Greenhouse Gas Inventory

download Greenhouse Gas Inventory

If you can't read please download the document

  • date post

    07-Mar-2016
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    222
  • download

    3

Embed Size (px)

description

Greenhouse Gas Inventory and Carbon Management Strategy

Transcript of Greenhouse Gas Inventory

  • REPORT ON

    Submitted to: Royal BC Museum Corporation

    675 Belleville Street Victoria, BC V8W 9W2

    DISTRIBUTION: 2 Copies - Royal BC Museum Corporation 2 Copies - Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd. July 2, 2008 07-1018-0023

    GREENHOUSE GAS INVENTORY

    AND CARBON MANAGEMENT STRATEGY

    FOR THE ROYAL BC MUSEUM CORPORATION

    Phone: 250-881-7372Fax: 250-881-7470Email: [email protected]

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    2640 Douglas StreetVictoria, British ColumbiaCanada V8T 4M1

    www.golderecofyssolutions.comYour source to sustainable energy

  • July 2008 - i - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd. (GESL) was contracted by Royal BC Museum Corporation (RBCM) to prepare a Scoping Study, including a Greenhouse Gas (carbon) inventory, and the business case to implement a Carbon Management Strategy for RBCMs facility located at 675 Belleville Street in Victoria, British Columbia. The need for this work is driven by the 2007 Provincial Throne Speech and subsequent GHG Reduction Act which requires that all Province of British Columbia entities, including crown agencies, to be carbon neutral by 2010.

    The methodology used in the scoping study was to develop baseline information and carbon management plan recommendations by compiling carbon inventories, identifying and quantifying potential reduction measures and conducting a carbon awareness and capacity survey of the organization. Based on this work specific carbon management and related strategies were recommended.

    A carbon inventory was developed to quantify carbon emissions for the past three years (2005 2007). Inventory development was generally consistent with methodologies outlined in existing protocols including those developed by the Climate Registry, California Climate Action Registry and World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD)/World Resource Institute (WRI). Emissions from natural gas consumption, the company vehicle, electricity consumption, air travel, boat travel, and taxis were included in the inventory. The carbon inventory results showed that emissions in 2005 and 2006 were very similar (126,467 and 125,702 kg CO2e for 2005 and 2006 respectively), however total annual carbon emissions (kg CO2e) increased by approximately 10% between 2006 and 2007 to 138,356 kgs of CO2e, or as more commonly used 138.4 tonnes of CO2e. This is primarily due to an increase in electricity consumption, as well as an increase in air travel. Although grid-based electricity in BC is relatively low in related GHG emissions, electricity consumption at RBCM was found to be the largest source of carbon emissions representing between 76% and 82% of total emissions in 2005-2007. BCs low carbon grid GHG intensity becomes an issue in that, as an alternative, switching to renewable energy locally does not cost-effectively yield significant reductions in carbon emissions. However, RBCM may consider implementing renewable energy locally for other reasons.

    A carbon awareness and capacity survey was completed by 90 RBCM staff and volunteers. The survey was intended to provide information about attitude, habits and knowledge of individual staff and the organizations culture towards energy efficiency issue engagement as well as the technical tools available to influence energy consumption. Generally respondents were optimistic about their own knowledge, habits and attitudes, both about climate change, GHG emissions and the environment in general.

  • July 2008 - ii - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    The opinion of the organization, technologies available for individuals to reduce energy and overall culture of energy awareness was less positive. Accepting the results as indicative for RBCM as a whole, the conclusion is that RBCM needs to work on approaches to harness interest and knowledge that is present within their organization and provide the tools, incentives and organization commitment to reduce energy consumption and other environmental impacts.

    Potential carbon emission reduction opportunities identified within the Facility Condition Assessment Final Report were quantified using CarMan software to develop a Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC). The MACC shows the effect of carbon reduction measures (amount of carbon emissions reduced) and the cost associated with the implementation of each measure. MACC analysis indicates that the combined result of all reduction measures currently identified is not enough to reach carbon neutrality. However, approximately 17 tonnes per year of carbon emission reduction can be achieved at a cost lower than the current market price for carbon credits (approximate $5 US/tonne), although it is unknown if purchase of such credits will be an option for BC organizations at this time.

    Based on its 2007 inventory of 138.4 tonnes CO2e, on our current understanding the provincial governments plans for the Pacific Carbon Trust, and on a cost of $25 per tonne CO2e which is being promoted by the provincial govt as the cost of travel-related carbon emissions, RBCM currently faces a cost of approximately $3,500 to achieve carbon neutrality. A conservative estimate for budget purposes in 2010, when carbon neutrality is required, would be approximately $5,000 plus reporting costs. These costs may escalate if carbon emissions increase and depend on changes in the price of carbon.

    GESL recommends that RBCM only undertake currently cost effective, or near cost effective carbon mitigation measures, typically energy efficiency and energy management measures, and purchase carbon offsets when, as appears likely, they are made available through the Pacific Carbon Trust.

    However, it should be emphasized that RBCM has a very motivated staff. To do nothing to manage its carbon and other environmental impacts would be to lose the opportunity to provide leadership and to present RBCM as a dynamic change agent within its community. In light of this, the following recommendations are broader than just carbon management, but do build on these objectives:

    1. Continue to maintain RBCMs carbon inventory per apparent regulatory requirements, but also as the basis for future risk and opportunity assessment.

  • July 2008 - iii - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    2. Implement only cost effective carbon reduction opportunities now essentially energy efficiency and energy management practices - but watch for opportunities to either advocate or participate in Provincial programs (like BC EMPRs ICE fund) to increase the cost/benefit of other reduction opportunities related to RBCM.

    3. All RBCM activities resulting in energy efficiency improvements need to be tracked to be included in annual Progress Reports as called for under the GHG Reduction Act. RBCM community and staff climate change advocacy activities should also be tracked and included in these reports.

    4. Wait for more clarity on Provincial carbon management requirements of government entities, and watch the development of the Pacific Carbon Trust, particularly with respect to offset purchase cost and potential purchase restrictions. A change or restriction in the availability of offsets to RBCM will require a re-evaluation of other available emission reduction opportunities.

    5. Engage the organization in pursuing environmental excellence, such as the BOMA Go Green or similar program. RBCM should aggressive launch internal environmental awareness and leadership activities to capitalize on staffs apparent engagement and commitment, with a focus that is broader than just carbon management.

    6. Organize an internal group to help deliver and maintain the above initiatives and to support delivery of an awareness campaign.

    7. Consider implementing a display tool, such as the Energy Mirror, to track and communicate energy and other initiatives progress to staff and the public.

    8. Advocate for the greening of the District Energy System through relationship with other government entities such as ARES.

    9. Pending confirmation of applicability, RBCM could consider the purchase of Green Power Certificates from BC Hydro to further reduce it emissions.

    10. Consider an alternative to the current company vehicle which would result in lower organization carbon emissions.

  • July 2008 - iv - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    TABLE OF CONTENTS

    SECTION PAGE 1.0 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................... 1

    1.1 Project approach .....................................................................................2 2.0 CARBON NEUTRAL ORGANIZATIONS.................................................... 3

    2.1 What is a Climate-Neutral Organization? ................................................3 2.2 Typical Guidelines for Climate-Neutral Organizations.............................3

    3.0 CARBON EMISSIONS INVENTORY ......................................................... 6 3.1 Inventory Approach .................................................................................6 3.2 Scope of Inventory...................................................................................7 3.3 Greenhouse Gases .................................................................................7 3.4 Boundary of the Inventory .......................................................................8 3.5 Sources of Carbon Emissions .................................................................8 3.6 Methodology ............................................................................................9

    3.6.1 Natural Gas Consumption (Scope 1).........................................10 3.6.2 Company Vehicle (Scope 1) ......................................................11 3.6.3 Electricity Consumption (Scope 2).............................................11 3.6.4 Air Travel (Scope 3)...................................................................13 3.6.5 Boat Travel (Scope 3)................................................................13 3.6.6 Taxi Travel (Scope 3) ................................................................14

    3.7 Emission Inventory Results ...................................................................14 4.0 INVENTORY REFERENCES ................................................................... 19 5.0 CARBON AWARENESS & CAPACITY SURVEY.................................... 20

    5.1 Introduction............................................................................................20 5.2 Survey Methodology..............................................................................20 5.3 Key Findings..........................................................................................22

