final report - kairos canada
Post on 26-Oct-2021
3 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Final Report
1
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.cainfo@sustainabilitysolutions.ca
West1281 Denman St., Victoria BC, V8T 1L7Phone: 250 213 9029
Central3516 Avenue du ParcMontreal, QCH2X 2H7Phone: 514 5044011
East11 Alex Cox RdTatamagouche, NSB0K1V0Phone: 250 2139029
Summary
The total estimate of greenhouse gas emissions produced at-
tributable to KAIROS is 324 tonnes per year. Figure 1 illustrates
the breakdown of these emissions according to end use. Travel
by KAIROS staff accounts for 231 tonnes, 59 tonnes are produced
due to heating, commuting accounts for 24 tonnes and 9.7 tonnes
result from the electrical load. Waste production produces less
then one tonne.
What does 324 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions mean? Is this
total a lot or a little? An indicator that is useful to place these emis-
sions in the global political context is to break the emissions down
per full time employee. The organization therefore emits 12.6
tonnes per full time employee. Figure 2 places this total in context
by highlighting per capita emissions from a range of jurisdictions.
This is not meant as a straight comparison, as the per capita emis-
sions for the examples given include all sources of greenhouse gas
emissions within the respective jurisdictions (ie. shared infrastruc-
ture, industry, etc.), whereas KAIROS’ emissions include only direct
work-related emissions. It does, however, provide a sense of the scale
of KAIROS’ greenhouse gas emissions impact comparatively. Table
1 uses an EPA calculator to equate this volume of emissions with, for
example, the number of gallons of gasoline that would need to be
burnt to equal 324 tonnes of greenhouse gas. emissions.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions of KAIROS
0
50
100
150
200
250
Co
mm
uti
ng
Was
te
Trav
el
Elec
tric
ity
Hea
tin
g
Figure 1: Kairos GHG Emissions by Source (tonnes CO2e)
0
5
10
15
20
25
Ind
ia
Ind
on
esia
Wo
rld
UK
Kai
ros
FTE
On
tari
o
Can
ada
0.00.20.40.60.81.0
0.00.20.40.60.81.0
Figure 2: Context (per capita tonnes CO2e)
Number Item
8304 Tree seedlings grown for 10 years
1.7 Number of railcars of coal
36,761 Gallons of gasoline
59.3 Number of passenger vehicles (one years worth of driving)
Table 1: KAIROS’ greenhouse gas emissions is equivalent to (EPA, 2007):
2
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
The majority of emissions are due to plane travel. SSG recommends the distinction of plane
travel critical to the work of KAIROS, which we call critical emissions and non-essential or non-
critical emissions. Non-critical emissions includes emissions that could be reduced without
restricting the operations of the organisations, for example, substituting bus or train travel
for short haul flights. In addition to travel emissions, major improvements can be made in the
areas of heating, and electricity consumption. Finally, improvements to information manage-
ment and data collection pertaining activities that produce GHG emission will need to be
developed to accurately track performance and improvements.
Greenhouse gases, global warming potentials and carbon
dioxide equivalents (CO2e) (IPCC,, 2001)
An over accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere form a
layer that traps the sun’s heat, causing the planet to warm. This is referred
to as the greenhouse effect. There are many different greenhouse gases,
all impacting the ‘greenhouse effect’ with varying intensities.
Global warming potentials (GWPs) are used to compare the abilities of
different greenhouse gases to trap heat in the atmosphere. GWPs are
based on the radiative efficiency (heat-absorbing ability) of each gas
relative to that of carbon dioxide (CO2), as well as the decay rate of
each gas (the rate at which the gases die off and stop absorbing heat)
relative to that of CO2. The GWP provides a method for converting
emissions of various gases into a common measure, denominated in
carbon or carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e). Greenhouse gas emissions
tend to be listed as CO2e.
3
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
1. Background
SSG was commissioned by KAIROS to analyse greenhouse gas emissions resulting from its operations. This
process was conducted with KAIROS staff support, in particular by Dorothy McDougall.
