SDG 13 - Climate Action

Room Recommissioning

Kiera Reid — Fri, 23 Sep 2022 16:23:12 +0000

Room Recommissioning Kiera Reid Fri, 09/23/2022 - 12:23

Project Background

Many buildings and rooms at the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ are not performing at the level they were designed to operate at. Recommissioning is the process of identifying and addressing systems that are not operating at optimal levels and also includes considerations of how different systems interact to affect overall performance.¹ Recommissioning some of the worst performing rooms can be a cost effective way to achieve quick and easy wins for energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions reductions. In fact, 62.3% of the University’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2018 came from the natural gas and electricity used to operate our buildings. Achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 and a 17.5% reduction in emissions below 2015 levels by 2025 will require major investments in building operating systems as highlighted by three initiatives in the Shift:Neutral climate action plan:

14. Reduction/Action: Complete an audit of campus buildings to determine a mix of short-term energy efficiency and carbon reduction projects (through 2025)

16. Reduction: Initiate a recommissioning program for top energy-consuming buildings to ensure controls and sequence of operations are operating as efficiently as possible

20. Consideration: Calibration and optimization of building scheduling and setpoints should be considered on an ongoing basis

This work also relates to the UN Sustainable Development Goals 7 and 13, for affordable and clean energy and climate action.

Project Examples

Consulting with Plant Operations to identify a room that is performing poorly, and assemble any available information on building design and performance.
Assessing the design capabilities and measure the performance of the room in terms of
- Lighting
- Temperature
- Air flow
- Energy use
- Lighting and temperature controls through the day/week/year
- Acoustics
- Air quality
Identifying problems with the room’s performance.
Performing a cost-benefit analysis of possible solutions to the problems identified.
Recommending improvements to the room systems and project the magnitude of the problems identified in that room for the entire campus.
Estimating the number of rooms that have similar performance gaps and the magnitude of the impact addressing them would have on total campus energy use and emissions.

¹ Mills E. Building commissioning: a golden opportunity for reducing energy costs and greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Energy efficiency. 2011;4(2):145-173. doi:10.1007/s12053-011-9116-8

Climate Impact Food Labels

Kiera Reid — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 20:04:12 +0000

Climate Impact Food Labels Kiera Reid Thu, 09/22/2022 - 16:04

Project Background

Food production and supply chains are responsible for 26% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions.¹ While we must all eat, there is great variation in the emissions impacts of the foods we choose to eat. Beans, for example, have a low carbon footprint because they require few agricultural inputs and they enrich the soil with nitrogen. Beef, on the other hand, has a high carbon footprint due to the methane (many times more potent greenhouse gas than CO2) produced in a cow’s stomach during fermentation and the cutting of trees and burning of grasslands to increase pastureland for beef production.²Yet there are other factors at play: farming practices, energy use for greenhouses, food miles, and others. Making informed choices for sustainable and climate-friendly food can be challenging, especially when there may be trade-offs involved. Is a locally-grown greenhouse tomato better than one grown in Mexico and flown here, for example?

2025 ��ݮ��Ƶ at the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ is looking to develop a climate-impact food label and communication tool to help patrons make more sustainable food choices. This work relates to the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ Environmental Sustainability Strategy objective O12 to increase awareness of healthy and sustainable food choices, and also supports the UN Sustainable Development Goals 2, 3, and 13.

Project Examples

Reviewing existing food labels used by 2025 ��ݮ��Ƶ on campus.
Researching best practices for roughly quantifying the climate impacts of different foods.
- What types of food have the highest and lowest carbon footprints?
- What are the major factors involved?
- How stable are these factors over time?
- Are there any established protocols that could easily be adopted?
Researching best practices from other institutions for quantifying and communicating the climate impact of the different food options. The focus should be on the entire menu item, rather than individual components (e.g. including the bread, tomato, lettuce, cheese, and meat patty for a hamburger).
Developing and testing a simple and easy to implement assessment tool for estimating the climate impacts of the food options served by 2025 ��ݮ��Ƶ in EV3’s Evergreen Café.
- The goal isn’t a quantitative value for climate impact but an assessment of how each food choice generally scores compared to alternatives.
Developing a labeling and communication strategy for the new food labels, including print at customer point of sale and media/electronic
- The strategy and accompanying media should be aligned to the UW 2025 ��ݮ��Ƶ Farm to Campus Fresh brand, sustainability goals and UW food services mission and core values.
- Any visual media (print or digital) should be accessible and editable so that UW food services can adapt it to new menus/dishes and add any required logos or branding needed to launch in actual food service locations on campus.
Make recommendations for how to easily measure the impact of that communications strategy on food choices on campus.

