of travel Passenger km travelled (pkm)

x km uplift factor 12 x kg CO2 per

pkm 13

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm

kg CO2e per pkm


Total kg CO2e


Flight type 14 Cabin class 11

Domestic14 Average x 109% x 0.16313 0.00010 0.00161 0.16484 0.03034 0.19518

Short-haul international14 Average x 109% x 0.09589 0.00001 0.00094 0.09684 0.01783 0.11467

Economy class x 109% x 0.09138 0.00001 0.00090 0.09229 0.01699 0.10928

Business class x 109% x 0.13707 0.00001 0.00135 0.13843 0.02549 0.16392

Long-haul international14 Average x 109% x 0.11037 0.00001 0.00109 0.11146 0.02053 0.13199

Economy class x 109% x 0.08057 0.00000 0.00079 0.08137 0.01498 0.09635

Premium economy class x 109% x 0.12891 0.00001 0.00127 0.13019 0.02397 0.15416

Business class x 109% x 0.23365 0.00001 0.00230 0.23596 0.04345 0.27941

First class x 109% x 0.32227 0.00002 0.00317 0.32546 0.05994 0.38540

0 0 0 0 0 0

Source

Notes

10

11

12

13

14

Scope 3

These indicative factors will be updated as further evidence comes to light on how these factors could more accurately be estimated. There are several ways in which these factors could be estimated, which will be kept under review.

These emissions factors are intended to be an aggregate representation of the typical emissions per passenger km from illustrative types of aircraft for the 3 types of air services. Actual emissions will vary significantly according to the type of aircraft in use, the load, cabin class, specific conditions of the flight route, etc.

The long haul estimate is based on a flight length from the EMEP/EEA Guidebook of 6482 km, short haul 1108km and domestic 463km. Actual flight distances do however vary significantly, as demonstrated in the examples in the following tables. Domestic flights are between UK airports, short haul international flights are typically to Europe (up to 3700km distance), and long haul international flights are typically to non-European destinations (or all other international flights over 3700km distance).

The emission factors refer to aviation's direct carbon dioxide (CO 2), methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions only. There is currently uncertainty over the other non-CO2 climate change effects of aviation (including water vapour, contrails, NOx etc) which may indicatively be accounted for by applying a multiplier. The appropriate factor to apply is subject to uncertainty but was estimated by the IPCC in 1999 to be in the range 2-4, with current best scientific evidence suggesting a factor of 1.9. This factor is derived from Table 1 of Aviation radiative forcing in 2000: and update on IPCC (1999), Sausen R. et al (2005): http://elib.dlr.de/19906/1/s13.pdfIf used, this factor would be applied to the emissions factor for CO 2 set out here.

The indicative emissions factors by passenger seating class have been produced to allow passengers to build an understanding of how emissions per passenger km are affected by load factors and seat configurations. This is in response to feedback on the previous version of the Act on CO 2 calculator. Emission factors by passenger seating class were developed on the basis of detailed analysis of the seating configurations of 24 aircraft model variants from 16 major airlines providing services within/to/from the UK. Indicative emission factors were calculated via the relative area on the aircraft occupied by different seating classes compared to an economy class equivalent per passenger. Figures are only indicative averages and will vary considerably between different specific airline and aircraft configurations.

Scope 3

Total

The 9% uplift factor comes from the IPCC Aviation and the global Atmosphere 8.2.2.3 , which states that 9-10% should be added to take into account non-direct routes (i.e. not along the straight line great circle distances between destinations) and delays/circling: http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/aviation/121.htm#8223Airline industry representatives have indicated that the percentage uplift for short-haul flights will be higher and for long-haul flights will be lower, however specific data is not currently available to provide separate factors. This is under investigation for future versions of these guidelines.

These emissions are based on bunker fuel consumption and are closely related to fuel on departing flights. This uplift is therefore based on comparisons of national aviation fuel consumption from this reported inventory, with detailed bottom up calculations in DfT modelling along with the similar NAEI approach, which both use detailed UK activity data (by aircraft and route) from CAA, and the CORINAIR fuel consumption approach. Therefore for this version of the Defra CO 2

emission factors an uplift of 10% is applied to the emissions from the Cruise, Climb and Decent of the aircraft based on provisional evidence. The CORINAIR uplift is in addition to the assumption that Great Circle Distances are increased by 9% to allow for sub-optimal routing and stacking at airports during periods of heavy congestion. It should be noted that work will continue to determine a more robust reconciliation and this will be accounted for in future versions of these factors.

Air Passenger Transport Conversion Factors10

Civil Aviation Authority (2010)

Developed by AEA (2011) using the methodology developed in discussion with the Department for Transport and the airline industry, 2009.EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook 2009 (EEA, 2009)

The emissions factors are based on typical aircraft fuel burn over illustrative trip distances listed in the EMEP/EEA air pollutant emission inventory guidebook 2009 (EEA, 2009) – available at the EEA website at: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/emep-eea-emission-inventory-guidebook-2009 . This information is combined with data from the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) on average aircraft seating capacity, loading factors, and annual passenger-km and aircraft-km for 2007 (most recent full-year data available). The provisional evidence to date suggests an uplift in the region of 10-12% to climb/cruise/descent factors derived in the EEA publication is appropriate in order to ensure consistency with estimated UK aviation emissions as reported in line with the UN Framework on Climate Change, covering UK domestic flights and departing international flights. This uplift has already been included in these emissions factors.