2. Methodology
2.1 A Precautionary Approach
Due to various data limitations (detailed below in section 2.4) a range of assumption were made to cal-
culate an estimated total of greenhouse gas emissions attributable to KAIROS. Since it is not possible to
calculate the actual totals in many cases, we ensured that the estimates for electricity and gas consump-
tion tend to the higher side by selecting the upper range of reasonable values for the assumptions. For this
reason, SSG believes that if it were possible to track every single kilogram of carbon dioxide released due to
the activities of KAIROS, the total would very likely be less then the total presented here. This precautionary
approach has the advantage of avoiding the leakage that results when organisations or companies under-
claim their emissions.
2. 2 Scope
Greenhouse gas emissions were considered from travel, heating, electricity usage, commuting and waste
production for the year 2007. The waste data was collected in November of 2007 and extrapolated for
twelve months. Only staff from the Toronto KAIROS office were considered in the evaluation.
2. 3 Techniques
Data collection strategies used included an online survey for staff (18 respondents), electricity consumption
of equipment to establish a baseline, repeated electricity audits of equipment use, a waste audit, interviews
with key staff and consultants and review of background documentation. Emissions factors used to convert
energy consumption to greenhouse gas production were derived by the Intergovernmental Panel on Cli-
mate Change (Eggelston et al, 2006).
4
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
2.4 Assumptions
The following assumptions were used. For more detail, please see the results section.
• An estimation of electricity demand attributable to KAIROS was necessary because electricity bills
apply to the entire church. Data from an end use survey was used to generate this estimate.
• Assumptions regarding the heating requirements of the office space were necessary because gas for
heating is neither metered nor paid for, and is therefore impossible to track accurately.
• Because invoice records don’t clearly delineate travel, online survey data was used to identify travel
by employees. The average travel behaviour of the 18 individuals (equal to 15 FTE, or 58 %) that
responded to the survey was assumed to be representative of the organization of a whole.
• Similarly, the commuting patterns of employees were calculated based on the results of the online
survey (58% sample size).
• A waste audit was undertaken for the period of one week and was assumed to be representative of
one year.
• Travel by volunteers, including board members, was not included.
5
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
3. Results
3. 1 Heating
Total greenhouse gas emissions stemming from heating are 59 tonnes. The
office is an annex to a church in Toronto, built as a Sunday school in 1931
(Figure 3). The walls are uninsulated stone and a portion of the windows have
been replaced with double-paned units five years ago. Steam from a gas
boiler in a neighbouring building heats the church; heat levels are controlled
by a manual valve. The only data available comes from an energy consult-
ant report on heating performed in 2006 by MCE Consultants Ltd. The report
considered the church as a whole including the office space, including the
unusual heating characteristics of church hall (Figure 4), so
it was not considered a reasonable approximation to the
more standard requirements of the office space.
The approach used was to identify the average energy
consumption of commercial/institutional buildings con-
structed in the same period that the church was built in
Ontario, and to assume this demand for the KAIROS office.
This is a reasonable approach given that the office space
is essentially an office building consistent with those built
during the era that has been added to the church. Natural
Resources Canada (2003) estimates that buildings con-
structed between 1920 and 1959 had an energy demand
of between 1.58 and 1.68 Gig joules per square metre of
space (GJ/m2). A provincial analysis in the same docu-
ments indicates that buildings in Ontario are at the high
end of the average. The analysis therefore assumed an en-
ergy demand of 1.7 GJ/m2 with resulting greenhouse gas
emissions of 59.9 tonnes per annum. This was calculated
based on office space of 548.8 square metres.
Figure 3: Kairos Office Space
Figure 4: Church space distorts heating bills
Definition:
A gigajoule (GJ)
is a metric term
used for measur-
ing energy use. For
example, accord-
ing to Natural
Resources Canada,
1GJ is equivalent
to the amount of
energy available
from 277.8 kWh of
electricity, 26.3 m3
of natural gas, or
25.9 litres of heat-
ing oil.