    5.3.1 Habits.........................................................................................24 5.3.2 Attitude.......................................................................................25 5.3.3 Knowledge .................................................................................26 5.3.4 Culture .......................................................................................27 5.3.5 Technical ...................................................................................28 5.3.6 Organization ..............................................................................29

    5.4 Suggestions for improvement opportunities ..........................................30 6.0 REDUCTION POTENTIAL........................................................................ 31

    6.1 Approach ...............................................................................................31 6.2 CarMan..................................................................................................31 6.3 Local reduction options and results .......................................................32 6.4 Energy Management to reduce Carbon Emissions ...............................35 6.5 Renewable Energy vs. Carbon Credits for carbon footprint reduction ..39

    7.0 CARBON MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS................................. 41 8.0 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 51

  • July 2008 - v - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Annual Carbon Emissions by Source 2005 -2007 Table 2 Interpretive scores Likert scale Table 3 Reduction Measures for the Royal BC Museum Table 4 List of Measures and Paybacks LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Climate Neutral Entrepreneurship Figure 2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2005 Figure 3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2006 Figure 4 Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2007 Figure 5 Greenhouse Gas Emission Trends by Source Figure 6 Greenhouse Gas Emission Trends Figure 7 Royal BC Museum - Spider Diagram with the Average Score per Aspect Figure 8 Marginal Abatement Cost Curve Figure 9 Apparent Reduction Opportunities vs. Carbon Neutral Target Figure 10 Detail of Apparent Reduction Emission LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix I Carbon Awareness & Capacity Survey Average Scores Appendix II Suggestions provided on Carbon Survey Appendix III Methods for Awareness Campaigns Appendix IV January Presentation to the RBCM Management Team Appendix V March 18 Presentation to the RBCM Executive Appendix VI RBCM 2005, 2006, 2007 GHG Inventory and Supporting Data (on CD)

  • July 2008 - 1 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    1.0 INTRODUCTION

    In December, 2007 Golder Ecofys Solutions was contracted by the Royal BC Museum Corporation (RBCM) to prepare a Scoping Project Brief (Scoping Study), including a Greenhouse Gas (Carbon) inventory, and the business case to implement a Carbon Management Strategy for RBCMs facility located at 675 Bellville Street in Victoria, British Columbia.

    The need for this work is driven by the 2007 Provincial Throne Speech and subsequent GHG Reduction Act (the Act) which set a target to reduce GHG emissions by 33 percent below current levels by 2020, placing emissions 10 percent under 1990 levels. Additionally, the Act, which came into force on January 1, 2008, requires that all Province of British Columbia entities, including Crown agencies, to be carbon neutral by 2010. All public sector organizations will be required by law to produce annual public reports on their progress. Regulations will be developed and introduced over the course of 2008 under the new Act.

    It should be noted that there is considerable uncertainty in terms of what is actually meant by the Provinces use of the term Carbon Neutral as well as reporting protocols and developing carbon credit markets. Some of this will be clarified by the release of regulations later this year.

    In light of these events, this Scoping Study was undertaken to build an understanding of the carbon risk related to RBCMs facility and activities, and to evaluate options to manage that risk going forward. This study is needed to define the boundaries of RBCMs responsibilities and priorities for a carbon management strategy, to provide an overview level of the likely financial implications of executing a strategy, and to outline the steps to be followed, the timescales, milestones and outputs to be delivered, as well as other resources required.

    GESL worked closely with key personnel from RBCM, and its contractors, such as Avalon Contracting, in developing the carbon, energy and organizational information contained. In this brief, Greenhouse gas and carbon emissions are used interchangeably throughout this report.

  • July 2008 - 2 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    1.1 Project approach

    Carbon management is a systematic approach to identify and manage the risks and opportunities associated with carbon emissions.

    GESLs approach is to use a modified, five-step approach to Carbon Management originally defined by the Carbon Trust of the United Kingdom.

    A typical five-step carbon management approach includes the following:

    1. Developing baseline information by compiling a carbon inventory, building a carbon forecast and identifying carbon reduction targets (either voluntary or set by policy/regulation);

    2. Identifying and quantifying carbon reduction options;

    3. Developing a Carbon Management Strategy and Implementation Plan;

    4. Implementing the Plan with budgets, targets and success metrics; and,

    5. Monitoring and revisiting frequently, at least initially, as carbon rules and opportunities (e.g., credit markets) evolve.

    Developing a Carbon Management Strategy typically begins with a Scoping Study, which is the subject of this work. The Scoping Study focuses on compiling a GHG inventory, assembling - with limited analysis the main drivers and opportunities available to an organization to reduce its carbon emissions, and also assessing an organizations capacity to implement an effective Carbon Management Plan. The intent of this Scoping Study is to build the Business Case for Carbon Management, provide the necessary inputs to support the next phase finalizing Carbon Management Strategy and implementing the Implementation Plan.

    At the core of the entire process developed initially in the Scoping Study and refined in next phase - is the Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (the MACC). A MACC is a graphic representation of an organizations carbon reduction options versus their costs. In its most effective form, a MACC is dynamic tool which provides support for senior management decision making about key carbon reduction activities.

  • July 2008 - 3 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    2.0 CARBON NEUTRAL ORGANIZATIONS

    2.1 What is a Climate-Neutral Organization?

    A climate-neutral organization has no net greenhouse gas emissions. Climate neutrality can be reached through a combination of:

    Own emission reduction efforts. Offsetting of remaining emissions.

    Own emission reductions can be attained in various ways, e.g. through more efficient use of energy, the application of renewable energy and carbon sequestration. Offsetting of remaining emissions can be done through ensuring that emissions elsewhere are reduced or carbon dioxide is captured through offset projects such as landfill gas capture or an afforestation project.

    Note that while there are established rules and markets under Kyoto to enable credit or offset trading, no rules are officially in place in British Columbia. Purchase of offsets in BC is currently through a voluntary market. Credits trade in BC is based on a number of voluntary standards, such as the Gold Standard or Voluntary Credit Standard (VCS), to add credibility to offset products. There is no certainty that such credits will be accepted by the Province to meet carbon neutral requirements.

    However, the combination of emission reduction efforts and offsetting emission is crucial to achieving carbon neutrality. In many cases it is not possible to reduce emissions to zero, at least not in the short term, so offsetting the rest is necessary to reach net zero emissions. On the other hand it is not sustainable globally if net zero emissions were only reached through offset projects.

    2.2 Typical Guidelines for Climate-Neutral Organizations

    To make the concept of climate-neutrality more concrete, the following guidelines can be used. They are illustrated through figure 1. The guidelines should be considered as indicative and valid for the average of firms. Actual possibilities depend highly on the type of enterprise, local circumstances, past activities in this area, etc.

    The proposed steps are:

    First: take energy efficiency and proactive energy management measures in order to stabilize or decline energy use, i.e. the growth of activities is compensated or over-compensated by measures to improve the energy efficiency (red area).

  • July 2008 - 4 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Secondly: In most parts of the world, investing in zero-carbon or low-carbon energy sources can reduce a carbon footprint further. These can include your own production of renewable electricity and/or the purchase of renewable energy credits. Own production of renewable energy typically makes up a substantial part of the total package of zero- and low-carbon measures. See the purple and blue area.

    However, there is a misconception of the general applicability of this approach. For instance, under the current calculation methodologies carbon emissions associated with grid-based electricity in BC is very low, and therefore switching to renewable energy may not be a cost effective method of reducing carbon emissions (but may be attractive for other reasons).

    Third: the remaining greenhouse gas emissions are compensated by the purchase of carbon credits (offsets) representing emission reductions in elsewhere. Again, there is a common misconception that any activity that reduces carbon emissions can generate credits. While such activities may indeed reduce carbon emissions, creating emission credits which are tradable and meet a programs conditions (e.g. offsets the Province may accept as being real) is not trivial and requires considerable time and effort to realize.

    Additionally, a company may work proactively on the upstream and downstream emissions associated with company products and services to reduce greenhouse gases emissions. Upstream emission reduction can be achieved e.g. through carbon-efficient product design or low-carbon procurement. Downstream emission reduction can be achieved e.g. through the design of energy-efficient products. Such an approach is typically termed a part of the products or services lifecycle carbon emissions. While aspects of a lifecyle approach are often applied at a project level, companies have adopted a lifecycle approach under voluntary structure to affect their corporate emission profile. Such considerations are terms defining the boundary of a companys carbon responsibilities. Below we discuss the current considerations in setting RBCMs carbon boundaries.