Page 8 of 9



Illustrative long haul flight distances

AreaNorth Africa

Southern Africa

Middle East

North America

North America

South America

Indian sub-continent

Far East

Australasia

Source

Illustrative short haul flight distances

AreaEurope

Europe

Europe

Europe

Source

9000

Hong Kong

Johannesburg/Pretoria, South Africa

New York (JFK), USA

9400Sao Paulo, Brazil

Dubai, UAE

Distance (km)


Distances based on International Passenger Survey (Office for National Statistics) calculations using airport geographic information.

Distances based on International Passenger Survey (Office for National Statistics) calculations using airport geographic information.

7200

Athens, Greece

Amsterdam, Netherlands

1000Prague (Ruzyne), Czech Rep

Sydney, Australia

Airport

1500

From London to:

9700

Bombay/Mumbai, India

Malaga, Spain 1700

400

17000

Distance (km)

5500

5600

8900Los Angeles California, USA

Abu Simbel/Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt 3300

AirportFrom London to:

Page 9 of 9

Appendix D: International Student Air Travel

Distance (miles)

5271 118,767 11

2653 8,540 1

3213 41,369 4

3725 23,981 2

3006 9,676 1

3006 19,352 2

3739 240,708 21

2996 250,738 22

2891 9,306 1

4132 1,130,535 100

5695 18,332 2

4928 95,176 8

2259 7,271 1

6054 896,407 80

5256 50,755 5

5167 16,632 1

2897 2,545,751 226

4093 13,175 1

5073 16,329 1

5736 590,832 52

5708 18,373 2

4479 331,599 29

3956 292,879 26

4930 79,345 7

5254 202,944 18 623

2294 7,384 1

2382 153,347 14

1204 27,129 2

2151 13,848 1

2962 781,814 69

1358 13,114 1

2938 9,457 1

1437 83,260 7

3067 9,872 1 97

4319 27,805 2

4193 67,484 6

5226 16,822 1

3442 55,397 5

4128 39,863 4

4622 74,388 7

4691 45,299 4

4173 13,432 1

4112 13,236 1

4105 13,214 1

4416 199,004 18

4260 13,712 1

4260 27,425 2 54

5082 32,717 3

5082 20,235,277 1,795

6007 11,794,845 1,046

5965 902,429 80

5577 1,759,266 156

5989 250,612 22

4395 28,294 3

6175 1,828,646 162 3,267

1211 19,490 2

683 103,329 10

199 66,618 7

999 6,431 1

1324 421,918 42

1324 8,524 1

852 32,910 3

2008 329,639 33

2008 394,274 40

2008 32,318 3

710 59,421 6

530 49,474 5

1149 25,889 3

1291 128,823 13

394 254,916 26

411 9,261 1

411 395,565 40

1083 17,430 2

1384 703,879 71

972 78,219 8

1126 7,249 1

337 131,256 13

862 371,806 37

1181 3,801 0

1092 84,360 8

1039 277,587 28

314 27,290 3

1246 4,011 0

1302 79,629 8

648 4,172 0

274 68,794 7

828 106,609 11

876 329,909 33

903 145,332 15

1216 172,223 17

1216 15,657 2

1119 32,417 3

1081 6,959 1

905 72,827 7

799 23,147 2

810 226,834 23

931 281,697 28

491 143,823 14 579

7087 342,183 30

5331 205,918 18

7049 272,279 24

5212 419,420 37

5771 37,152 3

5413 34,848 3

7886 25,384 2

5467 334,355 30

5286 17,015 2

6145 79,120 7

6720 21,631 2

4743 122,137 11 170

3460 11,137 1

3179 102,328 9

2317 186,454 17

2989 394,471 35

2559 8,237 1

2253 65,269 6

2328 52,455 5

2890 74,421 7

2180 77,189 7

2046 105,373 9

1364 21,953 2

3708 71,614 6

3234 145,738 13

3001 454,013 40

3088 79,519 7

2213 192,331 17

1296 12,515 1

3426 937,370 83

3663 11,791 1 266

3414 1,032,990 92

4489 28,899 3

4489 1,907,341 169 263

1000 12,876 1 1

7886 25,384 2

769 2,475 0

1000 61,159 5 8

Total Kms Total C (tonnes)

5 3 0 8 0 11 0 11 19

Not Known ( Blank ) 8 4 1 13 0 4 0 4

British Antarctic Territories 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Greenland (Faroe Islands) 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Not Known

52 19 38 109 0 118 1 119

Not European Union or Commonwealth No information provided Overseas 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 4

Total 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 4

North America Canada 3 15 48 0 45 1 46 94

United States 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2

United States of America 22 16 23 61 0 71 0 71 132

Total

Yemen, Republic of 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Total 58 35 47 140 0 181 4 185