6
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
3. 2 Electricity
Total greenhouse gas emissions stemming from electricity are 9.7 tonnes. Calculating
the electricity load for the office space faced a similar challenge. Three years of data
on a monthly basis was available for the building as a whole, and so it was necessary
to calculate the portion attributable to KAIROS. This was calculated using a usage
survey. Using a handheld meter, KAIROS staff member Dorothy McDougall created
an inventory of the electric appliances and their energy demand. She undertook
seven audits at three different times of day to identify which pieces of equipment
were consuming electricity. This data was run through a simple statistical analysis to
generate average electricity consumption patterns for two distinct periods including
during the work day and outside of the work day. This analysis estimated that the
office electricity demand was 3654 kWh per month. Monthly bills for the church in
December for the last three years were over 10,000 kWh, resulting in a largely unex-
plainable 6500 kWh demand. Usually such an extensive demand would be attribut-
able to space heating, however, in this case, the explanation doesn’t fit, as the heating
for the building is gas with the exception of some space heaters. There are seven 1400
Watt electric heaters, but because of over-heating in the building in the winter (to
the extent that windows are opened in some spaces due
to poor heat distribution), it is not reasonable to assume
the heaters are always on. If the160 flourescent strips were
left on twenty-four hours per day, the maximum possible
consumption is 2500 kWh per month. The survey, however,
indicated that during the work day on average one third of
the lights were on and janitorial staff shuts off all the lights
at night. This electricity load remains unknown and further
investigation is required to identify this load.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Mis
cella
neo
us
Inca
nd
esce
nt
Flo
ure
scen
ts
Hea
ters
Co
mp
ute
rs
Figure 5: End Use Electricity Demand (kWh)
7
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
3.3 Commuting
Total greenhouse gas emissions stemming from commuting are 0.576 tonnes. Eight-
een people representing fifteen full time equivalents responded to the online survey.
They reported their trips on a percentage basis over the course of the week by mode
including bus, subway, car (single occupant), car
pooling, biking and roller blading, and walking and
running. Respondents all indicated weekly commuting
distances. These distances were weighted by the per-
centages and a total distance for the 15 FTE was calcu-
lated by mode. This was then scaled up to 25.75 fulltime
equivalent (FTE) so as to represent the entire KAIROS
organisation and the distances were run through SSG’s
GHG calculator. This FTE does not include volunteers or
board members, but only staff members.
3.4 Travel
Total greenhouse gas emissions stemming from
travel are 190 tonnes. KAIROS employees also reported
on distances and mode for work-related travel. This was
compiled and greenhouse gas emissions were calculated.
Bus, train and vehicle emissions were calculated using
SSG’s travel calculator while airplane emissions were cal-
culated using Atmosfair’s model. The results were scaled
up to represent 25.75 FTE. By far, most of the emissions
were generated from plane flights (Figure 7), particularly
to international generations.
0
5
10
15
20
Sub
wayBu
s
Car
shar
e
Car
Figure 6: Commuting Emissions (kg CO2e)
0
30000
60000
90000
120000
150000
Car
s
Bu
ses
Trai
ns
Plan
es
Figure 7: Travel Emissions (kg CO2e)
8
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
3.5 Waste
Total greenhouse gas emissions stemming from waste are 0.139 tonnes. KAIROS staff member Dorothy
McDougall completed a waste audit. While there was a high percentages of recyclables and composta-
bles in the waste stream, the contribution to total greenhouse gas emissions was marginal.
Waste Stream kg
Pure waste 39
Recyclables 26
Compostables 39
Hazardous 0
Table 1: Annual Waste (kg)
Figure 8: Waste Audit
9
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
4. Analysis
In order to present a picture of the activities that contribute to KAIROS’ greenhouse gas emissions, we
compiled a set of indicators, which might be titled ‘a day in the life’. The indicators represent averages for
the organisation as a whole. By reducing these averages, KAIROS will reduce its greenhouse gas emis-
sions. The organisation can set targets
based on these averages.