  • July 2008 - 5 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    FIGURE 1: Climate Neutral Entrepreneurship

  • July 2008 - 6 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    3.0 CARBON EMISSIONS INVENTORY

    A carbon emissions inventory for the RBCM site (the site) was developed to identify and quantify carbon emissions for the past three years (2005-2007). The following section outlines the sources of carbon emissions included and excluded from the inventory, the methodology used to quantify the various greenhouse gas emissions, and the inventory results. The carbon inventory is included in Appendix VI.

    3.1 Inventory Approach

    In general, selection of the boundary and scope for the development of the RBCM carbon inventory was done to be broadly consistent with the following documents:

    The Climate Registry General Reporting Protocol (March 2008);

    California Climate Action Registry General Reporting Protocol (April 2008); and,

    World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), World Resource Institute (WRI), The Greenhouse Gas Protocol, A Corporate and Accounting Standard, not dated.

    We are aware that the B.C. Government (Climate Action Secretariat) are developing a framework to provide guidance for Crown Corporations regarding measurement and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions. The framework is currently in draft format, British Columbia Climate Action Secretariat, Draft Framework for GHG Measurement and Reporting dated March 2008. The draft framework and associated calculation tools are not currently available within the public domain, therefore have not been used to develop this inventory. The draft framework references the three protocols listed above, which were used to develop the carbon inventory, as best practice. However, we have reviewed the draft framework and are currently aware of differences in the operational boundaries and emissions measurement methodologies between the draft framework and the existing protocols. Therefore it is anticipated that this future final guidance document(s) and calculation tools will impact this inventory as the Provincial requirements and carbon management system develops. Main differences are that the draft protocol states that inventories should include indirect emissions from office paper purchases a scope 3 emission that would be optional under other protocols. Additionally the draft protocol states that emissions should be calculated using web-based calculators SMARTTool for calculating and reporting GHG emissions associated with corporate operations (buildings, fleet supplies, supplies) and SMARTTec for calculating and reporting GHG emissions from employee business travel. At the time of this report, these tools were not available.

  • July 2008 - 7 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    In addition to guidance provided in the protocols listed above, the development of the emissions inventory included a site visit undertaken by Ms. Rachel Wyles and Ms. Rebecca Cummings on February 13, 2008. During the site visit buildings and site conditions, carbon emissions sources were reviewed.

    3.2 Scope of Inventory

    Scope is a term that also defines what activities are considered in or out of a carbon inventory and which emissions are direct or indirect. Categorization of emissions for this inventory has followed the WBCSD/WRI and Climate Registry protocols as follows:

    Scope 1: All direct carbon emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by RBCM;

    Scope 2: Indirect emissions associated with the consumption of purchased or acquired electricity, steam, heating or cooling.

    Scope 3 emissions are all other indirect emissions not covered by Scope 2, and can include transportation related emissions such as business travel by employees.

    Scope 1 and 2 emissions are generally currently required to be reported as part of an inventory, whereas the reporting of scope 3 emissions is usually optional.

    You will note that GESL has developed RBCMs inventory using primarily Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions sources, but also included some Scope 3 emissions (employee business travel) as it has been indicated that the BC Government intends to include employee business travel in the scope which ministries must measure and report. Should this interpretation of current policy be incorrect, the inventory will need minor revision. Other Scope 3 emissions sources are noted. Once clarity is provided on Provincial reporting requirements, scope 3 emissions sources can be removed as necessary.

    3.3 Greenhouse Gases

    Preparation of a carbon inventory typically includes all six GHGs: carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxide (N2O); hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs); perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and sulphur hexafluoride (SF6). No significant emissions sources of HFCs, PFCs or SF6 were identified within information provided by RBCM, or observed during the site visit, therefore the carbon inventory focuses on emissions of CO2, CH4 and N2O.

  • July 2008 - 8 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    3.4 Boundary of the Inventory

    For the purposes of the emissions inventory, the site boundary includes all buildings present on the RBCM site with the exception of the National Geographic Imax theatre (operated by a separate company) and the Heating Plant (operated by a separate company). Generally the emissions protocols define organizational boundaries to an inventory based on the concept of management (financial or operational) control. RBCM do not have either financial or operational control over the Imax theatre or the Heating Plant, therefore these operations have been excluded from the inventory. RBCM also leases warehouse storage space, which is not located on the main site, and this has been included in the emissions inventory.

    The main buildings included in the carbon emissions inventory include:

    RBCM Exhibit Hall and associated lobby (675 Belleville Street); Fannin Tower (621 Government Street); Archives Building (655 Government Street); Carving Studio, Mungo Martin House, Helmcken House and St Anns School House;

    and, Leased warehouse storage facility located at 4222 Commerce Circle, Victoria.

    3.5 Sources of Carbon Emissions

    Six predominant sources of carbon emissions were identified for inclusion in the emissions inventory as detailed within Table 1 below. The scope of the emissions (1,2 or 3) as defined within the Climate Registry Protocol (March 2008) is also included within Table 1 below.

    TABLE 1: Summary of Emission Sources Included in Inventory

    Emissions Source Scope (1,2 or 3)

    Natural Gas Consumption 1

    Company Vehicle 1

    Electricity Consumption 2

    Air Travel (Employee Business Travel) 3

    Boat Travel (Employee Business Travel) 3

    Taxi (Employee Business Travel) 3

  • July 2008 - 9 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    GESL is aware that the Provincial Govt is developing a calculation methodology for GHG emissions related paper usage. However, at the time of this work, this is not available.

    Potential indirect sources of carbon emissions associated with RBCM that have currently been excluded from the emissions inventory include: staff commuting and visitor transport to/from RBCM.

    Direct emissions associated with the RBCM van that is used for transport of RBCM materials in the Victoria area have been included in the inventory, however indirect emissions associated with the freight of RBCM artifacts/paperwork (air, land, boat freight) by external companies that are not directly under management or financial control of RBCM have currently been excluded.

    Steam is supplied to RBCM by the district energy system (DES) operated by a separate company. Steam was reported by RBCM to only be used a few days per year to top up the existing electricity based heating system when outside temperatures dropped below minus 5 degrees Celsius. It was reported that steam usage by the site was not metered. However, based on information provided, it is likely to be small in the context of the whole emissions inventory. Also, it is likely that the DES operator, as a government entity, will be tasked with developing its own carbon emissions measurement and reporting under the GHG Reduction Act. We recommend that RBCM confirms that the DES operator has assumed this responsibility.

    3.6 Methodology

    The inventory has been developed in an Excel format to allow for future updates to be incorporated into the current inventory. Background data for the emissions inventory were provided by the Manager of Property Management and Operations, and the Finance Department within RBCM. The sources of data used have been referenced within the emissions inventory, and are provided on CD in Appendix VI. Data were obtained for a three-year period from 2005 to 2007 inclusive. The general methodology was to summarize the data per year and then apply emission factors in order to calculate carbon emissions in kg carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) units.

    Emission factors are commonly used to estimate a quantity of greenhouse gases released to atmosphere and are usually expressed as the weight of pollutant released per unit weight, volume, distance or duration. Global Warming Potentials (GWP) factors are used to relate carbon emissions into a single, common unit, a CO2 equivalent (CO2e).

  • July 2008 - 10 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    The following equation describes the basic emission calculation methodology:

    EFAE =

    Where:

    E = Greenhouse Gas Emissions; A = Activity Rate (gas consumption, power use, etc.); and, EF = Emissions Factor

    Two main sources of emission factors were used:

    Environment Canada, 2007, National Inventory Report: 1990-2005, Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada (Environment Canada, 2007); and

    Offsetters.ca, October 2007, Emissions Comparison Calculation, October 2, 2007 which presented greenhouse gas emission factors per passenger for various transport modes between Victoria and Vancouver that were quantified on behalf of Harbour Air by Offsetters.ca. These calculations included a comparison of Harbour Air, twin engine sea plane, BC Ferries and Helijet transport methods.

    It should be noted that the Province has commissioned the development and distribution of a transportation carbon calculator for ministry organizations to use. GESL attempted to obtain this calculator; however, our understanding is that it is currently not generally in use yet and is not available to organizations outside the Provincial Government. Our attempts to obtain the methodology have been unsuccessful to date. RBCM should consider updating the emissions inventory with the Provinces approach, specifically the business transportation sections and the inclusion of emissions related to consumption of office paper. That said, we believe we have reasonably accounted for the transportation emissions using an alternative accounting method (i.e. Offsetters.ca).

