Exploring the State of Sustainability

in Higher Education 2016

February 21, 2017

2

Speakers

Jennifer Andrews Heather Finnegan

Manages Sightlines Sustainability Services:

• GHG Inventory

• STARS Reporting

• Sustainability Planning

• Manages Campus Carbon Calculator/CarbonMAP

• Reports UNH Sustainability Data

• Coordinates Campus Metrics Working Group

3

2016 State of Sustainability Report

Download your copy now!

Visit www.sightlines.com to

download your free copy

today

> Why we study the State of Sustainability

> 2016 Findings, highlighting each stage of the building

lifecycle:

> Construction

> Operations

> Capital Re-Investment

> Demolition

> Questions/Discussion

4

Agenda

5

Join the Conversation

Enter questions in the box at any time

Enter questions

here at any

point during the

webinar

Presentation slides

and webinar

recording will be

sent to each

attendee following

today’s session

6

Resource Handouts

Instant access to complimentary content

Data & Sustainability.pptx Out with the Old.pptx Plan More, React Less.pptx Show all downloads…

Resources Available

2016 State of Facilities in

Higher Education

Data & Sustainability – How

the Right Data Creates

Success

Campus Sustainability

Case Study – Fort Lewis

College

Speaker Bios

A copy of today’s

presentation

Introduction & Background

7

> To assess progress for the sector, as a whole

> Celebrate achievements

> Outline specific and actionable opportunities

for continuous improvement

8

Why We Study the State of Sustainability

To explore key sustainability questions

99

A Building’s Carbon Profile%

Ca

rbo

n

Lifespan of building

Theoretical Emissions Profile of a Building

Source: UNH Sustainability Institute Fellow Brendan Hellebusch

Capital

Reinvestment

Demolition

Construction

Operations

Capital

Reinvestment

1010

A Building’s Carbon Profile%

Ca

rbo

n

Lifespan of building

Theoretical Emissions Profile of a Building

Capital

Reinvestment

Demolition

Construction

Operations

Source: UNH Sustainability Institute Fellow Brendan Hellebusch

Capital

Reinvestment

In recent years, most

institutions have

measured just a portion

of operational

emissions

1111

US Higher Ed Emissions Profile Incomplete

Scope 3 emissions from procurement account for 37% of UK Higher Ed profile

11%

25%

12%25%

27%

ComprehensiveGHG Inventory

Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3

US Best Practice GHG Inventory

Source: Higher Education Funding Council for England

Not Measured:

ProcurementConstruction

Procurement

Other

Procurement

Commuting

Ground/Air Travel

T&D Losses

Waste/Wastewater

1212

What Other Metrics Allow Us to Assess Progress?

Sightlines

• ROPA+ Database

AASHE

• STARS Database

National Association of Educational Procurement

• Annual Survey

USGBC

• Higher Education Project List

Second Nature

• Tangible ActionStatistics

Living Building Institute

• Higher Education Project List

Findings: Construction

13

14

Putting Campus Age in ContextHigher Ed has experienced 2 major building booms

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

% o

f G

SF

National Construction Trends in Higher Education

Sightlines Database- Construction Age Source: Sightlines

1515

LEED Construction Popular in 2nd Building Boom

In the future, Sightlines will track non-certified projects built to LEED standards

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Hig

her

Ed

ucati

on

Pro

ject

Co

un

t

LEED New Construction Projects

Certified Bronze Silver Gold Platinum

Source: U.S. Green Building Council

1616

Emerging Green Building RegimesCreate “Stretch Goals” for Green Construction

Source: International Living Building Institute

Findings: Operations

17

1818

Decreasing Utility ExpendituresProgress reflects energy efficiency improvements & lower unit costs