In undertaking the analysis, it was imme-
diately clear that plane flights will be the
problematic aspect of KAIROS’ greenhouse
gas emissions, as they facilitate key aspects
of KAIROS’ work. The approach adopted
therefore recommends separating
emissions into two categories: critical and
non-critical. Non-critical emissions are those
which can and should be reduced or elimi-
nated without compromising the ability of
KAIROS to do its work. Critical emissions,
on the other hand, are deemed neces-
sary for the work of KAIROS, for example
participating in a World Social Forum or
other events that are far enough away to war-
rant a plane trip. While it is not impossible to
reduce these emissions, it may involve more
profound consideration regarding KAIROS’
mission and activities. Clearly delineating
these categories is important so that guilt does
not accompany staff, for example, while flying
to a meeting on climate change negotiations or driving to Peel, ON to make a presentation on interna-
tional trade. It also ensures that efforts to reduce emissions are not impeding the ability of KAIROS to ful-
Computers on 11.4
Monitors on 19.1
Incandescent lights on 7
Fllouescents on 24
Ghost loads 17 not including computers
Commute by car (single passenger) 4
Commute by car (car pool) 1
Bus 3
Subway 12
Bike/rollerblade 4
Walk 1
Table 3: Average electrical load per hour (24 hour day)
Table 4: Mode of commute by number of staff, averaged)
Plane 604
Train 18
Bus 0.09
Car 11
Table 5: Travel-related GHG averaged per day for Kairos (kgCO2e assuming a 365 day year)
GJ per day 2.56
Table 6: Average Heating Eneryg per day (365 days)
10
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
fill its mission (unless there is a willingness to explore changing the vision). Given this challenge, and that
offsetting comes with a host of moral, social and political challenges, we believe that KAIROS should not
strive to be a carbon neutral organisation. Many definitions of carbon neutrality abound, and there is no
consensus how to achieve carbon neutrality so we believe that focusing on the elimination, rather then
the offsetting, of emissions is a carbon mitigation strategy this is transparent and has integrity. For those
emissions which cannot be eliminated, we would like to suggest that KAIROS consider a self-imposed
carbon tax per tonne of GHGs emitted each year and that these funds be directed to activities that have
a positive impact on GHG reductions, either internally or externally to KAIROS. The dark blue slice of the
pie in Figure 9, called critical emissions (flights more than 500 kilometres) will require careful considera-
tion by KAIROS as the organisation strives to reduce emissions. Reductions from short flights (less than
500 km) can occur through shifting the mode of transportation from plane to train or bus rides. Reduc-
tions form long flights considered to be ‘critical emissions’ can occur through limitation of long distance
travel and exploration of other means to maintain communications with partners over long distances.
Every other source of greenhouse gas emissions can be significantly reduced and this is highlighted in
particular by the ‘day in the life’ tables on page 7. For example, if one steps into the office at 2am or 2pm,
they will find an average of 11 computers on and nine monitors on- it is these aspects that can easily
change. Another factor is the heating system- it is a high priority to reduce the natural gas consumption
of the office building. While heating an uninsulated building with natural gas is a poor energy conserva-
tion strategy in general, doing so without thermal controls that can be operated by the occupants (who
are thus forced to open windows to compensate for overheating) is an extremely poor energy conserva-
tion strategy.
In the area of commuting, KAIROS employees
are more successful and strongly favour the
metro.
CommutingWasteNon-Critical TravelCritical TravelElectricityHeating
Commuting
Waste
Non-Critical Travel
Critical Travel
Electricity
Heating
Figure 9: Critical vs. Non-Critical Emissions (t CO2e)
11
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
5. Conclusion
The imperative for organisations, of whatever type in whatever sector, to address climate change in a
profound and meaningful way today, as it will surely be mandatory tomorrow. There are many forms,
however, that this engagement can take, both internally - known as getting the house in order - and
externally, as an activist.
KAIROS has taken the initial step of taking stock, answering the question “how many greenhouse gas
emissions result from one year’s operations by KAIROS.?” The colloray question is then what is to be
done about it?
One approach to addressing greenhouse gas emissions is summed up by the words reduce, produce,
offset. The first step is to reduce production of greenhouse gas emissions wherever possible. The sec-
ond step is to produce energy using clean generation strategies. The third step is to offset remaining
emissions. (Offsetting can take many forms which can be discussed later on, but we do not recommend
participating in the carbon offsets market.)
In this report, we have not developed a detailed set of recommendations; we propose that this be done
as part of a multi-stakeholder committee at KAIROS, after the information in this report is properly
disseminated. This participatory approach ensures a diverse range of ideas, organisational buy-in and
breaks through traditional consultant-client silo and solitudes.
