2021 Carbon Footprint Report - Metzger at Hauser & Wirth Somerset

1. Hauser & Wirth Somerset Gallery
Gustav Metzger Exhibition Carbon Footprint Report
November 23, 2021

2. 57 Hocken Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M6G 2K1 Canada (416) 494-9999
thecarbonaccountingcompany.com
November 23, 2021
Ms. Cliodhna Murphy
Senior Director of Operations
Hauser & Wirth
cliodhna@hauserwirth.com
Dear Ms. Murphy,
It is my pleasure to present this quantification of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the Gustav
Metzger Exhibition from June to September 2021.
Our review of the data is based solely on our assessment of the information provided to us by Hauser &
Wirth.
Based on the information provided, the emissions as reported in this document are credible and
defensible as an attempt to quantify the emissions sources and resultant emissions levels for the sources
provided.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 416.494.9999 ext.15 or
ian@thecarbonaccountingcompany.com.
Yours sincerely,
Ian Lipton
President & CEO

3. 1
Table of Contents
1 Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................................2
2 Scope of the Study.........................................................................................................................................................2
2.1 Quantification Boundaries ...................................................................................................................................2
2.2 Exclusions ................................................................................................................................................................4
3 Methodology and Assumptions...................................................................................................................................5
3.1 General Methodology...........................................................................................................................................5
3.1.1 Stationary combustion of fossil fuels, mobile combustion of fossil fuels, and combustion of
fossil fuels in backup generators ...........................................................................................................................5
3.1.2 Purchased electricity......................................................................................................................................5
3.1.3 Commute by employees, business travel by employees, and travel of visitors to the gallery.....6
3.1.4 Hotel accommodations.................................................................................................................................7
3.1.5 Freight ...............................................................................................................................................................7
3.1.6 Waste disposal................................................................................................................................................8
3.1.7 Lifecycle emissions of construction materials .........................................................................................8
3.2 Emissions Factors and Global Warming Potentials .......................................................................................8
3.3 Assumptions............................................................................................................................................................8
4 Results.............................................................................................................................................................................11
5 Statement of Accuracy................................................................................................................................................17

4. 2
1 Introduction
Hauser & Wirth (“H&W”) retained The Carbon Accounting Company (“TCAC”) to quantify the
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions resulting from the Gustav Metzger (“Metzger”) art exhibition at the
Somerset Gallery over the period June to September 2021. This engagement was supported by artist
Haley Mellin and Art into Acres.
The goal of this quantification is to guide H&W in creating a carbon budget that can eventually be used
for future exhibitions at H&W’s various galleries around the world. Creating a carbon budget requires
first knowing the “typical” carbon footprints of exhibitions. This is the first time H&W has quantified
carbon emissions from an exhibition.
H&W is committed to reducing its operational carbon footprint 50% from its base year inventory by
2030. The ability to create and follow a carbon budget for each exhibition is an important strategy in
reaching this target.
It should be noted that the terms “carbon footprint”, “GHG inventory”, and “emissions inventory” are
used interchangeably. They all refer to the same thing, which is the quantity of greenhouse gas
emissions caused from the activities associated with the Metzger exhibition at the Somerset Gallery.
The primary greenhouse gases in this inventory are carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous
oxide (N2O). While carbon (C) occurs in only two of these three gases, it is standard practice to
include at least all three gases in most organizational carbon footprints as these three gases are the main
drivers of global warming and the catastrophic climate crisis we are facing.
The carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide emissions are quantified and converted into an
equivalent amount of carbon dioxide (CO2e) based on the global warming potentials of each of the
three gases. This is standard practice in all organizational carbon footprints. More on this procedure
can be found in the Section 3.1 General Methodology.
2 Scope of the Study
2.1 Quantification Boundaries
This carbon footprint is limited to the GHG emissions generated from activities that occurred during
the period of the Metzger exhibition (June to September 2021), including the periods for construction,
transportation, installation, removal, and disposal.
This footprint follows the operational control approach. The operational control approach covers
emissions generated from activities for which H&W has operational control, including control over
policy and management practices such as purchasing decisions.
An example of emissions-generating activities that would fall outside operational control are the
business operations of a supplier that is neither owned nor operated by H&W. However, if that
supplier is hired to provide services onsite at H&W, the carbon associated from those activities would
be included in this carbon footprint. For example, the emissions from energy used by a supplier, such as
a carpenter, while working onsite to install the exhibition would be included in this footprint. However,
the energy used in the carpenter’s workshop would not be included.

