AB0401 S02 Grp 3 Bryan Lim, Olivia Tan, Chong ZhiHui, Toh Yilin, Ang GuoXiang Nicholas Tan

Uploaded on

E-learning Week : Changing Our World

E-learning Week : Changing Our World

More in: Education , Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
  • Good beginning, although the false accuracy of your derived data is distracting. (considering the many sources of error, you should report 80-90 million kg CO2 instead of 84,704,011.46 kg CO2- at most 1-2 significant digits in this data). Regarding online learning, the main savings are in travel and classrooms, and are probably more than offset by the very high fixed cost of developing suitable new materials- even Harvard B-school outsources their accounting education to Coursera! A shift from classroom to online learning may indeed be viable, but its risks demand careful thought and mitigation, such as the potential impact on our international accreditation and on the market for our graduates (employers are not on your stakeholder list). If we envision a future in which teams collaborate across the Internet to solve complex problems, we’ll have to prepare our students by building learning environments that simulate this.
    Very nice critical analysis of carbon trading, but what should I do after I leave the room?
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide
  • http://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/abs/MiomboConference/HLa.pdfhttp://www.greenbiz.com/news/2008/04/01/benefits-and-drawbacks-carbon-offsets
  • The Ethics of Carbon OffsetsHeather Lovell, Geosciences, University of Edinburghhttps://www.google.com.sg/search?q=carbon+trading&client=firefox-a&hs=QBZ&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=0HFnUo7YH879rAfbzIDQBw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=752&bih=706#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=5K5THG6sK6TzuM%3A%3BDVDh2aeiE6BZiM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fcdn7.triplepundit.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2010%252F04%252F2007-06-14carbontrading.gif%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.triplepundit.com%252F2010%252F04%252Fcarbon-trading-market%252F%3B242%3B240
  • http://www.reducesaveoffset.com/pros-and-cons/http://www.blogcdn.com/green.autoblog.com/media/2007/03/conesville_power_plant.jpg
  • http://www.reducesaveoffset.com/pros-and-cons/http://www.triplepundit.com/topic/carbon-trading/
  • http://www.reducesaveoffset.com/pros-and-cons/https://www.google.com.sg/search?q=carbon+trading&client=firefox-a&hs=QBZ&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=0HFnUo7YH879rAfbzIDQBw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=752&bih=706#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=zyIW8QFMpZF8DM%3A%3BHNoUMgFHVOJcTM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.socialism.com%252Fdrupal-6.8%252Fsites%252Fdefault%252FdrupalFiles%252Fcarbon.jpg%253F1255024732%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.socialism.com%252Fdrupal-6.8%252F%253Fq%253Dnode%252F300%3B276%3B300
  • http://www.geos.ed.ac.uk/abs/MiomboConference/HLa.pdf
  • The Ethics of Carbon OffsetsHeather Lovell, Geosciences, University of Edinburghhttp://www.naturalnews.com/027676_carbon_trading_emissions.html
  • The Ethics of Carbon OffsetsHeather Lovell, Geosciences, University of Edinburghhttps://www.google.com.sg/search?q=carbon+trading&client=firefox-a&hs=QBZ&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=0HFnUo7YH879rAfbzIDQBw&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=752&bih=706#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=3h1RB-JyK79H1M%3A%3BfhPgtTlc2tF8KM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252F1.bp.blogspot.com%252F_fsiZQ884Py0%252FTEQDXnBw3BI%252FAAAAAAAABbo%252Fcb5Pod8rPjE%252Fs72-c%252Fets_explained_carbon-trading-scheme-climate-news-ets-new-zealand-galeforcesales-news.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fcarbontradingscheme.blogspot.com%252F2012%252F07%252Fsolar-panel-firms-mislead-over-carbon.html%3B72%3B66
  • The Ethics of Carbon OffsetsHeather Lovell, Geosciences, University of Edinburgh
  • The Ethics of Carbon OffsetsHeather Lovell, Geosciences, University of Edinburghhttp://www.macrobusiness.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/carbon-creidt.gif
  • http://www.greenworldbvi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Carbon_Investments4.png
  • http://www.greenworldbvi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Carbon_Investments4.png