30

Tunisia 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 3

United Arab Emirates 25 6 0 31 0 54 0 54 85

Sudan 0 1 0 1 0 6 1 7 8

Syrian Arab Republic 0 9 7 16 0 10 1 11 27

Qatar 2 1 0 3 0 11 0 11 14

Saudi Arabia 2 4 12 18 0 28 1 29 47

Morocco 4 0 0 4 0 1 0 1 5

Oman 3 0 1 4 0 2 0 2 6

Lebanon 1 0 2 3 0 8 0 8 11

Libya 0 2 6 8 0 8 0 8 16

Jordan 3 1 0 4 0 2 1 3 7

Kuwait 2 0 0 2 0 6 0 6 8

Iraq 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Israel 5 1 1 7 0 2 0 2 9

1 1 4 6 0 19 0 19 25

Iran 4 8 14 26 0 15 0 15 41

Total 8 13 33 54 0 47 1 48

Mid East / North Africa Afghanistan 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Bahrain 5 0 0 5 0 5 0 5 10

Egypt

Uruguay 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Venezuela 1 1 1 3 0 5 0 5 8

Panama 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Peru 2 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 4

Falkland Islands 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Mexico 0 1 10 11 0 8 0 8 19

Ecuador 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 2

El Salvador 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2

0 1 7 8 0 4 0 4 12

Colombia 1 5 5 11 0 14 0 14 25

Total 9,640 1,717 837 12,194 25 2,715 58 2,798

Latin America Argentina 0 4 5 9 0 5 1 6 15

Brazil 2 0 3 5 0 7 0 7 12

Chile

Scotland 39 16 20 75 0 81 0 81 156

Wales 238 30 23 291 2 56 0 58 349

Jersey 17 0 0 17 0 1 0 1 18

Northern Ireland 40 14 5 59 0 34 0 34 93

17 0 0 17 0 2 0 2 19

Isle of Man (The) 10 1 1 12 0 0 0 0 12

Total 1,000 214 238 1,452 0 783 5 788

Europe - UK Channel Islands 4 0 0 4 0 2 0 2 6

England 9,275 1,656 788 11,719 23 2,539 58 2,620 14,339

Guernsey

Sweden 55 2 7 64 0 30 0 30 94

Switzerland 44 3 0 47 0 44 0 44 91

Slovenia 2 0 0 2 0 7 0 7 9

Spain 27 5 8 40 0 47 0 47 87

Serbia and Montenegro 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2

Slovakia 8 0 1 9 0 16 0 16 25

Romania (for Overeseas fee payers only) 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 3 4

Serbia 3 1 2 6 0 3 0 3 9

Portugal 15 8 10 33 0 17 0 17 50

Romania 21 3 2 26 0 18 0 18 44

Norway 19 2 3 24 0 16 0 16 40

Poland 55 18 19 92 0 25 0 25 117

Monaco 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2

Netherlands 22 4 4 30 0 48 0 48 78

Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Malta 3 3 8 14 0 5 0 5 19

Lithuania 76 1 1 78 0 5 0 5 83

Luxembourg 22 3 1 26 0 1 0 1 27

Kosovo 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Latvia 21 2 0 23 0 1 0 1 24

Ireland, Republic of 17 16 10 43 0 77 1 78 121

Italy 34 13 43 90 0 43 1 44 134

Hungary 8 4 5 17 0 8 0 8 25

Iceland 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 2

Gibraltar 4 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 5

Greece 27 34 30 91 0 67 0 67 158

Germany, 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 7

Germany, Federal Republic of 113 28 39 180 0 119 0 119 299

Finland 18 1 2 21 0 10 0 10 31

France 125 23 10 158 0 42 1 43 201

Denmark 4 1 2 7 0 22 0 22 29

Estonia 5 0 0 5 0 2 0 2 7

Cyprus (Non-European Union) 0 1 2 3 0 2 0 2 5

Czech Republic 11 2 3 16 0 10 0 10 26

Cyprus 39 0 8 47 0 4 0 4 51

Cyprus (European Union) 21 20 8 49 0 11 1 12 61

Bulgaria (for Overeseas feepayers only) 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2

Croatia 4 3 0 7 0 5 0 5 12

0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2

Bulgaria 75 5 0 80 0 19 0 19 99

EU & Non-EU & Norway Albania 2 0 0 2 0 3 0 3 5

Austria 24 2 2 28 0 19 0 19 47

Belgium 71 4 7 82 0 21 1 22 104

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Taiwan 9 13 14 36 0 56 0 56 92

Total 948 229 124 1,301 52 737 11 800

Macao 8 2 0 10 0 3 0 3 13

Mongolia 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2

17 3 6 26 0 19 2 21 47

Korea, Republic of (South Korea) 37 7 16 60 0 34 4 38 98

East Asia China, P. R. 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 2

China, People's Republic of 451 172 80 703 52 479 3 534 1,237

Hong Kong 425 32 7 464 0 144 2 146 610

Japan

Turks and Caicos Islands 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 2

Total 12 7 6 25 0 19 0 19

Trinidad and Tobago 4 1 2 7 0 7 0 7 14

Turks & Caicos Islands (for Home/EU fee payers onl 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Montserrat 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

