Data & Sustainability: How the Right Data Creates Success

1. Wheaton College (MA) Whitworth University Widener University Wilkes University Williams College Worcester Polytechnic Institute Worcester State College Wright State University Xavier University Yeshiva University Youngstown State University Data and Sustainability: How the Right Data Creates Success

2. 2 Introduction and Agenda Webinar Host: Heather Finnegan The Challenges of a Sustainability Professional Case Studies Using GHG Inventory Data to make the case for change Communicating STARS results to stakeholders Creating an actionable Sustainability Plan Questions/Discussion Agenda:

3. Feel Free to Start a Dialogue with Our Presenters Enter questions in the box at any time. We want to hear from you! Enter questions here at any point during the webinar Presentation slides and webinar recording will be sent to each attendee following today’s session 3

4. The Life of a Sustainability Professional 4

5. What are your Pressure Points? 5 Not enough time! Lack of “buy-in” Competing Priorities

6. Benchmarking Case Study Sustainability Benchmarking GHG Inventory and Analysis Benchmarking for 60+ Additional Metrics Sustainability Reporting Completed STARS Report Card Strategic Recommendations to Improve Performance Sustainability Planning Campus-Wide Stakeholder Engagement Published Sustainability or Climate Action Plan 6 Senior Level Presentations

7. 7 The Challenge of Validated Data Providing a consistent and quality data set for benchmarking “Looking at current [ACUPCC] reports, there are countless errors and problems” - Carnegie Mellon University Researchers • Likely the reporters are not aware of these issues • Systems are not designed to notice errors • Questions feasibility of benchmarking reported data Second Nature Reporting Site Disclaimer: What the Researchers Say: Through the Sightlines “QVQ” process, institutions have the ability to compare with confidence and report without reservations

8. 8 -100% -90% -80% -70% -60% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000 PercentChangefromBaseline MTCDE Gross Emissions Indexed to FY2006 Scope 1 Scope 2 Scope 3 Net Emissions Offsets Change from baseline Half of gross emissions were offset in FY15 Offsets Have Major Role in Reducing Net Emissions Net Emissions Indexed to FY2006

9. Only Half of Env/Mech Target Funded Spending should be directed toward envelope/mechanical targets 10 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% PercentageofTargetFunded Breakout of Target Funding Env/Mech Target: $9.1 million Sp/Prog Target: $4.1 million Envelope/Mechanical Space/Program

10. Beautiful Space, but Mechanical Rooms in Need 11 3.36 4.19 0 1 2 3 4 5 Example Peers Mechanical Room Inspection Score

11. Over Half of Expenses go to HVAC Outsourcing 12 HVAC 51% Building Maintenance 24% Custodial 16% Admin 1% Utilities 0.2% Grounds 8% 2015 Expense Mix HVAC expenses have increased by $1/GSF – this is an additional $2 million in costs. HVAC 21% Building Maintenance 32% Custodial 23% Admin 4% Utilities 7% Grounds 13% 2006 Expense Mix HVAC expenses have increased, but with no drop in people costs

12. Increase in Spending Outpaces Peers 13 $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 $8 $9 $10 2006 2015 $/GSF Example Operating Actuals Daily Service PM Utilities Inflation Utilities $0 $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 $8 $9 $10 2006 2015 Peer Operating Actuals Utilities While peers stabilize, Example has increased all areas of its operating budget

13. Reporting Case Study Sustainability Benchmarking GHG Inventory and Analysis Benchmarking for 60+ Additional Metrics Sustainability Reporting Completed STARS Report Card Strategic Recommendations to Improve Performance Sustainability Planning Campus-Wide Stakeholder Engagement Published Sustainability or Climate Action Plan 14 Senior Level Presentations

14. 15 Challenges of STARS Reporting System What the Campus Users are Say: 2015 AASHE Membership Survey

15. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Buildings Energy Air & Climate Waste Water Dining Purchasing Grounds Transportation Points STARS Operations Performance Estimated Points Earned Points Remaining Campuses with Similar Enrollment Performance By Category 16

16. Successes -1% -26% -25% -30% -25% -20% -15% -10% -5% 0% Space Energy Use (MMBTU) MMBTU / GSF %Change Energy Profile FY15 indexed to FY11 baseline Other successes: • Estimated 0.2% of energy consumption generated from on-campus solar 17 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Energy Consumption BTU/GSF/Degreeday Example University Performance Against STARS Threshold

17. 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Example (2.1) Points STARS Operations Performance Opportunities 18 Campus-Wide Energy and Water Benchmarking Program

18. Bridging the Gap – Scenario #2 19 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Example (2.1) Points STARS Operations Performance Best-in-class offsite renewables: 50% of total energy Offset remaining scope 2 with RECs: approx. $3,478

19. Platinum & Gold Institutions What is the secret to success? 20 Category Best in Class Performance Overall Waste Reduced 50% Waste Diversion > 70% Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reduced 75% “Real Food” > 30% Construction LEED Platinum Renewables > 25% Sustainable Commuting > 80% 1 Institution 93 Institutions 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Operations Academics Engagement Administration Points by Category Gold Target

20. Planning Case Study Sustainability Benchmarking GHG Inventory and Analysis Benchmarking for 60+ Additional Metrics Sustainability Reporting Completed STARS Report Card Strategic Recommendations to Improve Performance Sustainability Planning Campus-Wide Stakeholder Engagement Published Sustainability or Climate Action Plan 21 Senior Level Presentations

21. Challenges in Sustainability Planning 22 2015 AASHE Membership Survey

22. A Vision for the Future 23

23. Setting Achievable Goals 24

24. Sustainability Plan Using STARS as a Framework Plan ImplementMeasure

25. Questions? 26