  • http://www.greenworldbvi.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Carbon_Investments4.png


  • 1. Changing our World do we plant trees or create online courses? Done by: Sem 2 Group 3 Ang Guo Xiang Toh Yilin Janice Chong Zhihui, Ray Tan Ying Jie, Olivia Lim Wei Loong, Bryan Tan Xingtai, Nicholas
  • 2. Carbon Footprint of NTU •In order to determine statistically if classroom learning should be taken over by E-learning, we must first calculate the carbon footprint of NTU as of now. •The method used to calculate the carbon footprint of NTU is similar to that of in Sprangers (2012) •The carbon emissions from each activity is calculated by: (Sum of All Activity Data Factors x Emission Factors)
  • 3. Scope Emission Category Total CO2 Emission (kg CO2) Total CO2 Emission (%) 1 Direct Transportation Sources •Shuttle buses 2,654.95 0.0031% 2 Purchased Electricity 81,918,000 96.71%
  • 4. Scope Emission Category Total CO2 Emission (kg CO2) Total CO2 Emission (%) 3 Faculty and Staff Commuting 227,452.80 0.27% 3 Students Commuting 548,210.36 0.65% 3 Employee Travel 691,415.62 0.82% 3 Water Usage 306,064 0.36% 3 Paper Consumption 19,582.64 0.023% 3 Waste 990,631.09 1.17% For more information, please refer to the Appendix.
  • 5. Carbon Footprint of NTU The total carbon emissions from NTU is estimated to be: 84,704,011.46 kgCO2
  • 6. Should we change to E-Learning?
  • 7. Pros of E-learning • Reduced overall cost for NTU due to the elimination of costs associated with instructor's salaries, meeting room rentals, and student travel, lodging, and meals. • Learning times reduced, an average of 40 to 60 percent, as found by Brandon Hall • Learners and instructor do not need to be online at the same time; Facilitate asynchronous learning. • Allows for self-paced training • Eliminate barriers of time, distance, and socio-economic status • More focus on the needs of the individual learner • Take advantage of the Internet: real time, anywhere, anytime • Cuts paperwork and administrative overhead.
  • 8. Limitations of E-learning • With e-learning, the biggest trade-off is the student’s learning process and experience that can only be derived from a traditional classroom setting.
  • 9. Stakeholder Analysis: Students Traditional class setting E-learning They are able to approach their instructor for more information Fails to prepare students for participation in learning experiences such as working in groups and simulation of real-life working environment. They are able to obtain clarifications for concepts A lack of rigor and execution opportunities given in an elearning course. They can engage in discussion with the instructor and other classmates Under such conditions, students may find themselves feeling handicapped or overwhelmed when faced with the demands at work Allows for exchange opinions and ideas
  • 10. Stakeholder Analysis: Students Traditional class setting E-learning The existence of such social interactions creates a positive climate that is unique to a classroom setting and is instrumental to facilitate the instructor’s job and capture the attention of students to engage them in learning. The lack of social interaction or vigilance in an e-learning setting has been known to result in shorter attention span and poor overall satisfaction and learning outcomes.
  • 11. Stakeholder Analysis: Students Traditional class setting E-learning Students tend to learn more when guided by a teacher as they stand to benefit more from the teacher’s knowledge than from the text alone. There is no safe conclusion about the effectiveness of elearning as the existing evaluations are usually informal and conducted by users rather than independent sources. Large-scale evaluations have tended to focus on issues such as usability, learner preferences, and equipment quality rather than learner outcome.
  • 12. General attitudes of NTU students towards e-learning • Cultural acceptance: Local students used to the traditionalclassroom method of delivering learning materials that they were exposed to since primary school, hence they may be less receptive to the shift to e-learning • Negative attitudes due to the technology issues like lack of user-friendliness, unsophisticated e-learning platform, possible problems with accessing the e-learning portal. • The amount of uploaded information electronically for each course far exceeded the pace and information workload of conventional teaching and thus resulted in disorientation and exhaustion of students.