St Kitts and Nevis 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1

Jamaica 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 1 3

Martinique 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1

British Virgin Islands 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 3

Guyana 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 5 5

1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Bermuda 3 0 0 3 0 2 0 2 5

Total 55 18 4 77 0 58 0 58

Caribbean Bahamas 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2

Barbados 1 2 1 4 0 1 0 1 5

Belize

Ukraine 10 1 0 11 0 7 0 7 18

Uzbekistan 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Moldova (Moldavia) 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3

Turkmenistan 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2

Kazakhstan, Republic of 32 13 2 47 0 35 0 35 82

Associated States of Russia Armenia 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Azerbaijan 6 3 0 9 0 11 0 11 20

Belarus 2 0 2 4 0 3 0 3 7

Georgia

Zimbabwe 5 1 2 8 0 4 0 4 12

Total 163 37 45 245 0 328 5 333

Uganda 7 1 0 8 0 15 0 15 23

Zambia 1 0 0 1 0 4 0 4 5

Swaziland 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Tanzania 8 2 3 13 0 10 0 10 23

Seychelles 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

South Africa 2 1 2 5 0 26 1 27 32

Nigeria 48 22 11 81 0 191 1 192 273

Rwanda 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Mozambique 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 3

Namibia 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Mauritania 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Mauritius 37 3 2 42 0 4 0 4 46

Madagascar 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Malawi 1 0 0 1 0 5 0 5 6

Guinea 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Kenya 44 2 5 51 0 33 1 34 85

Ethiopia 0 0 18 18 0 2 0 2 20

Ghana 5 3 0 8 0 18 0 18 26

Cote d'Ivoire 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1

Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2

0 1 1

Cameroon 1 0 0 1 0 2 1 3 4

Congo, Democratic Republic of 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 2

Table 2.4 Summary of Enrolments by Country of Domicile by Level of Study, split by Government supported and Independently funded Courses

10/11

Government Supported Independently FundedGrand Total

Undergraduate Postgraduate Taught Postgraduate Research Total Undergraduate Postgraduate Taught Postgraduate Research Total

Africa Botswana 1 1 1 3 0 3 1 4 7

Burkina-Faso (Upper Volta) 0 0 0 0 0 1

9495 641,829 57

11661 375,354 33 90

3578 1,347,507 120 120

4964 415,442 37

4618 7,372,935 654

5547 53,565 5

4509 101,598 9

3817 2,334,428 207

5475 652,065 58 969

7030 1,267,209 112

5316 17,112 2

6169 39,715 4

7775 725,777 64

6537 8,206,309 728

6692 150,785 13

6756 6,437,039 571

5856 3,374,107 299

6044 1,595,303 141 1,935

1907 675,224 60 60

95,092,925 8,503 8,503

Total 538 44 50 632 98 308 4 410

Turkey Turkey 13 22 11 46 0 63 1 64 110

Total 13 22 11 46 0 63 1 64

Thailand 26 16 12 54 0 122 3 125 179

Vietnam 66 4 5 75 0 6 1 7 82

Phillippines 2 2 0 4 0 3 0 3 7

Singapore 171 10 2 183 0 113 0 113 296

10 3 5 18 0 11 0 11 29

Malaysia 218 3 22 243 98 49 0 147 390

South East Asia Brunei 44 6 3 53 0 3 0 3 56

Burma (Myanmar) 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Cambodia 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 2

Indonesia

Sri Lanka 27 1 2 30 0 7 0 7 37

Total 297 132 56 485 0 274 0 274

1 2 3 6 0 1 0 1 7

Pakistan 75 29 22 126 0 64 0 64 190

South Asia Bangladesh 8 3 8 19 0 7 0 7 26

India 184 96 21 301 0 195 0 195 496

Maldive Islands 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 3

Nepal

Russia Russia (Russian Federation) 39 10 1 50 0 67 0 67 117

Total 39 10 1 50 0 67 0 67

ROW Australia and New Zealand Australia 5 1 4 10 0 11 0 11 21

New Zealand 4 0 0 4 0 6 0 6 10

Total 9 1 4 14 0 17 0 17

Total 13 7 1 21 0 17 0 17

Not Known

22,833

Appendix E: Business Air Travel

University of

WarwickNew Report

Booking type: Flight

From Date: 01/08/2010

To Date: 31/07/2011

Used Date: Departure Date

Returned rows: All

Departments: Multiple

Bookers: Multiple

PNR Invoice Number Department Flight departure

date

Flight return

date

Flight Origin Flight Destination Flight Distance Uplift Km Flight CO2 (KG)

YO2R7X 148862 University of Warwick - Computer Science 18/09/2010 18/09/2010 PITTSBURGH BOSTON 796.57 868.26 84.08

Y6HW4Q 163862 University of Warwick - Health Sciences Research Institute 30/09/2010 11/10/2010 BIRMINGHAM MELBOURNE 34992.93 38142.29 4,251.34