5. 3
This carbon footprint consists of emissions generated from operational activities classified as Scope 1, 2
or 3. These standard classification categories refer to the direct or indirect nature of the emissions
causality.
Scope 1 activities are those that create emissions directly within the operational boundaries. Examples
include the combustion of natural gas in the gallery’s boiler, or the fuel used in vehicles operated by the
gallery.
Scope 2 activities are those that create emissions indirectly from the use of energy within the
operational boundaries. An example is the emissions generated from the use of electricity. While the
actual emissions occur at the electricity generating facility, which is outside H&W’s operational control,
the electricity used by H&W is within their operational control.
Scope 3 activities are all other activities that create emissions indirectly within the operational boundary.
For example, employees traveling to and from work generate indirect emissions. The employees are
required by H&W to travel to work, even though the vehicles themselves are not operated by H&W.
As such, the emissions caused by the travelling to and from work are those indirectly within H&W’s
control and therefore are included in the inventory as Scope 3.
Table 1 lists all activities considered in this inventory. Some of the activities listed below were
considered, but ultimately excluded from the inventory because they did not occur during period of the
Metzger exhibition, they did not apply to the buildings at the Somerset Gallery, and/or they were too
insignificant to impact the exhibition’s carbon footprint (de-minimis). More on this can be found under
Section 2.2 Exclusions.
Table 1. GHG Inventory Boundaries and Activities
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 1 Stationary combustion of fossil fuels for heating buildings and water
Mobile combustion of fossil fuels used in H&W operated road vehicles and off-road vehicles
Combustion of fossil fuels used in backup generators
Fugitive emissions from air conditioning and refrigeration units: There are no air conditioning
or refrigeration units at the gallery and therefore these sources do not apply
Scope 2 Purchased electricity
Purchased district energy (e.g., hot water, chilled water, steam): There is no district energy at
the gallery, and therefore these sources do not apply
Scope 3 Freight
Employee, contractor, and artist transportation
Employee, contractor, and artist hotel accommodation
Visitor transportation to the gallery
Employee commute to and from work
Construction of exhibition

6. 4
2.2 Exclusions
It is standard practice in carbon accounting to set a de-minimis threshold below which certain activities
are excluded from the inventory. In this case, activities that were deemed to contribute less than 1% of
the overall carbon footprint were excluded. See Table 2 for a list of de-minimis activities.
Table 2. De-Minimis Activities Excluded from the Emissions Inventory
Scope 1 None
Scope 2 None
Scope 3 Transportation of construction material and supplies
Rentals of furniture and other supplies
Purchase and consumption of supplies
Marketing material including website
Other activities, which otherwise would have been excluded because they contributed less than 1% to
the overall footprint and therefore fall under de-minimis thresholds, were included in the inventory for
the following reasons:
Freight
Carbon emissions from the transportation of exhibition materials, including art pieces, usually account
for a significant contribution to the overall carbon footprints of museums and galleries. In some cases,
freight emissions can account for more than 50% of the total footprint depending on the quantities,
distances, and modes of transportation involved.
However, in this inventory, those emissions contributed less than 1%. This is due to the short
transportation distances involved compared to other exhibitions, where art pieces tend to travel much
greater distances. Therefore, we chose to include the freight emissions, even though they were
insignificant, to illustrate how decisions pertaining to artwork can impact an exhibition’s overall carbon
footprint.
Business Travel
Business travel activities (transportation and hotel accommodations) are another source that can
contribute significant emissions. However, in this inventory, their contribution was under 1%. Like the
decision to include freight emissions, we chose to include business travel to illustrate a viable strategy to
reduce emissions.
Exhibition Construction and Fabrication Materials
Carbon emissions from the lifecycle of materials can be significant, depending on the type of material
used. For example, the cement manufacturing industry is one of the highest emitting sources of
greenhouse gas emissions in the world. Ideally, the Scope 3 lifecycle emissions associated with any
carbon-intensive material used in the construction and fabrication of exhibitions, including in any art
pieces specifically created for the gallery, would be included in the inventory.
For this inventory, like freight and business travel, the lifecycle emissions from the construction
materials were less than 1%. And for the same reasons as freight and business travel, we chose to
include construction material lifecycle emissions anyway.