  • 13. Conclusion • E-learning may be a viable option in terms of sustainability, as it will significantly reduce the amount of energy consumed within the school. However, after considering the limitations posed to the students, we conclude that a significant shift of course delivery to E-learning may not be feasible. • In view of sustainability, we propose that E-learning can be gradually introduced into our curriculum, but not to the extent that it will be at the expense of the students’ interests. • We hope that through this gradual process, students may subsequently become accustomed to E-learning, which will reduce these current limitations, opening up more E-learning opportunities in the future.
  • 14. Carbon Offsets “Carbon offsets are the modern day indulgences, sold to an increasingly carbon conscious public to absolve their climate sins”. Kevin Smith 2007 The Carbon Neutral Myth
  • 15. Management Australian Government CO2 Australia Students Singapore Government Local Community
  • 16. Management Australian Government CO2 Australia Students Singapore Government Local Community
  • 17. Management - NTU • Easy and practical alternative to achieve carbon neutral target • Able to focus on improving other aspects of NTU • Understands that this idea would probably not achieve long term sustainability
  • 18. Management Australian Government CO2 Australia Students Singapore Government Local Community
  • 19. CO2 Australia • For-profit organisation: Business model provides a steady revenue stream • Able to tap on many organisations worldwide who prefers short-term solutions
  • 20. Management Australian Government CO2 Australia Students Singapore Government Local Community
  • 21. Students • Perceive the school as putting effort in being responsible for their actions and accountable for their carbon footprints • Sees NTU as a reputable school
  • 22. Management Australian Government CO2 Australia Students Singapore Government Local Community
  • 23. Local Community • General improvement to the environment • Positive outlook of the carbon emission situation
  • 24. Management Australian Government CO2 Australia Students Singapore Government Local Community
  • 25. Singapore Government • Outflow of economic resources which does not improve the Singapore economy • Positive effects of buying carbon credit not directly affected by Singapore but in host country instead • Indeed cheaper to carry out such activities in Australia due to the lack of land space in Singapore
  • 26. Management Australian Government CO2 Australia Students Singapore Government Local Community
  • 27. Australian Government • Inflow of economic resources which boosts the Australian economy • Overall carbon footprint low due to plants • Improvement of the hole in the ozone layer which has started to spread to southern parts of Australia
  • 28. Justification for offsets • Atmosphere uniformly mixed so greenhouse gas reductions can occur anywhere • Some people, countries and sectors find full domestic reductions too difficult • Developing countries should gain some benefits from Kyoto • Emission reductions are cheaper/easier in developing world • Projects can have side benefits for sustainable development, biodiversity etc.
  • 29. Justification for offsets • In cases where emissions are inevitable, offsets provide a way to try to remediate the effects. • Offsets are a source of investment for renewable energy and other projects to mitigate climate change, therefore filling the void that some governments have left by not stepping in to regulate and/or limit the production of carbon dioxide emissions.
  • 30. Justification for offsets • Socio-economic and environmental benefits such as biodiversity conservation and improvements in the quality of life for a local population. • 20-25 per cent of anthropogenic emissions released into the atmosphere are caused by land use change and therefore climate change mitigation must address land use and deforestation.
  • 31. Justification for offsets • Carbon sequestration through re-vegetation could provide the renewable biomass materials and fuels needed for the future. In addition to carbon sequestration, forests can also cool the planet by evaporating water to the atmosphere and increasing cloudiness.
  • 32. Ethical concerns of carbon offsetting Fundamental Moral Objection Project Level Issues Outcome dependent
  • 33. 1. Fundamental Moral Objection • A price should not be put on the environment • Only regards the instrumental value but disregards the intrinsic value • Moral values subsumed & disregarded
  • 34. 2. Outcome dependent • • • 1. Offsets fine in principle as long as benefits outweigh costs Achieving environmental goals Has limitations such as: Scientific Uncertainty due to the Global Carbon Cycle and Measurement and monitoring issues. 2. Policy Failure due to difficulties in implementation and design.