7ZNVJI 203783 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 03/02/2011 04/02/2011 BIRMINGHAM ZURICH 1841.4 2007.13 194.37

4DEU2H 250547 University of Warwick - Sociology 22/06/2011 22/06/2011 BARCELONA MADRID 482.73 526.18 50.95

25ZCN5 175885 University of Warwick - Computer Science 24/10/2010 31/10/2010 LONDON PISA 2295.95 2502.59 242.35

2OHJ3N 250638 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 14/06/2011 19/06/2011 LONDON CORFU 4033.31 4396.31 490.01

5ZGBB2 190171 University of Warwick - Warwick Legal Training 10/12/2010 10/12/2010 BIRMINGHAM ABERDEEN 528.74 576.33 55.81

5ZGBB2 190171 University of Warwick - Warwick Legal Training 10/12/2010 10/12/2010 BIRMINGHAM ABERDEEN 528.74 576.33 55.81

288OAN 156009 University of Warwick - Development Technology Unit 05/09/2010 25/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM ENTEBBE/KAMPALA 14389.92 15685.01 1,748.25

5TBLT4 8011129 University of Warwick - Centre for Caribbean Studies 02/09/2010 03/09/2010 LONDON GEORGETOWN 7502.45 8177.67 911.48

ZVDVGN 213876 University of Warwick - Clinical Sciences Research Institute 07/06/2011 11/06/2011 BIRMINGHAM SALZBURG 2348.87 2560.27 247.94

3YHZ7Z 198821 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 01/03/2011 02/03/2011 BIRMINGHAM DUBLIN 643.04 700.91 67.88

43MYJR 152343 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 06/09/2010 06/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM GLASGOW 418.27 455.91 75.15

3PN8AX 161530 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 13/10/2010 13/10/2010 BIRMINGHAM BELFAST 727.04 792.47 76.74

3PN8AX 161530 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 13/10/2010 13/10/2010 BIRMINGHAM BELFAST 727.04 792.47 76.74

59LS5C 8013518 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 01/12/2010 03/12/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

59LS5C 8013518 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 01/12/2010 03/12/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

2RUAJX 254774 University of Warwick - Sociology 30/06/2011 01/07/2011 BELFAST BIRMINGHAM 727.04 792.47 76.74

Y4IQIH 162970 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 15/09/2010 17/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM GLASGOW 836.54 911.83 88.30

4GF6HT 126627 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 12/09/2010 12/09/2010 HAMBURG BIRMINGHAM 794.47 865.97 83.86

3HMNS7 149666 University of Warwick - Warwick Ventures 29/08/2010 02/09/2010 LONDON CATANIA 3876.48 4225.36 470.96

45ZK3T 249889 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 06/07/2011 06/07/2011 LONDON GOTHENBURG 1068.28 1164.43 112.76

245MIW 155707 University of Warwick - Library Department 08/10/2010 08/10/2010 AMSTERDAM BIRMINGHAM 442.12 481.91 79.44





768YI9 225150 University of Warwick - Health and Social Studies 13/06/2011 16/06/2011 LONDON BELFAST 1005.06 1095.52 106.09

8LUABK 225217 University of Warwick - Health and Social Studies 13/06/2011 16/06/2011 LONDON BELFAST 1005.06 1095.52 106.09

6D4AID 184019 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 07/12/2010 07/12/2010 VIENNA LONDON 1250.37 1362.90 131.98

Z3S3OJ 197816 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 02/03/2011 04/03/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05

2UOCDZ 207623 University of Warwick - Politics and International Studies 07/04/2011 07/04/2011 STOCKHOLM LONDON 1461.96 1593.54 154.32

5VO44X 231374 University of Warwick - Health Sciences Research Institute 15/06/2011 15/06/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 402.86 439.12 72.38

3QP7ZO 218895 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 15/04/2011 15/04/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 402.86 439.12 72.38

4OZ26N 194433 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 14/02/2011 18/02/2011 BIRMINGHAM BELFAST 727.04 792.47 76.74

296EY6 166483 University of Warwick - Politics and International Studies 09/11/2010 10/11/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

296EY6 166483 University of Warwick - Politics and International Studies 09/11/2010 10/11/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

X4F5G6 162722 University of Warwick - Economics 05/11/2010 07/11/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

4ZVC9I 167438 University of Warwick - Warwick Systems Biology Centre 12/12/2010 16/12/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

2TBAYT 207747 University of Warwick - Health and Social Studies 15/03/2011 16/03/2011 BELFAST LONDON 1122.76 1223.81 118.51

4DYYLF 199438 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 10/04/2011 13/04/2011 BIRMINGHAM DUBLIN 643.04 700.91 67.88

49LQJZ 201006 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 10/04/2011 12/04/2011 BIRMINGHAM DUBLIN 643.04 700.91 67.88

238DCL 171542 University of Warwick - Library Department 09/11/2010 12/11/2010 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05

2IWXF4 155360 University of Warwick - Department of Physics 03/09/2010 03/09/2010 FRANKFURT BIRMINGHAM 764.72 833.54 80.72