¹Poore, J., & Nemecek, T. (2018). Reducing food’s environmental impacts through producers and consumers. Science, 360(6392), 987-992.

²https://ourworldindata.org/food-ghg-emissions

Student Conversations on Sustainability

Kiera Reid — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 19:43:16 +0000

Student Conversations on Sustainability Kiera Reid Thu, 09/22/2022 - 15:43

Project Background

Katherine Hayhoe, world-renowned climate scientist and communicator likes to say that “The most important thing you can do to fight climate change is to talk about it”.¹ Talking about climate change and environmental sustainability has many positive impacts: it helps to raise awareness of these issues and why they matter to students, it raises the profile of climate change and sustainability and validates these as issues of concern in our society, it can empower individuals to take meaningful actions, it can give leaders the confidence that there is support for the systemic changes that are essential to building a sustainable future, and more.

In the University setting, students are central to the purpose of the institution and therefore the issues that matter to students are of concern to those who make decisions at the University and for the University. One of the key mechanisms for showing what matters to students is the conversations that they have amongst each other, with their instructors, with university staff, with administrators and other campus members. Creating more of a buzz around sustainability and climate change is therefore important but so is amplifying that buzz and creating quantitative and qualitative indicators for how strong that buzz is. When decision-makers at all levels are hearing that an issue is important to their major stakeholders, when they see numbers and stories that demonstrate that concern for the issue is widespread, they will feel the pressure to act, and they will know that there is support for action on these issues.

The Sustainability Office is looking to learn about best practices for encouraging more students to engage in sustainability-related conversations, both formally and informally. This work ultimately supports action on the Shift:Neutral climate action plan and all of the UN Sustainable Development Goals.

Project Example

Conducting a literature review on the institutional impacts of conversations about sustainability and climate change. Are there compelling examples, studies that have measured impacts, or theories of change that validate the importance of these conversations in general and in businesses/institutions in particular?
Researching best practices from other Universities for promoting conversations on sustainability and climate change.
Developing recommendations for how to inspire more sustainability and climate-related conversations between
- Students,
- Students and faculty or instructors,
- Students and staff (e.g. in residences, food courts, co-op office, etc.),
- Students and administrators.
Exploring simple ways of quantifying the number of student sustainability and climate change conversations occurring on campus.
Recommending simple ways of evaluating the impact of the recommendations.
Translating recommendations into infographics to disseminate on social media

¹ https://www.ted.com/talks/katharine_hayhoe_the_most_important_thing_you_can_do_to_fight_climate_change _talk_about_it

Energy Efficiency in IT

Kiera Reid — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 19:00:53 +0000

Energy Efficiency in IT Kiera Reid Thu, 09/22/2022 - 15:00

Project Background

We all know that it is bad to waste electricity. Electricity costs money and generating electricity has an environmental footprint (even renewables). On hot summer days in Ontario, we rely on gas-fired power plants to keep the lights on and the air conditioning running and that has a major carbon footprint and consequences for outdoor air quality. On these, and other peak demand days, the financial savings are also greater because, as a large institution, our electricity rates throughout the year are largely based on the electricity used during the five peak demand days (on billing, see IESO Guide to Wholesale Electricity Charges, and ��ݮ��Ƶ North Hydro Medium and Large Commercial Rates). Because we know in advance when these peak demand days are likely to occur, we can take steps to reduce our electricity use.

Information Technology (IT) uses a lot of electricity, and often the computers, servers and supportive technologies are not optimized for energy efficiency. Simple steps, such as increasing the thermostat on peak demand days, turning computers off before the weekend or before leaving for home on peak demand days, setting computers and their screens to hibernate by default when left inactive, and other measures can have a significant effect when applied to server rooms and computer labs. Some of these require a single intervention (e.g. setting computers to hibernate), and some require repeated interventions.

The University of ��ݮ��Ƶ Sustainability Office is looking to develop recommendations for how to reduce electricity use in computer labs and server rooms on peak demand days and throughout the year. This work relates to UN Sustainable Development Goals 7 and 13 and to item 33 of the campus Shift:Neutral climate action plan: Stronger guidelines for shutdown procedures of lights, IT equipment, and personal computing equipment will be considered.

