The following CAIP appendicies discuss in detail the historical background, quantifiable solution modules, key model assumptions of the strategic portfolio solutions, and references.
APPENDIX A - List of Acronyms
ACCC Academic Computing and Communications Center ACEEE American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy ACUPCC American College and University President’s Climate Commitment ANSI American National Standards Institute ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers BAU Business-As-Usual C&D Construction and Demolition CAP Tool Fovea Climate Action Planning Tool CAPEX Capital Expenditures CAIP Climate Action Implementation Plan CAP Climate Action Plan CAS Campus Auxiliary Services CCSE Chancellor’s Committee on Sustainability and Energy CCSE E&R CCSE Education & Research Subcommittee (formerly Teaching and Learning) CCSE E&U CCSE Energy and Utilities Subcommittee CCSE T&L CCSE Teaching and Learning Subcommittee (now Education & Research) CHP Combined Heat and Power CMAP Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning CNG Compressed Natural Gas CO2 Carbon dioxide COD College of Dentistry ComEd Commonwealth Edison CPPM Office of Capital Planning and Project Management CSO Combined Sewer Overflow CTA Chicago Transit Authority CUPPA College of Urban Planning and Public Affairs E85 Flex-Fuel (85% Ethanol) ECM Energy Conservation Measure ECMTRC Energy Conservation Measure Technical Review Commiteee eGRID Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database EIA SEDS U.S. Energy Information Administration – State Energy Data System EPC Energy Performance Contract EUI Energy Use Intensity FTE Full-Time Employee FY Fiscal Year GA Graduate Assistant GC Graduate College GHG Greenhouse Gase GRF Green Revolving Fund HDD Heating Degree Days HDPE High-Density Polyethylene HON Honors College HSI Hispanic-Serving Institution IECC Internatinoal Energy Conservation Code IL ECC Illinois Energy Conservation Code IEPA Illinois Environmental Protection Agency IESNA Illuminating Engineering Society of North America ISTC Illinois Sustainable Technology Center kW Kilowatt kWh Kilowatt-hour LAS College of Liberal Arts and Sciences LCC Latino Cultural Center LED Light-Emitting Diode LEED Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design MMBTU One Million British Thermal Units MRF Material Recovery Facility MSW Municipal Solid Waste MTCO2e Metric Tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent MW Megawatt MWh Megawatt-hours MWRD Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago NFWF National Fish and Wildlife Foundation NPV Net Present Value OBFS Office of Business and Financial Services OPEX Operational Expenditures OS Office of Sustainability OVCA Office of the Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services OVCR Office of Vice Chancellor for Research OVCSA Office of Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs PET Polyethylene Terephthalate PPA Power Purchase Agreement PV Photovoltaic RFCW eGRID Subregion RFI Request for Information SCE Student Center East SCW Student Center West SEM Strategic Energy Management SFAB Sustainability Fee Advisory Board SIP Sustainability Internship Program STEM Science, Technology, Engineering and Math TDM Transportation Demand Management TEM Travel and Expense Management TLC UIC Center for the Advancement of Teaching-Learning Communities USGBC United States Green Building Council UIC The University of Illinois at Chicago UI Health University of Illinois Hospital and Health System UIUC The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign U.S. EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency WARM United States Environmental Protection Agency Waste Reduction Model US Urban Studies VCAS Vice Chancellor for Administrative Services
Brief history of the last ten years of UIC’s climate action
Formed in 2008 along with the OS, the CCSE is composed of UIC employees including faculty, administrators, and operational managers, as well as student representatives. The CCSE is divided into six major subcommittees: Energy and Utilities, Grounds, Sustainable Materials, Transportation, Teaching and Learning, and Climate Resilience; tasked with monitoring campus sustainability progress and making recommendations for future actions.
UIC developed the Climate Action Plan (CAP) in 2009 which details strategies, goals, and actions to reduce total campus GHG emissions by 40% by 2030 (from FY 2004 levels); and by at least 80% in 2050 (without accounting for offsets) to meet its commitment as a 2007 signatory to the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (now known as Second Nature). UIC has made progress in achieving those goals to date. Over the past nine years, the CCSE has reviewed initial strategies, determined if they have been achieved, are still relevant, and recommended alternatives. Reports highlighting notable achievements were generated in 2009, 2010, and 2013.