7. 5
3 Methodology and Assumptions
3.1 General Methodology
This emissions quantification follows the principles and methods of The GHG Protocol Corporate
Accounting and Reporting Standard (https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard).
The lifecycle emissions quantification of construction materials follows the principles of the ISO
14040:2006 Standard (https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html).
Where emissions were generated from activities “shared” by more than one concurrent exhibition at
the Somerset Gallery (in this case, the Eduardo Chillida exhibition), those emissions were proportioned
accordingly to each exhibition. For example, in the case of stationary combustion, electricity use, and
mobile combustion, the emissions were apportioned to each exhibition based on each exhibition’s
relative occupied floor area.
Emissions were calculated as follows:
3.1.1 Stationary combustion of fossil fuels, mobile combustion of fossil fuels, and combustion of fossil fuels in
backup generators
Three main greenhouse gases from stationary combustion – carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and
nitrous oxide (N2O) – were quantified and converted into carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) as
follows:
CO2e = ∑ [ Q ft x (CO2 EF ft + (CH4 EF ft)(CH4 GWP) + (N2O EF ft )(N2O GWP)) ] ft
where,
Q ft = quantity of fuel type used
CO2 EF ft = carbon dioxide emissions factor for fuel type
CH4 EF ft = methane emissions factor for fuel type
CH4 GWP = methane global warming potential
N2O EF ft = nitrous oxide emissions factor for fuel type
N2O GWP = nitrous oxide global warming potential
ft = fuel type
All fuel emissions factors were sourced from UK, Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy
(reference: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-
2021).
3.1.2 Purchased electricity
H&W draws electricity from the local utility grid, all of which is purchased under a contract with a
supplier sourcing 100% renewable energy. Therefore, both the location-based and market-based
electricity emissions methods were used.

8. 6
Three main greenhouse gases from the generation of electricity – carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) – were quantified and converted into carbon dioxide equivalents
(CO2e) as follows:
Location-Based Method:
CO2e = ∑ [E local grid x (CO2 EF local grid + (CH4 EF local grid)(CH4 GWP) + (N2O EF local grid )(N2O GWP))] local grid
where,
E local rid = kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity drawn from local grid
CO2 EF local grid = carbon dioxide emissions factor for local grid
CH4 EF local grid = methane emissions factor for local grid
CH4 GWP = methane global warming potential
N2O EF local grid = nitrous oxide emissions factor for local grid
N2O GWP = nitrous oxide global warming potential
local grid = electricity grid on which each building is located
All grid electricity emissions factors were sourced from UK, Department for Business, Energy &
Industrial Strategy (reference: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-
conversion-factors-2021).
Market-Based Method:
CO2e = ∑ [E purchased x (CO2 EF purchased + (CH4 EF purchased)(CH4 GWP) + (N2O EF purchased )(N2O GWP))]
purchased
where,
E purchased = kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity purchased under contract
CO2 EF purchased = carbon dioxide emissions factor for electricity purchased
CH4 EF purchased = methane emissions factor for electricity purchased
CH4 GWP = methane global warming potential
N2O EF purchased = nitrous oxide emissions factor for electricity purchased
N2O GWP = nitrous oxide global warming potential
purchased = electricity purchase contract
All electricity contract emissions factors were provided by the electricity supplier.
3.1.3 Commute by employees, business travel by employees, and travel of visitors to the gallery
Three main greenhouse gases from commute and other forms of transportation – carbon dioxide
(CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) – were quantified and converted into carbon dioxide
equivalents (CO2e) as follows:
CO2e = ∑ [ D mode x (CO2 EF mode + (CH4 EF mode)(CH4 GWP) + (N2O EF mode)(N2O GWP)) ] mode