  • 35. 3. Project Level Issues • Neo-Colonialist: A policy whereby a major power uses economic and political means to perpetuate or extend its influence over underdeveloped nations or areas Cumulative CO2 emissions 1950-2000: with and without land use change and forestry source: http://pdf.wri.org/navigating_numbers_chapter6.pdf
  • 36. 3. Project Level Issues • • • • • • unequal revenue distribution from projects corporate profiteering lack of local participation bias towards large industrial projects questionable sustainable development benefits Over emphasizing on carbon and neglects sustainability
  • 37. Analysis • CO2 Australia effective in reducing worldwide carbon emissions but does not solve the core problem • The carbon emissions by NTU • Carbon trading is aimed at the wrong goal • Should instead target the cause of carbon emissions in NTU instead
  • 38. Analysis • Buying the opportunity to increase more carbon emissions • Organizations are merely using purchase of carbon credits as a chance to increase carbon emissions • “Think money can buy everything” • Tree planting lacks permanence and does not solve our reliance on fossil fuels • Leaving it to the market is ineffective and undemocratic
  • 39. Analysis • Long term: In the long run, NTU should not undertake the purchase of carbon credits as it is not sustainable and does not effectively solve the root of the problem. Such purchases only temporary. Instead, other alternatives should be considered. • Short Term: Carbon trading is a viable option for NTU in the short run as it is a practical and effective for NTU to fulfil immediate carbon credit needs.
  • 40. Assumptions • Biasness of the sources / writers Some of our sources may be bias. For example, writers who are for carbon trading may be businessman looking at the practical benefits of carbon trading while writers who are against carbon trading maybe non-profit environmental organizations that emphasizes on the importance of sustainability.
  • 41. Conclusion • Important Ethical Issues have to be dealt with before NTU proceeds with Carbon Offsetting even though carbon trading is viable in the short run. • While we acknowledge that in the short term it is beneficial for NTU to purchase carbon credits, the ethical concerns and long term sustainability are of greater importance.
  • 42. Conclusion • Based on the findings on the NTU’s carbon emissions earlier, NTU does not require immediate carbon offsets. Hence, NTU should lean towards long term sustainability instead of the convenience carbon offsetting provides.
  • 43. Other Alternatives
  • 44. Preview of Alternatives • Based on the article given (The Greening of Industry), • The Singapore government has been very successful in her green campaigns • Our challenge is to translate this success from a national level to a university level • We will now analyze the approaches taken by the government
  • 45. Approaches by the Government Approaches Example Approach 1 : Top down, Command and Control Approach  Greater industrial regulation and collaborative initiatives Letting the companies decide what green measures to implement instead of the government implementing measures for them to adhere to. Led to increased participation. Approach 2 : 2-Prongled Approach  (1) Resource conservation through a more intensive and coordinated effort at developing the recycling industry  (2) Waste reduction and elimination at source through product and process innovations as well as developing green technologies for industry through privatepublic collaborations Provide practical guidelines via a guidebook and e.g. of org generating cost savings (show the benefits of doing so)
  • 46. Approaches by the Government Approaches Example Approach 3 : Collaborating closely with Major Stakeholders Government developed innovative technologies through collaborations with companies. These collaborations can allow fresh new ideas to emerge which are likely to be more efficient and feasible for the companies. It also instills in them a sense of ownership in this project. Approach 4 : Funding Projects which consider environmental factors Entice companies to consider the environment in their projects and giving them extra funding. Also, allow easier access to resource to companies with environmental projects.