    A number of assumptions have been made to complete the emissions inventory; wherever possible these assumptions were conservative. The specific methodology and main assumptions used for each emissions source are described in further detail in the following sections.

    3.6.1 Natural Gas Consumption (Scope 1)

    The source of natural gas consumption at the site is the furnace used for heating Helmcken House. The furnace was reported by RBCM to be a residential style and sized forced hot air furnace.

  • July 2008 - 11 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Annual natural gas consumption for 2005 to 2007 was summarized based on consumption data provided by Terasen Gas. The consumption data in Gigajoules (GJ) were converted to m3 of gas using an average heating value calculated from four months (January March 2008) heating value data provided by Terasen Gas. An emission factor for the combustion of natural gas from Table A12.1 within reference Environment Canada, 2007 was used to calculate greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas consumption.

    No consumption data were provided by Terasen gas for August and September 2006. It is possible that the consumption could be zero due to summer months, however within the inventory the assumption was made to use consumption figures for August and September from the previous year (2005) to fill in the potentially missing data. Applying this assumption to the gas consumption for 2006 increases emissions (in CO2e) from gas consumption by approximately 5%.

    3.6.2 Company Vehicle (Scope 1)

    RBCM operates one company vehicle that is based at the site to move freight and run general errands around the local area.

    Emissions for the company vehicle were estimated based on the refueling expenses. Company vehicle fuelling costs were provided by the RBCM finance department for 2005 - 2007. The fuel usage of the company vehicle was calculated by dividing the total annual fuel cost by the average cost of a liter of fuel. Average fuel prices for 2005-2007 in Victoria, BC were based on data provided by the University of Victoria. Emission factors were taken from Table A12-7 of Environment Canada, 2007. The company vehicle was assumed to fall within the Light-Duty Gasoline Vehicles category, complying with Tier 1 emission standards.

    3.6.3 Electricity Consumption (Scope 2)

    Electricity consumption for 2005 to 2007 was calculated based on monthly consumption data provided by BC Hydro. Two electric meters are present at the main RBCM site, attributed to the following addresses: '617 Government Street' and '621 Government Street'. Electricity data from the leased warehouse at 4222 Commerce Circle, Victoria were also provided. The following table summarizes the electricity consumption data included within the inventory.

  • July 2008 - 12 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    TABLE 2: Electricity Inventory Data Summary

    Address Account Number BC Hydro Rate category

    617 Government Street 000005904680 1206

    621 Government Street 000005904688 1210

    4222 Commerce Circle 000005553096 1200

    RBCM took over management of the building on April 1st, 2006. Prior to this date BC Building Corporation (now called ARES) managed the building. Therefore for meter reading data prior to this date the associated company is listed as BC Buildings Corporation.

    A second electricity meter is listed at address 617 Government Street. The account holder of this meter is reported by BC Hydro to be ARES, therefore this consumption data has not currently been included within the RBCM inventory. However uncertainty exists regarding the final user of this electricity (ARES or RBCM). We recommend that RBCM confirms that the electricity consumption recorded by this meter is not consumed by RBCM.

    In order to calculate the calendar year's consumption rate the monthly meter readings were summed inclusive of the calendar year. For the monthly meter readings that overlapped the preceding and following year (December and January) the following methodology was employed. If, for example, the meter was read on the 15th of January, to calculate the consumption for the first half of January the average daily consumption was found for that metered period (December 15 to January 15). This average daily consumption value was then multiplied by the number of days in January prior to the meter reading date (15), and then added to the annual consumption rate. The same methodology would apply to the December electricity consumption whereby the daily average consumption from the meter reading period (December 15 to January 15) would be multiplied by the number of days between December 15 and December 31st.

    Emission factors were taken from Table A9-11 from Environment Canada, 2007. This table provides the greenhouse gas intensity specific to British Columbia. Data from this source for the most recent year (2005) were used.

    Note that the electricity consumption excludes electricity utilized by the National Geographic Imax theatre as this is reported by RBCM to be metered separately.

  • July 2008 - 13 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    3.6.4 Air Travel (Scope 3)

    For the purposes of the emissions inventory the air travel was divided into three specific categories;

    Commercial Helicopter Travel between Victoria and Vancouver (Helijet); Seaplane Travel (Harbour Air); and, Commercial Airline Travel (e.g. Air Canada, West Jet).

    Carbon emissions from air travel between 2005 and 2007 were estimated based on flight destination and airline company information as provided by the finance department at RBCM. Note that occasionally private helicopters were chartered for business travel. This travel has not currently been included in the emissions inventory as it represents a small component of the business air travel (private helicopters were chartered for 6, 5 and 13 hours in 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively).

    For Helicopter travel by Helijet, carbon emissions per trip were taken from Offsetters.ca (Offsetters.ca, October 2007). This report indicates that for each Helijet flight between Victoria and Vancouver greenhouse gas emissions are 52 Kg CO2e per passenger, assuming an 85% occupancy rate, dividing total emissions by occupancy. Note that this source of calculation is unverified at this time, and GESL is seeking the new Provincial Govt travel carbon calculation process to compare calculation results.

    For seaplane travel greenhouse gas emissions per trip were taken from Offsetters.ca (Offsetters.ca, October 2007). This report indicates that for each Harbour air flight between Victoria and Vancouver greenhouse gas emissions are 24 Kg CO2e per passenger, assuming an 85% occupancy rate, dividing total emissions by occupancy.

    For commercial airline travel, flight distances were estimated using webflyer.com. Emissions were calculated using the methodology and emission factors provided by The Greenhouse Gas Protocol Initiative (www.ghgprotocol.org). This methodology splits commercial airline flights into short haul, medium haul and long haul based on the distance of the flight leg, then applies emissions factors based on the length of each flight.

    3.6.5 Boat Travel (Scope 3)

    Travel using commercial ferries and water taxis were undertaken by RBCM staff during the period 2004-2007. Currently only boat travel using BC Ferries has been included in the inventory as this comprises a significant percentage of boat travel distance, 95%, 59% and 71% of total boat travel distance in 2005, 2006 and 2007 respectively.

  • July 2008 - 14 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Boat travel destinations were provided by the finance department at RBCM. Greenhouse gas emissions per trip were taken from Offsetters.ca (Offsetters.ca, October 2007). These calculations indicate that for each BC Ferry trip between Victoria and Vancouver greenhouse gas emissions were calculated to be 41 Kg CO2e per passenger when travelling on a BC Ferry Spirit Class vessel and 34 Kg CO2e per passenger for travel on a BC Ferry Queen Class vessel. For the purposes of this emissions inventory the larger number (41 kg CO2e per trip per passenger) was assumed.

    The main assumptions used in boat travel were:

    Water taxis are not currently included in the calculations; BC ferry travel emission assumes automobile transport; BC ferry travel assumes 85% occupancy and therefore total emissions are divided by

    occupancy to derive per passenger emissions; and, Extra passenger freight is assumed to be negligible.

    3.6.6 Taxi Travel (Scope 3)

    Taxi emissions were based on taxi expenditure data provided by the RBCM finance department. Annual taxi rates from the B.C. Passenger Transport Board were used to calculate the estimated kilometers traveled based on the taxi fares provided. Fuel economy (miles per gallon) was determined based on taxi car fleet make and model for the three years provided by Yellow Cab of Victoria. Between 2005 and 2006, it was assumed that the entire fleet was composed of 2000 Model Ford Crown Victoria. In 2007, 60% of the fleet was assumed to be 2004 - 2007 Toyota Prius hybrid models. The remaining 40% was assumed to be 2000 Model Ford Crown Victoria. The City fuel economy was used in conjunction with the kilometers traveled to determine greenhouse gas emissions. It was assumed that taxis were in motion at all times during the taxi fare.

    3.7 Emission Inventory Results

    Table 1 below presents an annual summary of greenhouse gas emissions broken down by each emissions source.

  • July 2008 - 15 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    TABLE 3: Annual Carbon Emissions by Source 2005 2007

    Emissions (kg CO2e) Percentage of Total

    Emissions Source

    Emissions Scope (1,2 or 3) 2005 2006 2007 2005 2006 2007

    Natural Gas Consumption 1 14287 11116 14392 11.3 8.8 10.4

    Company Vehicle 1 4383 4228 4941 3.5 3.4 3.6

    Electricity Consumption 2

    102454

    103247

    105315 81.0 82.1 76.1

    Air Travel Helicopter 3 572 260 2652 0.5 0.2 1.9 Seaplane 3 432 960 936 0.3 0.8 0.7

    Commercial Airline 3 343 2499 6829 0.3 2.0 4.9

    Subtotal of Air Travel 1347 3719 10417 1.1 3.0 7.5

    Boat Travel 3 3362 2378 2829 2.7 1.9 2.0 Taxi 3 635 1015 461 0.5 0.8 0.3

    TOTAL 126467 12570

    2 13835

    6 100.0 100.0 100.0

    Table 1 indicates that annual carbon emissions for 2005 and 2006 were similar at 126467 and 125702 kg CO2e respectively. Annual carbon emissions increased by approximately 10% between 2006 and 2007. The predominant source of carbon emissions is electricity consumption, which contributes between 76% and 82% of total emissions in 2005-2007.