9. 7
where,
D mode = distance travelled by mode of transportation
CO2 EF mode = carbon dioxide emissions factor for mode of transportation
CH4 EF mode = methane emissions factor for mode of transportation
CH4 GWP = methane global warming potential
N2O EF mode = nitrous oxide emissions factor for mode of transportation
N2O GWP = nitrous oxide global warming potential
mode = mode of transportation
All travel and transportation emissions factors were sourced from UK, Department for Business, Energy
& Industrial Strategy (reference: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-
conversion-factors-2021).
3.1.4 Hotel accommodations
The number of hotel room-nights were multiplied by the average room-night emissions factor for the
hotels in the region in which travel occurred:
CO2e = ∑ [ RN hotel x CO2e EF hotel] hotel
where,
RN hotel = number of room-nights used by hotel region
CO2e EF hotel = average carbon dioxide equivalent room-night emissions factor for hotel region
hotel = hotel region
All hotel emissions factors were sourced from UK, Department for Business, Energy & Industrial
Strategy (reference: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-
factors-2021).
3.1.5 Freight
Each freight shipment was recorded by longitude and latitude coordinates. Using the Haversine formula,
“as-the-crow-flies” distances were then calculated. Any air or sea shipment distance was then based on
this result. To determine road (rail) shipment distances, the Haversine formula result was grossed up by
a factor of 25% to account for longer, indirect ground travel routes.
Freight shipment weights (chargeable weight) were gathered from shipping invoices. Where no such
data was provided, an algorithm using the shipped item’s dimensions was used to arrive at a best
estimate of the chargeable shipping weight. See Section 3.3 Assumptions for further information.
Three main greenhouse gases from the transportation of freight – carbon dioxide (CO2), methane
(CH4), and nitrous oxide (N2O) – were quantified and converted into carbon dioxide equivalents
(CO2e) as follows:
CO2e = ∑ [ D mode x W x (CO2 EF mode + (CH4 EF mode)(CH4 GWP) + (N2O EF mode)(N2O GWP)) ] mode
where,

10. 8
D mode = distance travelled by mode of transportation
W = chargeable shipping weight
CO2 EF mode = carbon dioxide emissions factor for mode of freight transportation
CH4 EF mode = methane emissions factor for mode of freight transportation
CH4 GWP = methane global warming potential
N2O EF mode = nitrous oxide emissions factor for mode of freight transportation
N2O GWP = nitrous oxide global warming potential
mode = mode of freight transportation
All freight emissions factors were sourced from UK, Department for Business, Energy & Industrial
Strategy (reference: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-
factors-2021).
3.1.6 Waste disposal
Two types of waste were accounted for: Dry mixed recycling, and general waste. Quantities were
tracked based on the number of full 1,100-Litre waste bins emptied during the period.
Total volumes were multiplied by the corresponding emission factors sourced from UK, Department for
Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (reference:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-factors-2021).
For more information, see Section 3.3 Assumptions.
3.1.7 Lifecycle emissions of construction materials
Lifecycle emissions factors were primarily sourced from the Ecoinvent version 3.8 (2021) database. For
material not found in the Ecoinvent database, other online sources were used. For complete
information, contact The Carbon Accounting Company.
The emission activity boundary was “gate-to-gate”.
3.2 Emissions Factors and Global Warming Potentials
Unless otherwise stated, all emissions calculations were based on the 2021 version of the UK Emissions
Factors referenced in the sections above.
3.3 Assumptions
Data Collection:
• All data were collected and provided by H&W personnel either directly in the data collection
workbook provided by The Carbon Accounting Company, or in separately consolidated formats.
It is assumed that the data entered by H&W personnel were accurate and complete