3BCKPG 218317 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 18/04/2011 18/04/2011 LONDON ZURICH 788.43 859.39 83.22

237V8U 170692 University of Warwick - Library Department 10/11/2010 12/11/2010 LONDON EDINBURGH 1065.7 1161.61 112.49

5BBAVK 178636 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 31/10/2010 02/11/2010 BIRMINGHAM LONDON 1019.99 1111.79 107.67

YD7IPY 192873 University of Warwick - Computer Science 30/12/2010 30/12/2010 BIRMINGHAM PUDONG

INTERNATIONAL

9352.58 10194.31 1,136.26

44PTOL 253752 University of Warwick - Engineering 21/06/2011 22/06/2011 NANKING LONDON 9102.2 9921.40 1,105.84

ZZT9SN 227104 University of Warwick - Engineering 26/05/2011 26/05/2011 SEATTLE/TACOMA SALT LAKE CITY 1106.75 1206.36 116.82

ZZU88N 227221 University of Warwick - Engineering 26/05/2011 26/05/2011 SEATTLE/TACOMA SALT LAKE CITY 1106.75 1206.36 116.82

ZUIBWZ 135358 University of Warwick - Health and Social Studies 07/09/2010 08/09/2010 BELFAST LONDON 1005.06 1095.52 106.09

4GFXFE 126586 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 29/08/2010 29/08/2010 BIRMINGHAM FRANKFURT 764.72 833.54 80.72

485582 191499 University of Warwick - Department of Physics 17/01/2011 21/01/2011 LONDON PISA 2295.95 2502.59 242.35

Z42M7Z 197819 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 02/03/2011 06/03/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05

Z42M7Z 197819 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 02/03/2011 06/03/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05

5VPDYE 231375 University of Warwick - Health Sciences Research Institute 15/06/2011 17/06/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05

4PAKRZ 251583 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 19/07/2011 19/07/2011 BIRMINGHAM GLASGOW 836.54 911.83 88.30

4QENWI 229497 University of Warwick - Engineering 01/06/2011 01/06/2011 SALT LAKE CITY SEATTLE/TACOMA 1106.75 1206.36 116.82

4QENWI 229497 University of Warwick - Engineering 01/06/2011 01/06/2011 SALT LAKE CITY SEATTLE/TACOMA 1106.75 1206.36 116.82

5MYQ4P 201019 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 10/04/2011 13/04/2011 BIRMINGHAM DUBLIN 643.04 700.91 67.88

X34XRV 204829 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 10/04/2011 13/04/2011 BIRMINGHAM DUBLIN 643.04 700.91 67.88

2UCJX5 229792 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 22/06/2011 23/06/2011 BIRMINGHAM GLASGOW 836.54 911.83 88.30

3J3RZI 229795 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 26/06/2011 29/06/2011 BIRMINGHAM DUBLIN 643.04 700.91 67.88

YGZHH4 149265 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 05/09/2010 08/09/2010 LONDON BELFAST 1005.06 1095.52 106.09

2HRSWX 124285 University of Warwick 17/09/2010 26/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

6ZVIIB 202532 University of Warwick - Department of Physics 09/02/2011 12/02/2011 GENEVA BIRMINGHAM 1788.53 1949.50 188.79

4KEL7R 142283 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 20/09/2010 24/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM PARIS 975.06 1062.82 102.92

4XHBRA 210908 University of Warwick - Warwick Systems Biology Centre 29/03/2011 31/03/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05



7W8BNE 213781 University of Warwick - Warwick Systems Biology Centre 29/03/2011 31/03/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05

7W8BNE 213781 University of Warwick - Warwick Systems Biology Centre 29/03/2011 31/03/2011 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05

Z7KHXP 246352 University of Warwick - Economics 11/07/2011 16/07/2011 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

X9IY2J 194714 University of Warwick - Engineering 20/01/2011 01/02/2011 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

2EKH2S 226099 University of Warwick - Computer Science 13/04/2011 28/04/2011 BIRMINGHAM ORLANDO 17031.63 18564.48 2,069.20

2QMB3I 171755 University of Warwick - Mathematics 14/11/2010 17/11/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

YPZDYJ 155780 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 23/08/2010 24/08/2010 BRISTOL GLASGOW 1023.54 1115.66 108.04

YPZDYJ 155780 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 23/08/2010 24/08/2010 BRISTOL GLASGOW 1023.54 1115.66 108.04

6UBUUO 222952 University of Warwick - Health and Social Studies 17/05/2011 21/05/2011 TOULOUSE PARIS 1143.68 1246.61 120.72

4JXL2U 191446 University of Warwick - Computer Science 12/02/2011 26/02/2011 LONDON BUCHAREST 4223.21 4603.30 513.08

YB3K7X 153077 University of Warwick - Centre for Studies in Democratisation 21/10/2010 24/10/2010 BIRMINGHAM FRANKFURT 1529.43 1667.08 161.44

ZPMHPL 216673 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 06/07/2011 09/07/2011 LONDON GOTHENBURG 2136.56 2328.85 225.53