    Figures 2 to 4 below show the breakdown of carbon emissions by source. Emissions due to air travel showed a significant increase over the three years, and increased as a proportion of total emissions from 1.1% in 2005 to approximately 7.5% in 2007. Natural gas consumption decreased in 2006, then increased to 2005 levels in 2007, this could be due to seasonal weather variance and the associated requirement for heating. Taxi emissions increased significantly in 2006, then decreased back to approximate 2005 levels in 2007. As a percentage of annual emissions, boat travel and company vehicle emissions stayed at similar levels throughout the three year period.

  • July 2008 - 16 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Figure 2: Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2005

    11%1%3%

    81%

    3%1%

    Electricity Consumption

    Natural GasConsumptionAir Travel

    Boat Travel

    Taxi

    Company Vehicle

    Figure 3: Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2006

    9%

    3%

    2% 3%

    1%

    82%

    Electricity Consumption

    Natural GasConsumptionAir Travel

    Boat Travel

    Taxi

    Company Vehicle

  • July 2008 - 17 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Figures 5 and 6 below indicates the trend in greenhouse gas emissions by source between 2005 and 2007.

    Figure 4: Greenhouse Gas Emissions for 2007

    10%

    8%2% 4%

    0%

    76%

    Electricity Consumption

    Natural GasConsumptionAir Travel

    Boat Travel

    Taxi

    Company Vehicle

    Figure 5 Greenhouse Gas Emission Trends by Source

    0

    20000

    40000

    60000

    80000

    100000

    120000

    Electricity ConsumptionNatural Gas ConsumptionAir Travel (helicopter)Air Travel (Seaplane)

    Air Travel (Commercial Airline)

    Boat TravelTaxi

    Company Vehicle

    Source

    Emissions (kg CO 2

    equivalent)

    2005 2006 2007

  • July 2008 - 18 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Figures 5 and 6 indicate that greenhouse gas emissions are increasing, mainly due to the growth in air travel usage.

    Figure 6: Greenhouse Gas Emission Trends

    0

    20000

    40000

    60000

    80000

    100000

    120000

    140000

    160000

    2005 2006 2007Year

    Emissions (kg CO2

    equivalent) Company Vehicle

    Taxi

    Boat Travel

    Air Travel (helicopter)

    Natural Gas Consumption Electricity Consumption

  • July 2008 - 19 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    4.0 INVENTORY REFERENCES

    Source data and documents used in the inventory preparation are contained within an emissions inventory Excel file. A summary of the major references is provided below:

    The Climate Registry, General Reporting Protocol Version 1.0, March 2008. California Climate Action Registry, General Reporting Protocol, April 2008. World Business Council for Sustainable Development, World Resource Institute, The

    Greenhouse Gas Protocol, A Corporate and Accounting Standard, not dated.

    Environment Canada, National Inventory Report: 1990-2005, Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada, April 2007.

    Offsetters.ca, Emissions Comparison Calculation, October 2, 2007. British Columbia Climate Action Secretariat, Draft Framework for Greenhouse Gas

    Measurement and Reporting: Guidance for Crown Corporations, March 12, 2008.

  • July 2008 - 20 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    5.0 CARBON AWARENESS & CAPACITY SURVEY

    5.1 Introduction

    A Carbon Awareness and Capacity (Carbon) Survey was completed by 90 staff members and volunteers at the RBCM. This survey was intended to give more in-depth information about attitude, habits and knowledge of individual staff, the culture towards energy efficiency and the way the organization is perceived to be engaged in this area and the technical tools available to influence energy consumption (and the related carbon emissions).

    Generally respondents were most optimistic about their own knowledge, habits and attitude towards energy efficiency. The opinion of the organization, the technology available for individuals to reduce consumption, and the overall culture of energy awareness was less positive. Participants provided suggestions for energy consumption reduction opportunities, which underpins the overall conclusion that individual knowledge is present, but that the organization has not picked up on some of the options. There is also evidence that RBCM staff has considerable interest and capability in the broader environmental context, not just in looking for energy efficiency opportunities, that should be considered and harnessed if possible through an appropriate strategy.

    Accepting the results as indicative for RBCM as a whole, the conclusion is that RBCM needs to work on approaches to harness the interest and knowledge that is present within their organization, and provide the tools and incentives and organizational commitment to reduce energy consumption and other environmental impacts within their organization. That said, it would be wise to not exclude actions like awareness campaigns and educational activities at this stage to broaden the positive perception of energy efficiency, energy management and renewable energy, although the application of the latter may need to be adopted for reasons of demonstration of leadership rather than as the most cost-effective means to reduce carbon emissions. The high participation numbers are indicative of a strong level of interest in this issue within the organization.

    This portion of the report provides the aggregate results for all participating staff members and volunteers at RBCM. All individual responses have been collected and an aggregate analysis performed.

    5.2 Survey Methodology

    An invitation to participate in the survey was distributed to all members of the RBCM staff and volunteer team. An online questionnaire was available to respondents. Ninety out of approximately 150 people completed the survey which, in our experience, is a very good participation rate.

  • July 2008 - 21 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    The survey explored the performance of the following 6 aspects (areas):

    Attitude; this aspect measures whether respondents have a positive or negative attitude towards energy efficiency and/or their carbon footprint.

    Culture; this aspect describes the culture within the organization in relation to energy efficiency and/or energy saving.

    Habits; this aspect queries peoples habits in the field of energy use and energy saving.

    Knowledge; this aspect describes how much people know about (relative) energy use, and abatement opportunities.

    Technical; this aspect measures whether an inclination to energy efficient behaviour is prevented or stimulated by technological barriers or appliances (e.g. standby power option).

    Organization; within this aspect questions are asked to measure the willingness of the organization to properly respond to the energy and carbon challenge.

    The first three areas can be seen as relatively soft, whereas the last three can be regarded as relatively hard.

    Almost all answers to the questions of this survey were so-called Likert scales, ranging from: Totally agree to Totally disagree in five steps. These answers have been assigned to scores ranging from poor to good depending on the way the question was phrased. Finally, these scores have been transformed in numerical scores ranging from minus 2 through 0 to 2 to facilitate statistical analyses (as shown in Table 1 below). Score of 2 indicates the best performance. Organizations that are ambitious in the field of climate policy and energy awareness, should aim at a score between 1 and 2.

  • July 2008 - 22 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    TABLE 4: Interpretation Scores Likert Scale

    Response Score

    Totally disagree (5) Poor -2

    Partly disagree (4) Rather poor -1

    Dont agree Dont disagree (3) Neither poor nor good 0

    Partly agree (2) Rather good 1

    Totally agree (1) Good 2

    5.3 Key Findings

    Figure 7 a-b shows a spider diagram with the averages scores per area. In figure 7 b the same scores are presented on a larger scale. The overall average score for all aspects together is 0.251, which is between the scores neither poor nor good and rather good (see remark above about explaining the scores in a table in the introduction). The average score is not bad, but there is a lot of room for improvements. The scores for Knowledge, Attitude and Habits are relatively high, whereas the score for Organization, Technical and Culture are relatively low. This suggests that while individuals may have the knowledge, habits and a positive attitude for energy efficiency, the perception exists that the organization and culture in the workplace do not support or allow for taking full advantage of the individual knowledge, habit and attitudes. The low scores in the Organization aspect may reflect the need for educating staff and volunteers about RBCMs energy efficiency plans and programs. A dont know answer is statistically a 0, which may skew the results negatively simply due to a lack of knowledge.

    1 Calculated as the average of all six aspect averages

  • July 2008 - 23 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    FIGURE 7: Royal BC Museum - Spider Diagram with the Average Score Per aspect

    -2

    -1

    0

    1

    2Attitude

    Culture

    Habits

    Knowledge

    Organization

    Technical

    (a)

    -0.5

    0

    0.5

    1Attitude

    Culture

    Habits

    Knowledge

    Organization

    Technical

    (b)

    Closer analyses show clear patterns in the answers. These include:

    Respondents are positively disposed towards energy savings issues, and issues related to energy consumption reductions and carbon management.

