Net-Zero Heroes? Climate Change Mitigation Efforts and Strategies across Australian Group-of-Eight Universities

By inergency On Apr 1, 2024

[ad_1]

3.1. Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The Go8 universities can be separated into two distinct groups based on their size: five larger universities with annual populations (EFTSL + FTE) between 50,000 and 65,000, and three smaller institutions with annual populations between 20,000 and 30,000 (Figure 1a). This correlates to the location of the primary campus in a larger metropolitan centre (Mon and UoM in Melbourne, UoS and UNSW in Sydney, and UQ in Brisbane) or smaller capital cities (UoA in Adelaide, UWA in Perth, and ANU in Canberra). All Go8 universities, except for UWA, have experienced population growth over the past decade: on average, campus populations have increased from a mean of 36,456 in 2011 to 46,967 in 2019 (an annual growth of 3.6%). The largest increases were at UoM, Mon, and ANU (over 30%), followed by the two Sydney universities (around 25%), and the smallest increases were at UQ and UoA (around 10%). Populations decreased in 2020 in line with the COVID-19 pandemic, which was particularly noticeable for the universities Mon, UoM, UNSW, and ANU.

The average energy consumption of Australian Go8 universities increased annually by 2% between 2011 and 2019 (Figure 1b). Between 2011 and 2019, UoS and UNSW increased net energy consumption by around 40%, UoM, UoA, and ANU increased by around 20%, whereas UQ was the only university that had a decrease in net energy consumption before the pandemic. Reduced energy consumption during the pandemic years was also not consistent among the universities. Some universities had much greater decreases (UoM, Mon, UoS, and UNSW) than others (UoA), and some universities had no change (UQ).

In comparison, average Scope 1 and 2 CO₂e emissions effectively plateaued between 2011 and 2019 among all universities (Figure 1c). However, we again observed differences among universities: those that had increases in energy consumption also showed increases in CO₂e emissions (~25% increase for UoS and UNSW, and 15% for ANU), and only three universities had reductions in CO₂e emissions in that period (−20% for UQ, −14% for UoA, and −4% for Mon). In the pandemic years, emissions declined, on average, by 15% in just two years.

Average per-capita emissions of the Go8 universities decreased from 2.60 tCO₂e per capita in 2011 to 2.08 tCO₂e in 2019: a 20% decrease over eight years (Figure 1d). UoA, UoS, UNSW, and UWA had the lowest emissions per capita (1.3–1.6 tCO₂e in 2019), UoM, Mon, and UQ had per-capita emissions of around 2.0–2.3 tCO₂e in 2019, and ANU was the major outlier (4.3 tCO₂e per capita in 2019). ANU’s 2019 value is nearly three times greater than the average of the other universities and nearly five times greater than the smallest per-capita emitter, UoA.

Energy consumption and CO₂e emissions of the Go8 universities were closely correlated (Figure 2a), whereby 92% of the variance in annual emissions could be explained by energy consumption. The figure also illuminates the effects of changing state-level emission factors. Vertical drops are visible for UQ (grey) and UoA (green) during years where their state-level electricity emission factors also drastically decreased.

Population size of universities was weakly correlated with energy consumption (Figure 2b). The universities in the colder climates (ANU, UoM, and Mon) had greater net energy consumption compared to the universities in warmer climates. Most universities had a linear relationship between population size and energy consumption. Exceptions were UoA, UQ, and ANU, which indicated some level of energy efficiency with increasing population size.

A second common benchmark to compare energy consumption and GHG emissions across different sized institutions are emissions per area. Figure 3 illustrates energy (square) and emissions (cross) intensities across the Go8 in 2019. Most universities had similar energy intensities of around 0.7 GJ m⁻².

ANU remained the Go8 university with the highest emissions intensity per gross floor area (GFA); however, the extent was less pronounced compared to campus population as a benchmark (Figure 1d). There was a positive relationship between gross floor area (GFA) and campus population among the Go8 universities: universities with a greater population also occupied a greater area.

3.2. University Emissions Reporting and Disclosures

Australian universities create their own emissions inventories and many report on Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions voluntarily. Figure 4 highlights inconsistencies between mandatory and voluntarily reported Scope 1 and 2 emissions. While the Australian National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting scheme (NGER) and voluntary reports were consistent for Scope 1 emissions, Scope 2 emissions exhibited differences; notably, ANU’s Scope 2 emissions (83,961 tCO₂e NGER versus 1621 tCO₂e in ANU reports). This is because ANU has elected to only present “market-based” rather than “location-based” emissions accounting, allocating zero emissions to all electricity consumed within its territory due to the ACT government having signed power purchase agreements with renewable power generators across the country. In the case of UoS, their Scope 1 and 2 emissions displayed within STARS reporting is one-thousandth of their NGER emissions, suggesting they missed three zeros, and the error was not detected by STARS auditors.