  • 47. However, a School is different from a Government! • These approaches cannot be applied directly from a school to students as per a government to a business • Due to : • Unlike a government, the university itself is a business • It is profit-driven ; cost efficiency and effectiveness is still important • Additionally, a school’s main priority is to provide education, not to provide for the environment
  • 48. Our Initiative: School-based Green Movement
  • 49. Rationale • Outcome more probable • Easier to implement and monitor results • If everybody plays their part to regulate or reduce carbon emission, a carbon neutral future is probable. • More tangible CHANGE STARTS WITH YOU AND I
  • 50. Features of the initiative Features 1. Funds reallocation to entice environmental conservation in planning events 2. Greater involvement of the student body in environmental conservation efforts 3. Provide practical guidelines to reduce wastage
  • 51. 1. Funds reallocation to entice environmental conservation in planning events What is currently done The school reserves funds for school-based activities such as Freshmen Orientation Camps and Campaigns. In line with approach What can be done School can reserve a portion of the fund and granted to the students only if their proposals includes environmental considerations e.g. plans to recycle the lunchboxes, waste reduction measures) Give priority for approval to projects that incorporates environmental sustainability Potential impact:  Incentive to fulfill their pledge to conserve the environment  Can be implemented at no extra cost 1 ✔ 2 3 ✔ 4 ✔
  • 52. 2. Greater involvement of the student body in environmental conservation efforts In line with approach What can be done Create an online platform for exchange of excess resources by the various committees. For example, extra plates or cups leftover from the event can be passed over to another event committee facilitated by the online platform 1 ✔ 2 ✔ Hold sessions for various student bodies to gather and discuss measures they can implement to improve on electricity /waste reduction, utilization of resources and recycling efforts 3 ✔ 4 Potential impact:  Reduce wastage (buy less throw less)  Reduce cost of event, benefiting both the student body and the school  Ideas raised by student themselves likely to garner more participation  More feasible in the school context Greater sense of ownership
  • 53. 3. Provide practical guidelines to reduce wastage Current In line with approach What can be done Computers are not shut down after use Automate the computers in the school compound to shut down after a certain time 1 Lights in most areas are manually operated (switching on/off) Increase the number of lights with motion sensor 2 Enforce that offices recycles waste paper and reuse recycled paper if possible 3 Set up baskets for reusable waste paper. Students can pick up these papers to do their rough work on 4 Potential impact:  Inculcate in students habit of energy saving/ recycling  low cost of implementation  School enjoys reduced cost of operation (electricity) ✔
  • 54. How it affects Stakeholders • Students • Enjoy the experience and process of environmental conservation • Be familiar with methods to which they can contribute to conserving the environment • School • Increased cost savings • May enable them to win Green Awards (i.e BCA Green Mark Champion Award)  enhance reputation • Government Incentives • Non-Government Organizations • An addition avenue for them to carry out their green initiatives • Achieve their aims of environmental conservation since schools will take huge steps in conservation
  • 55. Comparison of the 3 Initiatives Criteria Analysis E-learning Feasibility in Schools Carbon Offset SchoolBased Initiatives ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ Short-Term Effectiveness Long-Term Effectiveness ✔ Ease of Implementation ✔ ✔ ✔ ✔ E-learning : Due to the lack of social interaction and general low receptivity towards E-learning Carbon Offset : Inappropriate in the long run due to ethical and sustainability constraints
  • 56. Our Choice! • As seen from the table before, School-based initiative can be seen as more effective than Carbon Offset and E-learning • On top of that, School-based initiatives can reap the following benefits better than the other 2 options : • • • • Low cost of implementation Highly effective and ethical Easy to monitor and control Benefits all stakeholders involved
  • 57. Executive Summary The total carbon emissions form NTU is estimated to be at an alarming level of 84,704,011.46 KgCO2. It is important for NTU to implement the initiative that best balances the interests of the related stakeholders. School-based initiatives are the most feasible, ethical and effective solution for NTU, relative to Carbon Offset and E-learning. Diverse clubs and student bodies within NTU provide us with a great opportunity to successfully implement our initiative. Based on the research and comparisons made by our team, we are certain that the option we chose is the most viable option.