    Respondents are generally knowledgeable about climate change and greenhouse gas emissions, although there is still room for some improvement.

    It is encouraging that respondents feel some responsibility for energy consumption and know it makes sense to pay attention to energy savings.

    People show good habits in terms of switching off lights that are unnecessarily on and wearing sweaters if they are cold.

    At the same time they claim they are not able to influence organizations energy consumption.

    However, there are areas where people can make a difference, e.g. switch off appliances when they dont need them, save energy when they stop working but they generally can not influence thermal conditions at their working place.

    Culturally, energy saving is not seen as a priority within the organization. Generally, people do not try to stimulate others into more energy efficient or energy saving behaviour.

  • July 2008 - 24 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Partly this is reflected by the low score in the Organization aspect. Employees seem to lack organizational support for energy efficiency and energy savings. Alternatively, they might simply not be aware of the organizational support that exists. Effort should be made to improve the communication of RBCMs policy towards energy efficiency to staff and volunteers.

    The numerous suggestions provided by respondents provide a clear signal there is a lot of room for improvement and the engagement of staff. All suggestions provided by the respondents during the survey should be explored and used as a support for further action (Appendix II).

    5.3.1 Habits

    Results

    The aspect of Habit showed the highest score with an average value of 0.71. This is mostly caused by high scores on the respondents own behaviour:

    + Switch off the lights when leaving room (1.21)

    + Too cold, will put on a sweater (1.62)

    Score for turning off the unnecessarily turned-on equipment is rather modest (0.45) and could be higher

    Furthermore, respondents observe office equipment is unnecessarily left switched on (-0.75), when at the same time some of the respondents claim to generally not forget to turn off equipment which is not being used (0.72). Obviously, if everybody switches off equipment, there is no office equipment left on unnecessarily. An explanation could be that people may wish their behaviour is energy efficient, while in real life they may forget to act accordingly. This pattern is seen in many organizations.

    Recommendations

    Close the gap between perceived own behaviour and observed behaviour of everybody else by a combination of a targeted information campaign, improved/open culture and more positive attitude

    Also attaching special reminders to turn off the equipment when not necessary will increase the score for Habits even further.

  • July 2008 - 25 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    5.3.2 Attitude

    Results

    The aspect Attitude scored second with the result of 0.60 which indicates a somewhat positive attitude towards energy savings and energy use issues:

    + Remarkably high score for the item Makes sense to pay attention to energy savings (1.78), close to the highest possible score and the highest individual score per item

    + Respondents feel they can affect climate change (1.21) and

    + They seem mostly to have time to pay attention to energy savings (0.64)

    On the other hand, respondents do not feel that energy efficiency plays an important role in their work (0.26)

    Respondents do not have a really open attitude towards other colleagues as they are not good at telling them not to waste energy (-0.08)

    Respondents believe they are not able to influence energy consumption at their work place (-0.42), which is neither bad nor good. However, at the same time the technological possibilities seem to be there as the respondents claim in another aspect (see high scores in Technical Appliances can be switched off (0.93). It may mean respondents are not aware of the existing possibilities they can use to contribute to energy savings.

    Recommendations

    Organize targeted campaign for workers to inform and raise awareness on how energy savings play a role in their working environment.

    Organize information campaigns to inform and make people aware about the possibilities they already have and can use in their area (and not only there) to limit energy use.

  • July 2008 - 26 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    5.3.3 Knowledge

    Results

    The Knowledge Aspect scored somewhat high, with an average response value of 0.49.

    + Most respondents clearly understand what climate change is (1.60).

    + Respondents know very well that energy use contributes to higher GHG emission (1.42)

    + Some respondents claim to be able to identify 3 options for energy saving (0.60)

    + People are moderately familiar with operations that are high energy users (0.51)

    Many respondents are not aware of actions they could take to save energy (0.09).

    Respondents awareness about the relative height of energy use (energy use of site or building compared to the energy use of other sites or buildings) is rather poor (-1.59). They are not well informed how energy use of processes and/or usage in particular departments and/or buildings relates to the total energy usage.

    Recommendations

    Pay more attention to relative amounts of departmental energy usage (set targets, monitoring & communication)

    Estimate the use of energy for various workplaces along with their reduction potentials done by employees, to make them think of the actual figures they could influence

    Improve communication channels to increase the exchange of knowledge between internal groups, as well as other museum groups in North America with a similar focus.

    Use options suggested by staff and volunteers (see Appendix II)

  • July 2008 - 27 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    5.3.4 Culture

    Results

    Culture scored 0.08 (neither bad nor good), which is the third lowest result out of all six aspects.

    People claim to encourage each other to save energy (0.66), though there is still a room for improvement

    Management could be a better example for others in respect to energy savings (0.51)

    Energy waste is seen as moderately wrong within the organization (0.46).

    Energy savings on an organizational level is seen as somewhat good (0.11).

    Respondents say they are seldom challenged about their own energy behaviour (-0.77).

    Energy savings lacks attention on departmental level (-0.70).

    Recommendations

    More openness and a different mindset could help to encourage colleagues more often to practice energy saving behaviour.

    Make energy saving issues a topic of meetings, open discussions, platforms, targeted campaigns in RBCMs departments both separately as well as for all of them together.

    Improve even more the role of management in setting good examples.

    Activate the staff with a system of incentives for good energy saving and carbon reduction ideas.

  • July 2008 - 28 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    5.3.5 Technical

    Results

    Technical scored somewhat low, with an average response value of -0.13.

    + Appliances can be switched off scored the highest in this aspect (0.93)

    + Many of the respondents indicated that when they stop working they can reduce energy consumption in their area (by using e.g. standby mode) (0.69)

    Still there is some unnecessary equipment or installations turned on after regular working hours, (0.27)

    According to the respondents, lay-out of their working environments does not support them to be energy efficient (0.02).

    There appears to be minimal use of reminders for people to turn off equipment (-1.02).

    People generally do not feel that they can influence the thermal conditions in their work space (-1.13) Improving this score will bring energy and heat savings and will give people more influence on their energy consumption.

    Generally respondents note that their equipment is old, and by inference energy inefficient. (-0.67).

    Recommendations

    Attach reminders on devices wherever necessary reminding users to turn them off when not in use.

    Assess technical status and possibilities of lay-out of working environment (including heating system and air conditioning) per department in order to improve even more of the possibilities to reduce energy consumption; (see Suggestions for Opportunities).

    Exchange good examples of action being carried out in different departments.

    Update older, less-efficient office equipment.

    In the organization recommendations to follow, RBCM may wish to continue to solicit office efficiency improvement suggestions from their staff by periodically

  • July 2008 - 29 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    providing examples of such work to stimulate such discussions. The best of the ideas generated from such a process may need an external technical assessment of the idea feasibility, given the apparent lack of internal technical resources.

    RBCM could task some of its long term energy contractors and consultants to put on brown baggers, which are presentations of general interest related to energy and sustainability, to provide ideas and encouragement to staff. Again, the best of the ideas may need an external technical assessment.

    5.3.6 Organization

    Results

    The Organization scored the lowest out of all six aspects (-0.25). Low scoring items suggest:

    Energy efficiency is not a regular topic at departmental meetings (-0.95)

    Energy efficiency is not yet included in staff training programmes (-0.89)

    Organization does not have quantitative energy savings targets (-0.07)

    Energy efficiency is generally not communicated and perceived as an important operational driver (-0.01)

    There is no budget for energy savings measures (-0.60)

    Organization does not have energy consumption monitoring at the departmental level (-0.31)

    Generally respondents do not think that there are any carbon reduction policies in the organization (-0.09).

    Some promising starting points in the organization are:

    Respondents claim to know staff responsible for energy consumption (0.14), though for a really good score there is still a big gap to bridge.

    The appointed people responsible for energy savings and energy efficiency, to some extent, are perceived to practice what they preach (0.21).

  • July 2008 - 30 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Recommendations

    Scores can be improved easily (quick wins) by translating and implementing an energy saving and carbon reduction policy into all layers of the organization. This includes formulating an action plan on departmental level which includes:

    Setting (quantitative) targets and measurable objectives;

    Assigning a budget to enable achievement of these targets. If targets are set, they need to be monitored (and evaluated) as well;

    Assigning tasks, adapt job profiles, create energy/carbon managers if necessary;

    Ensure proper monitoring of task performance; and

    Have regular energy/carbon meetings, with those that are responsible, at regular intervals and exchange knowledge and lessons learned.