Scope 2 emissions (from electricity generation) dominated the overall emissions for most universities, while Scope 1 emissions made up around 10% of Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Universities in cooler areas tended to have a higher proportion of Scope 1 emissions (ANU, Mon, and UoM), while others had almost none (UQ). Three universities had equally high Scope 1 and 2 emissions, with around 130,000 t CO₂e (UoM, Mon, and UQ), three universities had Scope 1 and 2 emissions around 100,000 t CO₂e (UoS, ANU, and UNSW), and the two smallest universities also had the lowest Scope 1 and 2 emissions, with around 30,000 t CO₂e.

Scope 3 emissions were disclosed by six of the eight universities, and values ranged by an order of magnitude largely because the universities all used different emissions boundaries (Table 1). All lacked a description of the methodological framework and processes. For example, while UNSW and UoM disclosed that Scope 3 emissions account for “purchased goods and services” or “third-party services”, respectively, the extensiveness within these categories and the estimation methodology were not elaborated. At the most developed end was UNSW, which disclosed itemised values for all material emissions within the 15 categories stipulated through the Greenhouse Gas Protocol framework [11]. The consequences of this inconsistent reporting are substantial. UNSW’s Scope 3 emissions were five times greater than its combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Meanwhile, despite ANU and UoS having higher Scope 1 and 2 emissions than UNSW, both reported less than 10% the Scope 3 emissions of UNSW.

3.3. Net-Zero Targets and Plans

All Go8 universities have announced an emissions target in line with science-based targets of net-zero emissions no later than 2050 (Table 2). In terms of the target year, UNSW has the most ambitious plan and has outlined Scope 1, 2, and 3 emission reduction targets of 30%, 50%, and net-zero by 2025, 2030, and 2050, respectively. The least ambitious is UoA, which has not committed to carbon neutrality (of Scope 1 and 2) until 2050. The remaining six universities have set net-zero targets between 2025 and 2030, of which UoM and UQ state will include some Scope 3 emissions but have not defined their emissions boundary.

As of September 2022, only five of the Go8 universities had current strategies that detail their pathway to net-zero emissions by their target year. UoA and UNSW’s strategies expired in 2020 and 2021. UQ and UoM’s strategies had expired in 2020 and were only updated in 2021 and 2022, respectively. Both updated strategies were more general in nature than their previous iteration, with a departure away from SMART objectives (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound). Examples include UoM’s goal to reduce Scope 3 emissions “wherever possible”, or UQ’s goal of an “accountable supply chain” without any indicators of performance.

3.4. Commitment towards Renewables and Electrification

While all universities have installed some amount of on-campus solar, no university is close to self-sufficiency, with the top-performing university (UQ) still relying on grid electricity for 94% of its energy needs. Nonetheless, on-campus renewables are being installed yearly, with goals of up to 20% of energy needs being sourced behind-the-meter by 2030 (Mon). This still leaves most of the energy to be sourced from state grids, thus the resulting influx of power purchase agreements by all universities (or controlling government, in the case of ANU) to be able to reach 100% renewable and carbon-neutral targets.

In terms of electrification targets, Mon and UQ stand out as having the most ambitious targets for electrification. UQ already has the lowest reliance on natural gas out of the Go8, largely thanks to having the warmest climate and no need for gas heating. UQ is also committing to a 25% electric vehicle fleet by 2025, including intercampus commuter buses. Mon has a much steeper trajectory towards total electrification due particularly to their higher reliance on gas heating, but have committed to eliminating all gas heating, water, and appliances by 2030.

3.5. Target for Absolute Emissions Reductions

UNSW was the only university to explicitly include absolute reduction targets related to their total Scope 1–3 emissions. However, other universities have targets to reduce or cap aspects of consumption, which would have the same effect. UoM, Mon, and UWA all have substantial targets for reducing energy consumption, with UoM being the most ambitious at 18 to 25 GWh reduction per annum (equivalent to an 8% to 12% reduction in total energy consumption from a 2019 baseline). However, UoM’s previous sustainability plan had the same target, to “reduce electricity demand by 18,350 megawatt hours per year by 2020”, which was reported to have been “partially met”, with installed efficiencies equivalent to 1841 MWh (just 10% of the original target). The 2020 sustainability report acknowledged this shortfall, explaining that “planning for net-zero emissions electricity in 2021 through renewable energy PPAs has taken precedence over electricity demand reduction projects”.

While ANU’s beyond-zero strategy is still in development, the single mention of GHG emissions in their Strategic Plan is to “reduce our carbon emissions intensity over the life of the Plan”. However, referring to emissions intensity rather than total emissions allows ANU to continue to increase their total emissions so long as they build larger and marginally more efficiently. Arguably better, therefore, is UQ’s energy consumption target to maintain consumption below a 2019 baseline, which from an emissions point of view will still likely lead to carbon reductions as emissions intensities continue to decrease.

Lastly, while UoS say they “aspire to decrease our electricity and gas usage”, they do not go as far as adding measurable targets. However, they target emissions related to Scope 3 airline travel, including a goal to reduce the number of kilometres flown on university business by 20%. This is one of the few examples where a university explicitly outlines a reduction in human consumption of a good or service, over targets and strategies that can be achieved solely with improved efficiencies and sourcing.

[ad_2]