Project Examples

Identifying all easy to implement mechanisms that could be used to reduce energy use in computer labs and server rooms.
Consulting with ITS and IT groups from one or more faculties to understand the barriers to implementation of these mechanisms. • Make recommendations for strategies that the University can use to reduce electricity use during peak demand days and throughout the year.
Estimating the electricity and emissions impacts of the proposed mechanisms using
- Marginal emissions factors from the IESO Annual Planning Outlook data tables
- High level electricity cost estimates from the Sustainability Office
Researching further value propositions for the target actions
Developing communications materials targeted at those that can implement the proposed mechanisms

Full Cost of Driving

Kiera Reid — Thu, 22 Sep 2022 13:23:39 +0000

Full Cost of Driving Kiera Reid Thu, 09/22/2022 - 09:23

Project Background

At the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ, commuting contributes an estimated 19% of emissions associated with the University. Commuting emissions are part of the campus goal of net zero emissions by 2050. Action item 41 of the Shift:Neutral climate action plan is the development of an institutional Transportation Demand Management Plan. Part of that plan will involve finding creative ways to convince commuters to forgo the personal vehicle and choose sustainable means of getting to and from campus: by walking, biking, rolling or taking public transit.

There are many considerations that go into the decision of how to commute to and from campus: distance, travel times, climate and weather, cost, availability of sustainable transportation options, fitness levels, need to combine a commute with other trips, etc. Often if a commuter owns a personal vehicle, however, the simplest and easiest choice is to use that vehicle. Some, however, may be persuaded to leave that vehicle at home or even to give up that vehicle if they are made aware of the true cost of driving to campus.

The University of ��ݮ��Ƶ is looking for an analysis of the full economic and societal costs of using a personal vehicle to commute to and from campus and recommendations on how to use these values to promote sustainable commuting options. This work relates to the UN Sustainable Development Goals 11 and 13.

Project Examples

Reviewing data for commuting mode choices and sustainable transportation options for the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ.
Performing a literature review to identify best practices for quantifying the full cost of owning and using a personal vehicle. The full cost may include:
- The full economic cost of owning a car so that you can commute to campus. This could be measured as an overall cost over the vehicle’s lifetime or an average per km travelled and could include:
  - Upfront cost
  - Fuel costs
  - Maintenance costs
  - Insurance costs
  - Parking costs
  - Distance travelled
- Incremental economic costs (avg yearly and per km commuting) of using a personal vehicle you already own to commute to UW including:
  - Maintenance costs from wear and tear
  - Fuel costs
  - Incremental insurance costs (from occasional to commuting vehicle)
  - Campus parking costs
- Social costs - try to estimate average per vehicle financial and non-financial costs in Canada for factors such as:
  - Health impacts of emissions
  - Health impacts from sedentary lifestyles and driving stress ▪ Road accident costs
  - Climate impacts from emissions
  - Climate impacts from embodied emissions from the vehicle ▪ Urban heat island effect
  - Road infrastructure (new roads, bridges, parking lots)
  - Road maintenance (includes paving, plowing)
  - Road policing
  - Other (effects on plants, wildlife, farmland?)
  - Make recommendations on how to communicate these costs to commuters as a means of promoting sustainable alternative commutes.

Projecting EV and E-Bike Adoption

Kiera Reid — Wed, 21 Sep 2022 17:48:39 +0000

Projecting EV and E-Bike Adoption Kiera Reid Wed, 09/21/2022 - 13:48

Project Background

In 2021, over 5% of new vehicles sold in Canada were electric.¹ E-bike sales are also on the rise worldwide including in Canada.² The economic, social and policy signals are all pointing toward greater adoption of electric vehicles and e-bikes in Canada. These technologies are also important solutions to the estimated 19% of University of ��ݮ��Ƶ emissions that are attributed to commuting.³ Action item 41 of the Shift:Neutral climate action plan is the development of an institutional Transportation Demand Management Plan in which EVs and e-bikes will play a role. Furthermore, as more of our commuters adopt EVs and e-bikes, there will be increased demand for EV chargers, e-bike chargers and secure e-bike storage options, and this is something that the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ must plan for.

Currently, the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ has 18 EV chargers. Charging is free at these level 2 chargers, but vehicle owners must have a valid parking permit and are limited to 4 hours of parking in charging spots. There are no dedicated e-bike parking or charging stations.

The University of ��ݮ��Ƶ is looking for an analysis of the projected uptake for electric vehicles, e-bikes and the support infrastructure required. This work will support the Sustainability Office’s Transportation Demand Management planning and work toward the UN Sustainable Development Goals 7, 11 and 13.