6CNM36 211462 University of Warwick - Center for Discrete Mathematics and its Applications 01/05/2011 01/05/2011 FRANKFURT BIRMINGHAM 764.72 833.54 80.72

4ZEGAY 143407 University of Warwick - Library Department 09/08/2010 10/08/2010 BIRMINGHAM DUNDEE 904.42 985.82 95.47

X2T2PI 173354 University of Warwick - Economics 06/11/2010 07/11/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

YE5OHT 148293 University of Warwick - Politics and International Studies 03/10/2010 03/10/2010 GOTHENBURG BIRMINGHAM 1061.6 1157.14 112.06

2J7VML 135364 University of Warwick - Health and Social Studies 07/09/2010 08/09/2010 STOCKHOLM LONDON 2923.92 3187.07 308.64

3OK79O 136836 University of Warwick - Health and Social Studies 06/09/2010 08/09/2010 STOCKHOLM LONDON 2923.92 3187.07 308.64

4MBUKO 143362 University of Warwick - Mathematics 18/09/2010 25/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM AMSTERDAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

4CFGV9 249271 University of Warwick - Economics 06/07/2011 14/07/2011 MANCHESTER LISBON 3405.44 3711.93 413.73

4CFEJC 249272 University of Warwick - Economics 24/06/2011 30/06/2011 MANCHESTER LISBON 3405.44 3711.93 413.73

3Z295G 195472 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 01/02/2011 01/02/2011 BIRMINGHAM GLASGOW 836.54 911.83 88.30

Z5FM5H 149714 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 31/08/2010 03/09/2010 LONDON COPENHAGEN 1958.32 2134.57 206.71

X43RL3 216225 University of Warwick - Engineering 09/03/2011 11/03/2011 LONDON AMSTERDAM 707.67 771.36 74.70

ZWW2QV 198932 University of Warwick - Sociology 10/02/2011 28/02/2011 BIRMINGHAM PORT BLAIR

ANDAMAN ISL.

17279.58 18834.74 2,099.32

Y4IQIH 129696 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 15/09/2010 17/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM GLASGOW 836.54 911.83 88.30

Y3FZE8 129700 University of Warwick - Warwick Medical School 13/09/2010 17/09/2010 BIRMINGHAM GLASGOW 836.54 911.83 88.30

7OYPSS 185758 University of Warwick - Warwick Systems Biology Centre 18/12/2010 23/12/2010 AMSTERDAM BIRMINGHAM 0.00 0.00

ZII5Y5 206075 University of Warwick - Politics and International Studies 09/03/2011 12/03/2011 AMSTERDAM BIRMINGHAM 884.24 963.82 93.34

556JJL 183727 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 16/03/2011 30/03/2011 LONDON STOCKHOLM 2923.92 3187.07 308.64

ZGC37P 206670 University of Warwick - Comparative American Studies 26/05/2011 29/05/2011 BIRMINGHAM SHANNON 971.08 1058.48 102.50

2HOTGB 227621 University of Warwick - Engineering 07/07/2011 07/07/2011 BUDAPEST LONDON 1488.94 1622.94 157.17

YHO4GE 8012564 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 24/11/2010 28/11/2010 LONDON BARCELONA 2296.89 2503.61 242.45

YPHGKQ 195474 University of Warwick - Warwick Business School 14/01/2011 14/01/2011 DUBLIN BIRMINGHAM 643.04 700.91 67.88

ZDXV5W 144305 University of Warwick - Computer Science 15/08/2010 20/08/2010 BIRMINGHAM PARIS 975.06 1062.82 102.92

ZP5LC3 158905 University of Warwick - Warwick Systems Biology Centre 09/10/2010 16/10/2010 BIRMINGHAM EDINBURGH 805.71 878.22 85.05



Warwick University Air Carbon Foot Print Aug 10 - Jul 11

From To Miles KM KGC02

BHX AMS 276 444 73

AMS BHX 276 444 73

LHR SIN 6765 10885 1213

SIN LHR 6765 10885 1213

BHX DUB 200 322 53

DUB BHX 200 322 53

LHR JNB 5621 9044 1008

JNB LHR 5621 9044 1008

LGW VRN 646 1039 101

VRN LGW 646 1039 101

EDI LGW 357 574 56

LGW EDI 357 574 56

LGW VCE 696 1120 108

VCE EDI 994 1599 155

BHX FRA 477 767 74

FRA YYC 4692 7549 841

YYC FRA 4692 7549 841

FRA BHX 477 767 74

BHX AMS 276 444 73

AMS ACC 3230 5197 579

ACC AMS 3230 5197 579

AMS BHX 276 444 73

LHR ADD 3675 5913 659

ADD MQX 313 504 49

MQX ADD 313 504 49

ADD JNB 2516 4048 451

JNB ADD 2516 4048 451

ADD LHR 3675 5913 659

BHX AMS 276 444 73

AMS JNB 5584 8985 1001

JNB AMS 5584 8985 1001

AMS BHX 276 444 73

LHR DUS 313 504 49

DUS FRA 117 188 31

FRA ATH 1130 1818 176

ATH LHR 1510 2430 235

LGW VCE 696 1120 108

LHR AMS 231 372 61

AMS MNL 6479 10425 1162

MNL KUL 1546 2488 241

KUL AMS 6363 10238 1141

AMS LHR 231 372 61

MNL BKK 1361 2190 212

BKK KUL 754 1213 117

Appendix F: Carbon Management Matrix – Embedding. Current status

highlighted.POLICY ORGANISATION INFORMATION AND

DATA

COMMUNICATION AND

TRAINING

FINANCE MONITORING &

EVALUATION

5 Specific

sustainability /

climate change

policy with targets

signed off and

implemented.