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

2007 2015

% o

f F

acilit

ies O

pera

tin

g B

ud

get

Utilities Spending

Source: Sightlines

-15%

-12%

-9%

-6%

-3%

0%

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

2007 2015

Un

it C

os

t $

/MM

BT

U

Unit Cost

Electric

Fossil

19

Decreased Spending on Envelope/Systems/Infrastructure

Yet, improvements in energy efficiency

42% 45%

40%39%

18% 16%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2007 2015

Spending by Package

Space/Safety Systems/Envelope

Infrastructure

-15%

-12%

-9%

-6%

-3%

0%

-

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

2007 2015

BT

U/G

SF

Energy Consumption

Fossil Electric Percent Change

Source: Sightlines

2020

Scope 1 Stationary and Scope 2 Emissions

Reductions largely driven by switch to Natural Gas

-15%

-12%

-9%

-6%

-3%

0%

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

2007 2015

MT

CD

E/ 1

,00

0 G

SF

Emissions

Fossil Electric Percent Change

Source: Sightlines

66%

84%

13%

4%21%

12%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2007 2015

Fuel Mix

Natural Gas Coal Other Fuel

Findings: Capital

Reinvestment

21

2222

Campuses Must Prepare to Replace Aging Systems

Future systems needs of 2 peaks will coincide in future

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

% o

f G

SF Wave 1

Needs

Wave 2

Needs

System Life

Cycle

Roofing 25 years

Electrical 25 years

Exteriors 30 years

HVAC 30 years

Plumbing 35 years

Source: Sightlines

2323

Capital Implications of Existing SpaceNeeds will grow to exceed $6B annually across the Sightlines database

$0

$1

$2

$3

$4

$5

$6

$7

$ in

Bil

lio

ns

Total Database Need 1950-20503-Year Moving Average Using ROPA+ Prediction

Source: Sightlines

2424

Capital Spending into Existing Buildings

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2007 2015

Capital Spending

Existing Space New Construction

Source: U.S. Green Building CouncilSource: Sightlines

86%

2%

12%

Higher Education LEED Projects

LEED BD+C

LEED O+M

LEED ID+C

>50% of Capital Spent in Existing Buildings Few Existing Buildings Certify under LEED

2525

Formal Green Procurement Policies Lag

But buyers do consider sustainable attributes

33%

77%

Does your institution have a formal green procurement policy?

Yes No

Source: National Association of

Educational Procurement

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%100%

Co

nstr

uc

tio

nS

erv

ice

sC

on

str

uc

tio

nM

ate

rials

Respondents consider sustainability when purchasing:

Findings: Demolition

26

2727

Construction Significantly Outpacing Demolition

“Net Zero Growth” strategies not yet mainstream

511

143

137 60

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

2007 2015

GS

F (

Mil

lio

ns

)

Construction & Demolition

Constructed Demolished

Source: Sightlines

2828

Construction & Demolition Waste Diversion

NEED TO FIND A LOCAL C&D

WASTE HAULER?

Construction Waste Management

Database(National Institute of Building Science)

63%

37%

C&D Waste Tracking Amongst STARS participants

Track Do Not Track

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

STARS 2.0

Perc

en

t

Construction & Demolition Waste

Diverted Landfilled

Source: AASHE & U.S. Green Building Council

Threshold to earn

total available

points in LEED

Projects

Key Findings and

Recommendations

29

30

Summary of Key Findings

> Recommendations:

> Adopt a more “life-cycle” approach to understanding institutional impact, including expanded annual tracking and reporting of Scope 3 emissions

> Adapt sustainability policies that target existing buildings

> Seek continuous improvement in sustainability performance

Institutions Measure

Carbon

Institutional Policies

Common

Average

Performance

Construction

Capital

Reinvestment

Operations

Demolition

31

Thank you for attending!

Questions/Comments?

32

What Did You Think?

Tell us your thoughts and a little something about yourself

Please share your feedback

by answering a few quick

questions after the session

to help us get to know you

better and improve our

webinars for the future.

33

Thank you for attending!

Questions/Comments?