Project Examples

Performing a literature review to summarize projections for EV and e-bike adoption in Canada and Ontario.
Researching best practices from other institutions on the infrastructure investments needed to support the transition to electric transportation.
Researching best practices from other institutions for how to incentivize a shift to electrified transportation while also minimizing and/or recovering some of the infrastructure costs. This might include:
- Tiered parking rates based on type of vehicle
- Higher parking rates for internal combustion vehicles than for EVs
- Fees for charging
- Rates for secure bike parking
Exploring how the University could capitalize on vehicle to grid technology and what incentives might be required to enable this.
Making recommendations for how the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ can incentivize EV and e-bike use while minimizing the costs to the University.

¹ https://electricautonomy.ca/2022/02/15/ihs-markit-zev-adoption-canada-2021/

² https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2020/12/02/e-bike-sales-to-grow-from-37-million-to-17-million-peryear-by-2030-forecast-industry-experts/?sh=53342db22876

³ /sustainability/sites/ca.sustainability/files/uploads/files/shift_neutral_final_aoda.pdf

Parking Fee Structures

Kiera Reid — Tue, 20 Sep 2022 18:57:33 +0000

Parking Fee Structures Kiera Reid Tue, 09/20/2022 - 14:57

Project Background

At the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ, commuting contributes an estimated 19% of emissions associated with the University. Action item 41 of the Shift:Neutral climate action plan is the development of an institutional Transportation Demand Management Plan to support a shift to net zero emissions by 2050. Part of that plan will involve finding creative ways to encourage commuters to choose low carbon transportation options including electric vehicles, but especially active and public transportation. Parking fees can be a tool for incentivizing these alternative commuting choices, yet a strategy of simply increasing parking fees is often highly unpopular and therefore difficult to implement.

The University of ��ݮ��Ƶ Sustainability Office is looking for an analysis of best practices from other institutions for parking fee structures and the associated communication campaigns to promote active transportation, public transportation and commutes in electric vehicles. This work relates to the UN Sustainable Development Goals 11 and 13.

Project Examples

Reviewing data for parking fees, commuting mode choices and sustainable transportation options available for the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ.
Researching best practices from other institutions to identify parking fee structures used to promote a shift to sustainable transportation. Also include information about how these fee structures were marketed to commuters and the impacts that they had on commuting choices. These fee structures could include:
- Tiered pricing based on the type of vehicle (e.g. higher rates for internal combustion vehicles than for electric vehicles)
- A shift to daily pricing so that commuters are not “locked in” to vehicle use but can still drive to work in bad weather or when other needs arise
- Pricing structure based on commuting distance or availability of sustainable alternatives
Noting that any subsidies for sustainable transportation count as a work benefit that must be reported on income tax and tends to be unpopular.
Making recommendations for parking fee structures that could be used at the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ to promote alternative and sustainable commuting options.
Making recommendations for how to market these fee structures to increase buy-in from administrators and commuters.

Carbon in Campus Soils

Kiera Reid — Tue, 20 Sep 2022 18:05:23 +0000

Carbon in Campus Soils Kiera Reid Tue, 09/20/2022 - 14:05

Background

The University of ��ݮ��Ƶ Sustainability Office, in consultation with Grounds, and other stakeholders, has developed a Sustainable Land Care Standard. The goal is to provide a framework for the sustainable development and maintenance of campus grounds and natural areas. The standard includes consideration of soil and vegetation, fertilizers and pesticides, biodiversity, water management, snow and ice management, equipment, and stakeholder engagement. Of particular interest in the context of biological carbon fluxes, is how landscaping practices affect carbon storage in soils and other parts of the landscape and recommendations for how to increase carbon sequestration in soils through grounds maintenance practices.

Some Research Questions Include

Are there differences in carbon flux between naturalized areas and adjacent manicured (I.e. grass) spaces
Are there differences in carbon flux between areas in different stages of naturalization?
What effects do different ground cover plants make: grass vs ivy vs clover?
How does mulching affect carbon fluxes? Do different mulching materials matter?
How does the use of wood chips on pathways impact carbon fluxes in the underlying soil?
How does the type of vegetation along Laurel Creek affect carbon fluxes in the riverbanks?
How are remediation efforts at Spongy Lake (UW property near Baden) affecting carbon flux?

Resources

Sustainable Land Care Standard

Stakeholders

Sustainability Office
Plant Operations - Grounds
Ecology Lab

Proposed Deliverables

The details of the deliverables are flexible but must meet the requirements set out by the course instructor. Some proposed deliverables include:

A work plan early in the term outlining key milestones and responsibilities.
Updates on progress at least once during the term.
A final report with research and recommendations.
A final meeting to review the outcomes of the report and answer questions.