11. 9
Freight:
• Road distances were based on the Haversine formula and grossed up by 25% to account for non-
linear road routes
• Road freight vehicles are assumed to be average laden, diesel-powered heavy goods vehicles
(HGVs)
Stationary Combustion, Electricity, and Mobile Fuel:
• The gallery’s total fuel and electricity use was split between the Metzger and Chillida exhibitions
according to the proportion of floor space occupied by each exhibition during the exhibition
overlap period
• Garden machineries are assumed to use petrol
• Passenger van is assumed to use diesel
• The gallery’s propane-powered forklift vehicle was not used for the Metzger exhibition
• Approximately 3% of the gallery’s gross floor space is occupied by another organization. It is
assumed that the electricity and natural gas used by that organization are insignificant
Visitor Travel:
• It is assumed all visitors to the Metzger exhibition also visited the Chillida exhibition during the
Metzger period. Therefore, the emissions from visitor travel were divided evenly between the
two exhibitions during this period
Construction Material and Supplies:
• It assumed upstream emissions from printed material were less than 1% of the total footprint and
therefore those emissions were excluded as de-minimis
• It is assumed emissions from the transportation of construction materials and supplies were less
than 1% of the total footprint and therefore those emissions were excluded as de-minimis
• It is assumed MDF (medium density fiberboard) is manufactured in the UK. Therefore, UK grid
emissions factors were used in its lifecycle assessment
• It is assumed that MDF 15 mm, MDF 18 mm, and MDF plinths all have the equal LCA values
• It is assumed paint is alkyd based, in 60% solution
• It is assumed the density of paint is 1.1 kg/L (see Table 3 Reference Sources)
• It is assumed plywood is produced from standard conifer timber (see Table 3 Reference Sources)
• It is assumed dimensional lumber is produced from coniferous timber and dried accordingly
• It is assumed the density of 2x4 dimensional lumber is 1.936 kg/m (see Table 3 Reference Sources)
• It is assumed tulipwood has the same emissions factor as dimensional lumber
• It is assumed toughened glass and float glass have the same GHG emissions factors
• It is assumed 50 mm steel box tubing has a density of 7.46 kg/m (see Table 3 Reference Sources)
• It is assumed that carpet is manufactured from nylon
• It is assumed that each item designated for storage and re-use is re-used an average of once before
being disposed
Waste Disposal:
• It is assumed waste from the gallery during this period is split evenly between the Metzger and
Chillida exhibitions
• It is assumed the average density of general commercial municipal solid waste is 64 lbs/cubic yard
(see Table 3 Reference Sources)
• It is assumed the average density of dry mixed recycling is 155 lbs/cubic yard (see Table 3
Reference Sources)

12. 10
• It is assumed general waste goes to landfill
• It is assumed dry mixed recycled goes to an open-loop recycling facility (i.e., the waste material is
recycled into other products)
Table 3. Reference Sources
Source
Paint density https://www.jotun.com/Datasheets/Download?url=%2FTDS%2FTDS__12300__Alkyd+Topcoat__Euk__GB.pdf
Plywood
composition
https://www.vttresearch.com/sites/default/files/pdf/technology/2013/T115.pdf
Toughened glass
and float glass
https://www.vttresearch.com/sites/default/files/pdf/technology/2013/T115.pdf
Dimensional
lumber density
https://www.vttresearch.com/sites/default/files/pdf/technology/2013/T115.pdf
Steel box tubing
density
https://www.themetalstore.co.uk/products/mild-steel-box-sect
Waste density https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2016-
04/documents/volume_to_weight_conversion_factors_memorandum_04192016_508fnl.pdf

13. 11
4 Results
Table 4. Emissions Sources
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 1
Stationary Combustion: Natural Gas 805,534 kWh
Mobile Combustion: Petrol 84 Litres
Mobile Combustion: Diesel 32 Litres
Mobile Combustion: Propane 0 Litres
Air Conditioning & Refrigeration n/a
Scope 2
Grid Electricity (Location-based) 56,829 kWh
Grid Electricity (Market-based) 56,829 kWh
Purchased Hot Water n/a
Purchased Chilled Water n/a
Scope 3
Freight See Table 5
Employee, Contractor, & Artist Travel See Table 6
Employee, Contractor, & Artist Hotel Accommodations See Table 7
Visitor Travel See Table 8
Employee Commute See Table 9
Exhibition Construction See Table 10
Waste Disposal See Table 11
n/a = not applicable
Table 5. Freight
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 3 Weight (kg) Distance (km)
Road Shipments 1,694 1,244
Air Shipments 0 0
Rail Shipments 0 0
Sea Shipments 0 0
Table 6. Employee, Contractor & Artist Travel
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 3 km
Employee, Contractor & Artist Travel Passenger car 1,873
Intercity rail 975
Air 0