    5.4 Suggestions for improvement opportunities

    More than 50 respondents offered energy savings suggestions in their survey submission. Most of the suggestions included energy saving options that can be achieved by:

    Upgrading the lighting system to a higher efficiency (use LED, motion sensors and timers).

    Using renewable energy sources. Saving water. Using more energy efficient equipment (energy star appliances). Enabling computer updates to take place while still allowing computers to be turned

    off at night. Turning off unnecessary equipment and lighting when not in use. Smaller, more fuel-efficient company vehicle. Better heating and cooling control.

    All the suggestions can be found in Appendix II. Some of the recommendations are explored in our reduction potential section to follow, however, we recommend that suggestions not addressed below be further explored and their value assessed.

  • July 2008 - 31 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    6.0 REDUCTION POTENTIAL

    6.1 Approach

    This project did not include an extensive on-site analysis of all energy consumption and carbon emission reduction options (e.g. through an energy audit). Rather, existing reports have been used to extract information about potential reduction measures. The main source of info was the Facility Condition Assessment Final Report, as prepared by VFA Inc. in October of 2007.

    The focus was put on those measures with a quantifiable energy efficiency effect, and those that had been labeled currently critical, with suggested implementation in 2009. For these measures an order of magnitude evaluation of energy savings potential was made, and the potential greenhouse gas reduction effect calculated.

    A number of more generic measures have been added to this list, and likewise energy savings and greenhouse gas reduction potential determined. Without a detailed investigation of energy consuming equipment on-site it was difficult to quantify the effect of some measures per building. No information was available about which energy using equipment or even buildings are connected to which of the two electricity meters that serve RBCMs site.

    6.2 CarMan

    In order to evaluate the options that are available to RBCM to reduce greenhouse gas emissions the CarMan tool (Carbon Management) has been used. CarMan is a software module that is designed to enable users to evaluate different carbon-saving measures on the basis of their cost-effectiveness. Different scenarios can be developed and assessed by changing important parameters such as interest rate, subsidy level, energy and CO2e credits prices. In addition, the structure of the module facilitates analysis of more than one site at the same time. Developing integral strategies and supporting decision making on holding level is an inbuilt feature of the program.

    CarMan helps assess risks and identify opportunities related to carbon assets and liabilities. It will be easy to take make, buy or sell decisions in boardroom settings. The consequences of selecting or deselecting specific reduction options to the distance-to-target are immediately visualized and presented on screen.

    Local measures (see Section 5.3) were used to construct the Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC; see figure 8), using the CarMan online tool. The MACC shows the effect of carbon reduction measures (amount reduced) on the Y-axis, and the cost involved with implementation (per tonne of achieved emission reduction) on the Y-axis. Also indicated

  • July 2008 - 32 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    are the target for reduction, and the apparent market value of carbon credits (carbon credits, offsets). In this way the MACC shows at a glance which measures are cost-effective in their own right (all measures with a negative cost per tonne CO2e saved), and which measures cost money but are below the market value of carbon credits (those measures above the X-axis but below the market value line. The latter measures could (at least theoretically) be used to generate carbon credits, which could then be sold at a profit. Measures that are lying above the market value line are not cost-effective, but may be required to reach the desired target.

    FIGURE 8: Marginal Abatement Cost Curve

    6.3 Local reduction options and results

    Table 2 indicates which measures were investigated. Only the measures for which the carbon reduction effect could be quantified were used to demonstrate the usefulness of the CarMan management tool. This list of measures should be considered as a cross section of the total range of measures potentially available to reduce emissions. To get a more complete insight into the options a more detailed study would be required, and would entail options such as suggested for further study in the VFA Energy Management proposal.

    In the case of RBCM, the combined effect of all investigated measures is not enough to reach the envisaged target of carbon neutrality (see figure 9.)

  • July 2008 - 33 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    FIGURE 9: Apparent Reduction Opportunities vs. Carbon Neutral Target

    As can be seen from Figure 9, the combined result of all measures equals to an annual reduction of greenhouse gas emissions of about 24 tonne per year. The total emissions range from 125 tonnes CO2e in 2005 to 138 tonnes of in 2007 (approximate average of 130 tonnes CO2e per year). The gap between the two could be covered by purchasing greenhouse gas credits.

    FIGURE 10: Detail of Apparent Reduction Emission

    Figure 10 shows an expanded view of the left part of the MACC diagram, which allows a better appreciation of the relationship between the financial impact of the investigated measures in comparison to the (current) cost of purchasing greenhouse gas emission credits.

    The figure shows that about 17 tonnes per year of reduction can be achieved at a cost that is lower than the current market price for carbon credits (the average trading price at the Chicago Exchange, which was US$5.00, at the time of investigation). The remaining measures are more expensive. From a purely economic perspective, these measures should not be taken at the present time, particularly as the cost and acceptable standard of carbon credits is highly uncertain.

  • July 2008 - 34 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    An overview of investigated measures, their costs and expected GHG effect is given in the table below.

    TABLE 3: Reduction Measures for the Royal BC Museum

    Building Measure name Investment GHG effect

    (kg CO2e)

    kWh savings

    Measure in

    CarMan Laboratory Air Compressor $16,410 54.4 3200 Y Curatorial Block Replace Vacuum system $11,718 Y Domestic Hot Water Tank $16,915 58.1 3420 Y Helmcken House Forced Air Furnace $10,474 N Boiler Replacement $91,808 1509.9 88815 Y Aged Air Handling Units $1,327,742 N Piping Insulation refurbishment $38,814 N

    Phased Window Replacements $251,782 4250.0 250000 Y

    Replace HVAC service from Central Plant $5,027,200 N

    Replace control air compressor $10,588 27.2 1599 Y

    Museum Exhibit Hall

    Recovery of heat from exhaust air $16,000 1105.0 65000 Y

    Optimize settings on timers (or install them) $1,000 8047.0 473351 Y

    Energy monitoring / management $20,000 8047.0 473351 Y

    Solar Hot Water Generation $3,000 32.6 1920 Y

    Photovoltaic Panels $95,000 204.0 12000 Y Hybrid Museum Vehicle $6,000 400.0 Y

    General

    Carbon Credits Chicago Carbon Exchange $688 137604.1 N

    TOTAL 23,335 TOTAL EMISSIONS FROM ELECTRICITY USE (2007) 105,315

    Table 4 below is a companion table to figures 9 and 10 showing the reference to the specific reduction measure (e.g. S0012 Optimize setting on timers). In essence, three carbon reduction measures have paybacks which pay for themselves though energy savings based on the current cost of energy. These are: Optimize settings on timers, Implementing energy monitoring/management and Recovering heat from exhaust air related to RBCM Exhibit Hall. In total, these measures will result in approximately 17 tonnes of carbon reductions per year. If all measures were implemented regardless of

  • July 2008 - 35 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    cost, carbon reductions would be on the order of 24 tonnes per year, far short of the 130 tonne target.

    TABLE 4: List of Measures and Paybacks

    6.4 Energy Management to reduce Carbon Emissions

    As discussed above, currently cost-effective carbon reduction opportunities are limited to three activities: Optimizing timer settings, Implementing energy monitoring/management and Recovering heat from exhaust air related to RBCM Exhibit Hall. GESL understands that RBCMs energy contractor, Avalon, has been contracted to undertake an energy management program. Below is GESLs view of energy management for comparison.

    The main driver for energy management used to be cost savings, but more and more it is becoming a tool to reduce environmental impact of operation and the most cost effective way to comply with increasingly tight governmental regulations related to carbon and other emissions. A 2000 study by representatives of the commercial building industry and co-sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and other Canadian and American organizations found that a 30% improvement in energy efficiency could be achieved using existing technologies. With aggressive implementation of more innovative technologies, energy-efficiency improvements of 50 to 80% could be realized. The effect on carbon emissions is commensurate.

  • July 2008 - 36 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Other benefits can come from improved asset management due to energy efficiency measures. Asset management involves the systematic review of a facilitys operations and equipment, and a logical repair or upgrade schedule that focuses on a proactive approach to improvements. Proactive and improved asset management can extend the lifespan of a building and lower expenditures. Finally, investments in utility infrastructure due to growing activities could be avoided by improving energy efficiency.