Co-op Car Requirement Study

Kiera Reid — Tue, 20 Sep 2022 14:47:32 +0000

Co-op Car Requirement Study Kiera Reid Tue, 09/20/2022 - 10:47

Project Background

Transportation accounted for 49% of ��ݮ��Ƶ Region’s total emissions in 2015¹ and will be a major target as it enacts its plan to achieve an 80% reduction in emissions below 2005 levels by 2050. Here at the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ, commuting contributes an estimated 19% of emissions associated with the University². Commuting emissions are part of the campus goal of net zero emissions by 2050. Action item 41 of the Shift:Neutral climate action plan is the development of an institutional Transportation Demand Management Plan. The development of this plan will require a better understanding of current commuting mode share and the transportation mode options that are practical and accessible to employees.

Some co-op work terms require students to have access to a vehicle for their work either because the job requires travel or because workplaces are difficult to access by other means. Between winter of 2018 and fall of 2021, 6.9% of ��ݮ��Ƶ co-op job postings explicitly required access to personal transportation. This is likely an underestimation because many jobs moved to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic, and because job postings may not have explicitly made this a requirement even when it is effectively true.

There are concerns that the convenience of a personal vehicle can result in decreased use of sustainable travel choices for commuting to campus. Furthermore, car ownership is expensive, in the order of $9,000US per year¹ and access to a vehicle could be a barrier to equitable access to co-op jobs. Here at the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ, where two-thirds of full-time undergraduate students are enrolled in a co-op program, the impact of requiring a vehicle for co-op work terms may be significant. It may also create a sunk cost wherein once they purchase a vehicle, students are less likely to use more sustainable modes of transportation to and from the campus going forward.

The University of ��ݮ��Ƶ would like to understand how many students feel the need to buy personal vehicles for their co-op terms and explore options for reducing the impact of this requirement on student travel to campus behaviour. This work relates to the UN Sustainable Development Goals 8, 10, 11 and 13.

Project Examples

Conducting a student survey to:
- Estimate how many own or are considering acquiring a personal vehicle as a direct consequence of co-op work terms,
- Understand whether required vehicle access is a barrier to obtaining co-op placements and if so, estimate the degree to which it acts as a barrier,
- Estimate the annual cost of vehicle ownership for students,
- Estimate the impact on commuting choices in subsequent academic semesters,
- Assess their willingness to consider other options, such as 4-month rentals.
Conducting research to profile any historical or existing programs for 4-month vehicle rentals (the University of ��ݮ��Ƶ currently has negotiated preferred rates with Enterprise for short term rentals).
Conducting research to identify other programs that could cost-effectively reduce the need for personal vehicle ownership for co-op work terms.
Performing a high-level cost-effectiveness analysis for vehicle ownership versus 4-month rentals, assuming one co-op term per year requires access to a vehicle.
Making recommendations for reducing the need for vehicle ownership for co-op terms.

¹Moody, J., Farr, E., Papagelis, M. et al. The value of car ownership and use in the United States. Nat Sustain 4, 769–774 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00731-5

Visualizing UW in 2050

Kiera Reid — Mon, 19 Sep 2022 14:32:32 +0000

Visualizing UW in 2050 Kiera Reid Mon, 09/19/2022 - 10:32

Project Background

Imagine you are returning to campus in 2050, perhaps for a reunion with your fellow classmates, or even to witness your own child graduate. What will the campus look like? We don’t know a lot about what will change between now and mid-century, but we do know that our campus and our society aim to be net zero emissions. Our climate action plan, Shift:Neutral, lays out a pathway to achieving those emissions reductions: through upgrades to buildings, through electrification of our heating systems, through greater use of active and sustainable transportation, through clean energy production, etc. Green spaces may also look different as we increasingly value naturalized spaces, green roofs, the services provided by trees, and other forms of biodiversity. How will those things change the look of our campus? That is far less obvious.

The University of ��ݮ��Ƶ Sustainability Office is looking for student visions of what a sustainable and zero-emission campus might look like in 2050. This work relates to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, with a particular emphasis on SDGs 11, 13, and 15.

Project Examples

Reviewing the Shift Neutral climate action plan and Sustainable Development Goals to understand the changes needed to achieve net zero emissions and a more sustainable campus in general.
Creating images of that show how the campus as a whole or recognizable parts of it will evolve between now and 2050.