14. 12
Table 7. Employee, Contractor & Artist Hotel Accommodations
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 3
Employee, Contractor & Artist Hotel
Accommodations
20 room-nights
Table 8. Visitor Travel
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 3 km
Visitor Travel Passenger car 910,178
Intercity rail 24,323
Air 0
Table 9. Employee Commute
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 3 km
Employee Commute Passenger car 25,214
Other 0
Table 10. Exhibition Construction
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 3
MDF, 15 mm 26 sheets (0.0432 cubic metres)
MDF, 18 mm 2 sheets (0.0799 cubic metres)
Plywood, 18 mm 1 sheet (47.94 kg)
Dimensional lumber, 2x4, 4.8 m per length 24 lengths
Tulipwood lumber, 4.8 m per length 7.5 lengths
Paint 70.4 kg
Toughened glass, 8 mm 223 kg
Sand/ballast, 25 kg per bag 21 bags
Steel boxed tubing, 50 mm 4.2 metres
Carpet 190 square metres
Table 11. Waste Disposal
Metzger Exhibition
Scope 3
General waste 550 Litres
Dry mixed recycling 550 Litres

15. 13
Table 12. Greenhouse Gas Emissions for Metzger Exhibition
Metzger Exhibition (Location-
based)
Metzger Exhibition (Market-
based)
Scope 1 kg CO2e kg CO2e
Stationary Combustion: Natural Gas 230,729 230,729
Mobile Combustion: Petrol 185 185
Mobile Combustion: Diesel 81 81
Mobile Combustion: Propane 0 0
Air Conditioning & Refrigeration n/a n/a
Total Scope 1 230,995 230,995
Scope 2 kg CO2e kg CO2e
Grid Electricity 12,066 0
Purchased Hot Water n/a n/a
Purchased Chilled Water n/a n/a
Total Scope 2 12,066 0
Scope 3 kg CO2e kg CO2e
Freight 14 14
Employee, Contractor & Artist Travel 356 356
Employee, Contractor & Artist Hotel
Accommodations
278 278
Visitor Travel 156,941 156,941
Employee Commute 4,324 4,324
Exhibition Construction 1,663 1,663
Waste Disposal 12 12
Total Scope 3 163,587 163,587
Total Emissions (kg CO2e) 406,649 394,582
Total Emissions (tonnes CO2e) 406.6 394.6
n/a = not applicable

16. 14
Figure 1. Emissions by Scope for Metzger Exhibition
56.8%
3.0%
40.2%
Emissions by Scope: Location-based
Scope 1
Scope 2
Scope 3
58.5%
0%
41.5%
Emissions by Scope: Market-based
Scope 1
Scope 2
Scope 3

17. 15
Figure 2. Emissions by Activity Source for Metzger Exhibition
56.7% Stationary
Combustion: Natural
Gas
3.0% Grid Electricity
38.6% Visitor Travel
1.1% Employee
Commute
Emissions by Activity Source: Location-based
Stationary Combustion: Natural Gas
Mobile Combustion: Petrol
Mobile Combustion: Diesel
Grid Electricity
Freight
Employee, Contractor & Artist Travel
Employee, Contractor & Artist Hotel
Visitor Travel
Employee Commute
Exhibition Construction
Waste Disposal
58.5% Stationary
Combustion: Natural
Gas
39.8% Visitor Travel
1.1% Employee
Commute
0.4% Exhibition
Construction
Emissions by Activity Source: Market-based
Stationary Combustion: Natural Gas
Mobile Combustion: Petrol
Mobile Combustion: Diesel
Grid Electricity
Freight
Employee, Contractor & Artist Travel
Employee, Contractor & Artist Hotel
Visitor Travel
Employee Commute
Exhibition Construction
Waste Disposal

18. 16
Figure 3. Carbon Footprint Equivalents for Metzger Exhibition (Market-based)
Carbon Footprint Equivalents of 395 tonnes of CO2e
GHG emissions from:
Carbon dioxide emissions from:
GHG emissions avoided by:
Carbon sequestered by:
Source: US EPA Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator

19. 17
5 Statement of Accuracy
The Carbon Accounting Company states that, based on the information provided, H&W’s emissions as
reported in this document are credible and defensible as an attempt to quantify the emissions sources
and resultant emissions levels for the sources provided.
For more information regarding this report, please contact:
Ian Lipton
President & CEO
The Carbon Accounting Company
(416) 494-9999 ext. 15
ian@thecarbonaccountingcompany.com