Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Free workshop: Carbon Footprint 101

845 views

Published on

By Liam Salter, RESET Carbon

Published in: Economy & Finance
  • I can advise you this service - ⇒ www.WritePaper.info ⇐ Bought essay here. No problem.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here

Free workshop: Carbon Footprint 101

  1. 1. Carbon Footprint 101 SASIN CENTRE FOR SUSTAINABILITY MANAGEMENT Liam Salter, CEO, RESET Carbon January 2016
  2. 2. Objectives ¡ To  provide  par+cipants  with  a  clear  understanding  of  the  market  drivers  and  context   for  carbon  footprin+ng.   ¡ To  provide  a  high  level  view  of  how  carbon  footprints  are  developed  and  used  to   influence  individual  and  corporate  decision  making  in  the  areas  of:   ¡ Lifestyles   ¡ Companies   ¡ Products   © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. 2
  3. 3. RESET –Your One-Stop Service Provider 3 2 offices and 20 staff in Hong Kong and Bangkok. Conducted environmental strategy and carbon footprinting projects for over 20 international corporations Implemented 10 energy and environmental assessment or improvement projects in 11 Asian countries in commercial property, retail and light industrial facilities. Conducted implementation projects saving clients between 125,000 and 1,000,000 USD/year.
  4. 4. Current  and  Previous  Clients         4
  5. 5. Climate change and the importance of our carbon footprint 5 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  6. 6. We can already see impacts from climate change today 6 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Sources:  IPCC,  NASA/GISS,  EM-­‐DAT  Interna+onal  Disaster  Database,  UN,  WWF   Global  warming   § 2015:  warmest  year  on  record   § 10  warmest  years  occurred  since  1998   § April  2016:  12th  consecu+ve  warmest   month  on  record   Rising  sea  level   § Average  annual  rise  roughly   doubled  from  1993  to  2010  vs.   1901  to  2010   Natural  disasters   § Occurrences  tripled  from   2000  to  2009  vs.  1980  to  1989   Water  scarcity   § More  than  1.2  billion  people  lack   access  to  clean  drinking  water   § ~20%  of  world  popula+on   Coral  reef  damage   § ~25%  of  coral  reefs  worldwide  considered  damaged  beyond  repair   § 66%  under  serious  threat   Climate   change  is   happening   now  
  7. 7. Global carbon cycle 7 http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/16/presentation.htm
  8. 8. Carbon intensity Electricity and fuels 8
  9. 9. Global carbon emissions 9 http://www.globalcarbonproject.org/carbonbudget/16/presentation.htm
  10. 10. Emissions trends per country 10 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  11. 11. Emissions per person 11 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  12. 12. Thailand’s situation 12 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Thailand emissions in context
  13. 13. Four potential global warming scenarios 13 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Source:  Intergovernmental  Panel  on  Climate  Change  (IPCC)   Note:  The  four  Representa+ve  Concentra+on  Pathways  (RCPs)  are  named  a]er  a  possible  range  of  radia+ve   forcing  values  in  the  year  2100  rela+ve  to  pre-­‐industrial  values  (+2.6,  +4.5,  +6.0,  and  +8.5  W/m2,  respec+vely).   RPC  8.5   RPC  6.0   RPC  4.5   RPC  2.6   Goal  of  science-­‐based  targets   Es+mated  2.7-­‐3.7  °C  with  INDCs  
  14. 14. The global carbon budget 14 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  15. 15. Carbon budget 15 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. 2100 GtCO2 Indicative range 450-1050GtCO2 800 GtCO2
  16. 16. Government carbon footprint goals 16 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Source:  World  Resource  Ins+tute   No  INDC  submibed   INDC  submibed   NDC  submibed   China   § Peak  CO2  emissions  by  2030   § 60-­‐65%  intensity  reduc+on   by  2030  vs.  2005   United  States   § 26-­‐28%  GHG  emissions   reduc+on  by  2020  vs.  2005   European  Union   § At  least  40%  GHG  emissions   reduc+on  by  2030  vs.  1990   India   § 33-­‐35%  intensity  reduc+on   by  2030  vs.  2005   Japan   § 26%  GHG  emissions   reduc+on  by  2030  vs.  2013   Hong  Kong     § 50-­‐60%  intensity  reduc+on   by  2020  vs.  2005   § Upcoming  carbon  target   Vietnam   § 20%  intensity  reduc+on   by  2030  vs.  2010   Cambodia   §   27%  GHG  emissions   reduc+on  by  2030  vs.  BAU   Bangladesh   §   5%  GHG  emissions   reduc+on  by  2030  vs.  BAU   Thailand   §   20%  GHG  emissions   reduc+on  by  2030  vs.  BAU  
  17. 17. Corporate goals Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Overview 17 https://b8f65cb373b1b7b15feb-c70d8ead6ced550b4d987d7c03fcdd1d.ssl.cf3.rackcdn.com/cms/reports/documents/000/001/384/original/ carbon-action-infographic-2016.pdf?1481208408 https://data.cdp.net/Climate-Change/Global-500-Emissions-and-Response-Status-2013/marp-zazk