    Qualitative benefits resulting from effective energy management often include a better working environment (i.e., improved lighting, better indoor air quality, reduced noise, etc.), increased productivity and employee morale, improved service delivery, and an opportunity for organizations to show leadership and influence other community stakeholders to take action.

    Effectively demonstrating the benefits of an energy management program is often one of its few shortfalls. Often energy management program deliver many such benefits without explicit recognition. A number of attractive presentation technologies, such as the Energy Mirror, can help provide the recognition as well as motivate better energy and environmental performance.

    Energy Monitoring and Reporting

    Energy Management starts by knowing your actual energy consumption. Without up-to-date knowledge on consumption of the main functional entities it is not possibly to take timely corrective action, or to clearly evaluate the effectiveness of implemented measures. The following paragraphs give an introduction into Energy Monitoring and Reporting.

  • July 2008 - 37 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Introduction to Reporting

    The day-to-day working of an energy information system can be illustrated by the following closed loop diagram.

    The energy data that are collected (via utility meters, or submeters per building) can be analyzed using available proprietary software, or a spreadsheet developed to match RBCMs needs. If an energy information system is to fulfill its prime objective - to support energy management - effective communication is a critical part of that system. There is little point in collecting, collating and analyzing data for storage purposes only.

    It is essential to discover who needs what information to support their role in the energy management process. It should be clear that the information needs vary throughout the organization. What information does the board require? Is this the same as the facility manager?

    Correctly identifying the recipients of energy information is essential for communication to be efficient and effective. Therefore who needs to know? The answer, though very general, is anyone and everyone who can have an impact. This may cover a wide range of people. With the growth of environmental management, we also have to consider communication with stake-holders. Stakeholders include employees, regulatory bodies, interested groups and members of the public. What should be immediately apparent is that information needs vary widely. At one extreme it may be a single key statistic, at the other a comprehensive and detailed report.

    Communication

    Action

    Data Collection

    Data Analysis

  • July 2008 - 38 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    It is equally important to realize that not everyone needs to know everything. The information that is communicated should be the minimum required for achieving results. It should also be information that recipients can easily assimilate. It may mean that the style and nature of output needs to be tailored.

    Typically, communication falls into one of three categories:

    Regular report - typically, the weekly or monthly report. Issued on a time basis rather a need basis.

    Exception report - produced when something has gone wrong - or right!

    Ad-hoc report - initiated by request or as the result of investigation. Possibly produced to coincide with a relevant event or activity.

    A typical reporting for a larger organization is given in the following diagram:

    Annual Report Monthly Report

    Weekly Report

    Key Indicators

    Exception Report

    Chief executive

    Accountant

    Department heads

    Procurement

    Facility manager

    Workforce

    Members of public

    There are two key time-related aspects to the issue of communication:

    Speed - The value of information is time-dependent. Information delivered at the right time has a high value. Information delivered too late, when little can be done, wastes time and can discredit the system.

  • July 2008 - 39 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    Frequency - Communicating too often introduces information overload. It is commonly accepted in todays work environment that managers have access to too much information, rather than too little. Conversely, sending reports and information too infrequently can mean that interest is lost.

    For some people, you may need to deliver information in an exact form to their desk; for others you may need only to give them access to the system. The best methods to choose are the ones which achieve results. This will vary from site-to-site and from year-to-year. What works for one group of people may not work for others. A key factor for the successful implementation of energy monitoring and reporting is to make the internal resources available to guide and support the communication processes.

    It must be recognized that the utility meters in the current configuration do not collect all the necessary information and are not able to generate information that is aggregated and easy to understand. Meter information is not regularly stored for easy access, and it is unclear which parts of RBCM complex are serviced by which meter.

    It is recommended to investigate, as a minimum, the users that are connected to each meter, and the main electric infrastructure on site. The latter will provide information about what effort would be required to install submetering for the main buildings of the complex. Electricity meters are relatively cheap, and metering per building will provide valuable information about actual consumption. This will be a starting point to allow for later reporting on the success of efficiency measures.

    6.5 Renewable Energy vs. Carbon Credits for carbon footprint reduction

    As previously mentioned, a key consideration with selecting cost effective carbon reductions in British Columbia is the current low carbon emission factor (i.e. grid intensity) and low cost associated grid-supplied electricity. This typically makes most forms of renewable energy and other measures uneconomic on a $/tonne of carbon reduced basis.

    Based on a conservative carbon exposure for RBCM of approximately 200 tonnes CO2e annually, and given an apparent carbon credit cost range of $5 to as high as $25/tonne, cost to RBCM to achieve carbon neutrality is currently estimated at $1000 to $5000 annually. GESL cannot, given the regulatory and market uncertainties, and given the focus of this work to evaluate cost-effective carbon reduction options, make recommendations to implement renewable energy options based on carbon emission reduction potential alone. It is simpler and more certain to continue to seek cost effective energy efficient options, track their related carbon reduction benefits, and buy emission credits as necessary, when they become available as proposed by the Provincial government through the Pacific Carbon Trust.

  • July 2008 - 40 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    That said, renewable energy can have other qualitative benefits that may make it attractive to RBCM, such as increased security and control over long term costs and operation, demonstrating leadership, engaging and energizing staff and the community, and supporting local technology development. When viewed from these perspectives, RBCM may choose to implement some form of renewable energy, potentially using one of the many technologies support funds (e.g. BCs ICE fund2) as they become available. One real opportunity to investigate is for RBCM, as a customer to act as an advocate for the redesign of the District Energy System to use renewable energy. Changing such systems to use renewable energy sources are potentially more cost effective and, particularly when connected to highly political users (e.g. the parliament buildings), may be promoted on their qualitative benefits.

    2 BC Energy Mines and Petroleum Resources runs a $25-million program called the Innovative Clean Energy (ICE) fund. The ICE Fund is to help make British Columbia a world leader in alternative energy and power technology by showcasing B.C. technologies to the world and fostering solutions to B.C.s pressing energy challenges. It is designed to accelerate the commercialization of new, clean and renewable energy technologies. The 2008 program application deadline was in March, 2008 and was over subscribed; however, another ICE fund offering is anticipated.

  • July 2008 - 41 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    7.0 CARBON MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS

    The core carbon management strategy recommendations are as follows:

    1. Continue to maintain RBCMs carbon inventory per apparent regulatory requirements, but also as the basis for future risk and opportunity assessment.

    2. Implement only cost effective carbon reduction opportunities now essentially energy efficiency and energy management practices - but watch for opportunities to either advocate or participate in Provincial programs (like BC EMPRs ICE fund) to increase the cost/benefit of other reduction opportunities related to RBCM.

    3. All RBCM activities resulting in energy efficiency improvements need to be tracked to be included in annual Progress Reports as called for under the GHG Reduction Act. RBCM community and staff climate change advocacy activities should also be tracked and included in these reports.

    4. Wait for more clarity on Provincial carbon management requirements of government entities, and watch the development of the Pacific Carbon Trust, particularly with respect to offset purchase cost and potential purchase restrictions. A change or restriction in the availability of offsets to RBCM will require a re-evaluation of other available emission reduction opportunities.

    5. Engage the organization in pursuing environmental excellence. RBCM should aggressive launch internal environmental awareness and leadership activities to capitalize on staffs apparent engagement and commitment, with a focus that is broader than just carbon management.

    6. Organize an internal group to help deliver and maintain the above initiatives and to support delivery of an awareness campaign.

    7. Consider implementing a display tool, such as the Energy Mirror, to track and communicate energy and other initiatives progress to staff and the public.

    8. Advocate for the greening of the District Energy System through relationship with other government entities such as ARES.

    9. RBCM could consider the purchase of Green Power Certificates from BC Hydro to further reduce it emissions.

    10. Consider an alternative to the current company vehicle which would result in lower organization carbon emissions.

  • July 2008 - 42 - 07-1018-0023

    Golder Ecofys Solutions Ltd.

    These recommendations are discussed further below:

    1. Inventory Maintenance

    GESL has developed and provided RBCM an excel-based inventory for the years 2005, 2006 and 2007. While this meets the intent of this phase of work, carbon inventories are dynamic as RBCMs, regulatory and offset market circumstances change. Typically, organizations task an internal individual or group with the responsibility to maintain the inventory, and while this is currently an annual event, as circumstances change experience in the EU shows that more frequent updates to the inventory become necessary to effectively manage carbon risk. However, this is also typical of larger emitters than RBCM, so an annual update may suffice for some time. It is prudent to anticipate in future budgets a line item to support