Postscript: Recommendations were developed in a participatory session. They are included in Appen-
dix 1.
12
Sustainability Solutions Groupwww.sustainabilitysolutions.ca
6. Bibliography
Atmosfair (2006). The atmosfair emissions calculator. Available at www.atmosfair.de.
Eggelston, S., Buendia, L., Miwa, K., Ngara, T., and Tanabe K. (2006). 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Avail-able at: www.ipcc.ch.
Environmental Protection Agency (2007). Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator. Avail-able at: http://www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/energy-resources/calculator.html.
International Panel on Climate Change (2001). Third Assessment Report, 2001.
http://www.ipcc.ch/pub/wg1TARtechsum.pdf, last accessed December 02, 2006
Herzog, T., Pershing, J., Baumert, K. (2005). Navigating the numbers; Greenhouse gas data and international climate policy. World Resources Institute: Washington, DC.
Office of Energy Efficiency (2003). Commercial and institutional building energy use survey 2000. Natural Resources Canada. http://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/corporate/statistics/neud/dpa/data_e/Cibeus2/energy_intensity.cfm?PrintView=N&Text=N
Category Recommendation Cost / Savings
KAIROS to set GHG reduction targets n/a KAIROS as an organization needs to have a conversation on how to achieve its mission in a way that is not carbon intensive and to develop organizational strategies to accomplish its goals.
n/a
Monthly travel tracking by all KAIROS staff, including GHG emissions n/a Pay a carbon tax on GHG emissions annually (money could be allocated to higher cost of train tickets, or manual meters, etc.)
TBA (~ $20/tonne)
Expand scope of assessment to include other KAIROS stakeholder activities n/a Expand scope to include procurement policies (priority purchasing for local goods/with low carbon footprints)
variable
Conduct annual or biannual GHG inventories n/a (if done internally)
Develop an internal energy policy n/aDevelop a permanent committee to coordinate GHG redcution activities n/a Develop a follow up plan for this recommendations n/a
General
Allocate financial resources in annual budget for GHG reductions activities variable
Develop clear guidelines to distinguish between critical and non critical travel in relationship to Kairos' mission
n/a
Train/bus/carpool policy for distances under 500 km variable (~ +/-15% )
Seek arrangement with Viarail for discounted train tickets Savings! Investigate possibility of a work-at-home arrangement Develop internal KAIROS commuting plan (car pool; biking; incentives) n/a
Transportation
Develop air travel guidelines for trips over 500 km. Program all computers to have sleep mode for monitor and hard disk after ten minutes Savings!
Replace all T12 strip lights with T8 bulbs (fluorescents) Bulbs ~$10 each
Replace all incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescents ~$3 each Develop and implemment an awareness programme around electricity consumption for KAIROS staff (turn off computers at night; lights off when not in room; compostables in garbage)
n/a
Ensure air conditioner level setting does not go below below 24 - 25 degrees. Experiment with turning it off at night then back on in the mornings. Depending on the humidity and the heat, this will work to save energy without greatly compromising the comfortability of the indoor space.
Savings!
If KAIROS stays in current building: separate electricity bills and metering for KAIROS
Ensure new electricity consuming equipment purchases are 'Energy Star' certified ~+/- $10 Investigate the purchase of renewable electricity (monthly premium). Example: Bullfrog http://www.bullfrogpower.com/
~ 30% increase over
current electricbills
Electricity
Assess existing equipment to determine what needs to be replaced When choosing a new space mandate search committee to consider the issue of energy
consumption in their deliberations. If KAIROS stays in current building: Install ceiling fans for more even heat distribution ~ $300 per
Energy Star fan
If KAIROS stays in current building: If possible, install manual controls for heating (thermostats)
Heating If KAIROS stays in the current building: Hold a design charette with builing and heat professionals to develop a renovations plan. This plan could include explorations of: entering into an energy services contract (company pays for renewable energy retrofits, then KAIROS/building enters into a long term purchasing agreement with them. Example service providers: Mondial Energy, Johnson Controls
More research needs to be
done
Reduce amount of compost and recycling in waste stream n/a Waste
Conduct annual waste audits to n/a
Appendix 1: Recommendations
top related