  18. 18. City goals C40 Cities ¡ hbps://www.compactofmayors.org/   18 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. “There  is  no  Democra/c  or  Republican  way  of  fixing  a  sewer.”     New  York  Mayor  Fiorello  La  Guardia    
  19. 19. Conclusions Carbon  is  constrained   Ins+tu+ons  are  under  pressure  to  set  targets   Therefore  measuring  is  cri+cal!!!!   Carbon  footprint  approaches  are  being  refined  to  enable   measurement  and  target  segng  to  be  achieved  in  a  consistent,   verifiable  manner   19 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  20. 20. Measuring carbon footprints 20 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  21. 21. Main steps 21 Collect  raw  data   Collect  emissions   factors   Define  scope  and   boundary   Calculate  carbon   footprint  
  22. 22. Lifestyle footprints 22 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  23. 23. Lifestyles footprints are: ¡ Easily  available  online   ¡ Not  standardised   ¡ Highly  variable     ¡ Difficult  to  compare   23 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  24. 24. Define boundary and scope ¡ What  are  we  seeking  to  measure  and  why?   24 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  25. 25. 25 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Lifestyle  carbon  calculator  walkthrough  
  26. 26. Standardising emissions factors 26 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Worked  example  of  GHGP  purchased  electricity  tool  
  27. 27. 27 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Carbon per passenger km Solo driving
  28. 28. Carbon per passenger km Transport modes 28 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  29. 29. Corporate Footprints 29 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  30. 30. Corporate footprints are: ¡ Widely  reported   ¡ Follow  common  standards   ¡ Frequently  3rd  party  verified   ¡ Excellent  tools  for  measuring  performance  within  a  company  over  +me   ¡ Influenced  by  a  large  number  of  factors  and  difficult  to  compare  across  companies   ¡ Timeframes   ¡ Geographies   ¡ Varia+ons  in  nature  of  similar  businesses   ¡ Challenges  in  repor+ng  accurately  and  consistency  year-­‐on-­‐year  over  large  opera+onal   porlolios   30 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  31. 31. Corporate footprints The Greenhouse Gas Protocol & ISO 14064 31 http://www.ghgprotocol.org/about-ghgp
  32. 32. Standardising scope for companies 32 6  GHGs,  but  CO2  most   relevant  for  most   companies   Scope  3  occurs  outside  of   direct  business   opera+ons  but  can  be   largest  source   Most  companies  currently   focusing  on  scope  1  &  2  due  to   good  data  and  cost  savings  from   reducing  emissions  
  33. 33. Case study: Global Professional Service company 33 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Business  air  travel  =  72%   of  global  emissions   Paper  =  2%  of  emissions   64%  of  emissions  from  4   largest  offices  
  34. 34. Professional services Data sources 34 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Defra  emissions   factors  used  for   credibility  and   consistency   Best  in  class   specialist  calculator   to  provide   customer  with   maximum   management   op+ons  
  35. 35. Professional services Carbon strategy ¡ What  is  my  emissions  trend?   ¡ Which  emissions  are  under  most  significant?   ¡ Should  I  act  across  my  global  business  or  priori+se?   ¡ Which  emissions  should  be  included  in  a  target?     35 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  36. 36. Professional services Customer response 36 Company  tackled  all  major   emissions  sources  but   reduc+ons  resulted  from   business  air  travel   Emissions  reduc+ons  from   focus  on  largest  offices   drove  the  overall  trend   Emissions  essen+ally  flat  but   23%  improvement  per  full   +me  employee    
  37. 37. Professional services Customer response – air travel 37 Variance  in  use  of  first  and   business  class  implied   inconsistency  with  corporate   policy   Some  offices  exhibited  large   shares  of  flights  as  non-­‐ billable  expenses  
  38. 38. 38 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. Paper  use  decreased   significantly   Professional services Customer response – paper Recycled  paper  also   contributed.    50%  recycled  =   20%  carbon  reduc+on  
  39. 39. 39 Typical  interna+onal  airport  carbon  footprint   Direct  emissions  limited   Business  partner   emissions  >  direct   Rising  trend  due  to  global   air  traffic  increase   LTO  emissions  usually   lion’s  share   APU  result  from  planes   but  airports  can  help   reduce   Case study: Airports