Action plan with

clear goals and

regular reviews to

confirm actions

undertaken and

targets

achieved/being

progressed.

Accountabilities for

sustainability /climate

change defined at senior

level

Sustainability / climate

change responsibilities

integrated into

responsibilities of relevant

people in different

departments, e.g.

Teaching, Finance, Estates

CO2e emissions

compiled for all main

HEI sources for a

baseline year and

regular collation of

annual emissions

data.

Data externally

verified.

Formalised

communication and

training plan for all staff

on carbon and energy

related matters,

including integration in

induction and other

normal training

processes.

Communication on

carbon and energy

related matters with the

academic and student

body and other key

business partners

Use of innovative

external funding

mechanisms for

carbon related

projects.

Development of

internal financing

mechanisms, e.g.

self sustaining

fund, specifically

for carbon related

projects

Management

Review of carbon

management

process by senior

management.

Regular reviews by

core team on

progress with

carbon

management.

4 Specific

sustainability /

climate change

policy with targets

developed and

signed off, but not

implemented


change responsibilities

integrated into

responsibilities of relevant

people in different

departments, e.g.

Teaching, Finance, Estates

CO2e emissions

compiled for all main

HEI sources for a

baseline year (i.e.

buildings, transport

and commuting, etc.

Data internally

reviewed.

Formalised

communication and

training plan for all staff

on carbon and energy

related matters,

including integration in

induction and other

training, and awareness

raising

Strategic plan for

developing internal

financing

mechanisms and

obtaining funds

from external

sources

Regular reviews on

progress with

carbon

management (e.g.

review of actions,

check against

emissions profile

and targets,

addition of new

opportunities etc.)

3 Sustainability /

Climate change

included in wider

policy documents


change/ carbon

management is part-time

responsibility of moderate

ranking personnel, e.g.

Energy Manager,

Sustainability/Environment

Officer

CO2e emissions data

compiled for some

sources for a

baseline year (e.g.

buildings) and source

data available for

other sources (e.g.

transport)

Ad hoc communication

and training delivered to

all staff/students on

carbon and energy

related matters

Some internal

financing on an ad

hoc basis for

carbon and/or

energy efficiency

related projects

Review conducted

on applicable

external funding

sources

Ad hoc assessment

of all aspects of

carbon/energy

policies/strategies,

targets and action

plans

2 Sustainability /

Climate change as

an aspiration in

non-policy

documents


change/carbon

management is part-time

responsibility of low

ranking personnel

No CO2e emissions

data compiled for

any sources but

energy data

compiled on a

regular basis

Communication and

training to specific

groups in the HEI (e.g.

environment team) on

carbon/energy related

matters

Some internal

financing on an ad

hoc basis for

carbon and/or

energy efficiency

related projects

Ad hoc reviews of

specific aspects of

carbon/energy


targets and action

plans

1 No sustainability /

climate change

policy or strategy

and no mention of

climate change in

policy/strategy

documents

No individual with

responsibility for

sustainability / climate

change issues

No CO2e emissions

data compiled for

any sources and

energy data not

compiled on a

regular basis

No communication or

training to staff/students

on carbon or energy

related matters

No internal

financing or

funding for carbon

and/or energy

efficiency related

projects

No monitoring of

carbon/energy


targets and action

plans

Appendix G: Document Change Record 2013 - 2014

Executive Summary.

2005 - 06 Baseline emissions changed from 47,028 to 46,540 tonnes based on 2013 update to DEFRA

document “2013 Government GHG Conversion Factors for Company Reporting: Methodology Paper for

Emission Factors: July 2013” and guidance therein on historical reporting of emissions related to grid

electricity.

2008 – 09 Emissions figure updated according to above document.

Projections for Carbon Savings from Cryfield Energy Centre reduced in line with latest modelling.

1.4 Achievements So Far.

Projections for Carbon Savings from Cryfield Energy Centre reduced in line with latest modelling.

3.2 Baseline and assumptions

2005-6 Baseline emissions from electricity changed from 20,076 to 19,816 based on 2012 update to DEFRAdocument “Greenhouse Gas Conversion Factors for Company Reporting” and guidance therein on historicalreporting

2008-9 Emissions data updated according to changes in historical grid electricity emissions factor publishedby DEFRA in 2012

2020 carbon management implementation plan the university ... · foreword from the carbon trust...

Documents