  40. 40. Airports Carbon strategy ¡ What  is  my  emissions  trend?   ¡ Which  emissions  are  under  most  significant?   ¡ Which  emissions  are  under  greatest  control  of  the  airport  management  team?     ¡ Which  emissions  should  be  included  in  a  target?   ¡ Which  emissions  should  I  priori+se  trying  to  reduce?     40 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  41. 41. Case study Hong Kong Airport strategy 41 Included     •  Airport  opera+ons   •  Business  partners   •  Emissions  at  gate     Excluded     •  Landing  and  take  off   •  Passenger  access   As  a  result  of  its  scope   choice  HK  Airport  makes   a  legi+mate  claim  to  be  a   leading  airport  globally   from  a  carbon  reduc+on   perspec+ve.    
  42. 42. Products 42 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  43. 43. Product – or Life Cycle - footprints are ¡ Uncommon  but  growing  as  a  tool  for  differen+a+ng  products  on  basis  of   environmental  performance   ¡ Extremely  complicated  to  calculate   ¡ Account  for  complex  raw  materials,  manufacturing  and  consump+on  chains   ¡ O]en  not  just  carbon  only   ¡ Standards  –  and  cer+fica+ons  -­‐  are  available  but  not  that  widely  used  yet   ¡ Verifica+on  is  possible  but  o]en  perceived  as  rela+vely  expensive   ¡ Usually  built  with  complex  commercial  database  products   ¡ S+ll  not  par+cularly  comparable  between  similar  products   43 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  44. 44. Lifecycle footprint approaches
  45. 45. Lee ReThink: Overview •  Sources  of  environmental  benefits:   –  BCI  Cobon  yield  increase,  water  and  chemical  use;   –  Replace  cobon  with  recycled  PET  (SCafé);   –  Central:  energy,  chemical  and  water  efficient  produc+on  process;   –  Crystal:  efficient  washing  process.   Carbon (kgCO2e)   Energy (MJ)   Water (L)   Lee ReThink 14.8 138.4 2921.1 Baseline 24.2 195.9 5294.5 Carbon Footprint Energy Demand Water Footprint -39% -29% -45%
  46. 46. Thai Greenhouse Office (TGO) Product carbon label 46 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd. http://thaicarbonlabel.tgo.or.th/products_approval/ products_approval.pnc
  47. 47. Complexity Example of polyester fabric LCA farm-gate only! 47 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  48. 48. Main steps (refresh) 48 Collect  raw  data   Collect  emissions   factors   Define  scope  and   boundary   Calculate  carbon   footprint   Internalised  with   so]ware  tools  
  49. 49. Future trend ¡ Branded  carbon  product  footprint  to  be  delivered  by  recognised  commercial  or   government  en++es,  leveraging  core  interna+onal  databases  and  supplemented  with   local  emissions  factors  in  key  areas   ¡ Main  issues  driving  demand  are     ¡ applicability  of  methodology,     ¡ reputa+on  of  label  provider     ¡ regula+on   ¡ cost     49 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  50. 50. Conclusion 50 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  51. 51. Conclusions ¡ Carbon  footprin+ng  con+nues  to  grow  as  a  tool  for  measuring  and  reducing  carbon   emissions.   ¡ Corporate  –  or  opera+ons  –  lens  is  the  most  widely  used  and  in  the  future  will  be   driven  by   ¡ Need  to  set  deeper  –  or  Science  Based  –  reduc+on  targets   ¡ Need  for  companies  to  move  beyond  direct  opera+ons  and  influence  supply  chains   and  business  partner  performance   ¡ Product  footprin+ng  becoming  more  widespread  driven  by     ¡ Desire  to  brand  products  credibly   ¡ Recogni+on  that  impacts  are  huge  and  not  covered  by  more  ‘direct’  emissions   ¡ Increasing  power  and  accessibility  of  life  cycle  databases  via  branded  intermediaries   ¡ Recognised  skillsets  will  be  needed  to  do  the  job  properly  and  stay  abreast  of  the   evolving  standards   ¡ hbp://www.ghgprotocol.org/training-­‐capacity-­‐building   51 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.
  52. 52. For  more  informaSon:     Liam Salter CEO e: liam.salter@resetcarbon.com     RESET  Carbon  Ltd.       www.resetcarbon.com   52
  53. 53. Cost savings – energy efficiency Business    Annual  spend  (USD)   Savings   Typical  ROI   Hypermarket   1m   20%   4  –  5  years   Hotel   500  000  to  1.2m   20%   3  –  5  years   Dye  mill   3m  to  10m   15%   1  –  2  years   Electrical  products   2m   15%   2  –  4  years   Food  and  beverage   10m   10%   3  –  5  years   Large  airport   30m+   15%   4  –  6  years   Large  university   20m+   20%   4  –  7  years   Commercial  building   1m   15%   3  –  5  years   Large  Office   20  000   15%   2  –  3  years   53 © 2016 RESET Carbon Ltd.

×