Sustainability Strategic Thinking (SST) – To Green and Beyond: Excellence Through Sustainability at UIC
From 2008 to 2012, the focus of sustainability initiatives was on campus operations. However, as a research and teaching institution with a long history of community engagement, UIC’s Climate Commitment compelled the SST Committee to examine the core activities of teaching, research, and community engagement as well as within the context of sustainability. In October 2012 the committee was charged to explore (1) what sustainability means for UIC; and (2) how advancing improvements towards sustainability aligns with the strategic goals of the campus. The SST process occurred in two phases.
Phase I, focused on identifying existing strengths or “assets,” related to sustainability at UIC. It also sought to organize those assets into broader domains. While the convention is to employ the three domains of environment, economy, and equity – the “Three E’s” – the committee concluded that UIC’s sustainability assets are more usefully mapped to five sustainability domains: environment, energy, economy, equity and diversity, and health. The CCSE also developed nine key insights that arose out of thinking about sustainability broadly and within the unique context of UIC.
The 9 Key Insights:
- Integrating sustainability into the curriculum is a natural way for UIC to educate for energy.
- Collaboration, deliberation, and cross-cultural dialogue are key aspects of sustainability.
- Sustainability requires culture change driven by lessons from history as well as new ideas an innovation.
- Advancing social and environmental justice and supporting cultural and biological diversity are essential to achieving sustainable communities that nurture people and nature.
- UIC has the potential to become a regional leader in sustainability.
- UIC has great potential to be a learning lab for sustainability.
- Health and wellness are key components of sustainability at UIC.
- Sustainable buildings and spaces are means to promote collaboration and education, as well as efﬁciency and conversation.
- True cost accountability is an essential tool for sustainable decision making.
Phase II, which began in the Fall 2017, extended this collaboration to the larger campus community through town halls and stakeholder meetings. Focus groups gave a variety of constituents the opportunity to weigh in on key thoughts related to these insights and the sustainability domains, to raise their own concerns. The process resulted in recommendations organized into three categories: Teaching and Learning, Research, and Practice. While one cannot isolate approaches to sustainability from one another, it was useful to consider them in terms of the university’s basic functions in order to consider how to implement specific recommendations and identify the complexities of doing so. The subsequent report, aptly named “To Green and Beyond: Excellence Through Sustainability at UIC” , contains the recommendations.
In April 2016 Chancellor Michael D. Amiridis signed the updated Second Nature Climate Commitment that challenges UIC to even higher goals than previous commitments. This updated commitment also required UIC to update the CAP and conduct a climate resilience analysis. In parallel, the CCSE worked with the Chancellor to develop aspirational goals and short-term action items that build upon existing progress towards UIC’s sustainability goals.
These new goals are the UIC Climate Commitments and include four major categories in order to reduce carbon emissions, reduce waste streams, increase water use efficiency, and enhance biodiversity at UIC. 1) Carbon Neutral Campus 2) Zero Waste Campus 3) Net Zero Water Campus 4) Biodiverse Campus.
The CCSE has updated the goals of the Climate Action Implementation Plan (CAIP) to include the new Resilience commitment and the recommendations of the SST.
Additional Guiding Documents
Several other institutional and sustainability guiding documents have informed the UIC Climate Commitments (and CAIP)
- UIC Strategic Priorities
- UIC Master Plan
- UIC Tree Care Plan
- Urban Transformations: A Phased Approach to Green Infrastructure Implementation at the University of Illinois at Chicago (a student-led, United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) award-winning Stormwater plan)
- UIC Multimodal Transportation Plan (developed in co-ordinance with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP).
2016 – 2017 Activity
Proactive, sustainable strategies face a variety of immense complexities in moving forth into actual phases of implementation. This is why it is important to highlight progress – which could not have been realized without the hard work and dedication from the UIC OS and other concerned faculty, staff, and students – which has already been achieved, and can be built upon moving forward.
Still, since the development of the CAP (2009) there are several key areas which could see further improvement. The associated image displays a Scorecard (2016) developed in relation to the progressive standing on key strategies of the CAP. Based on this exercise the CCSE revised its strategies into the UIC Climate Commitments.
During the summer of 2016, the CCSE Subcommittees conducted a resource needs assessment. This assessment identified existing assets that would contribute to the CAIP planning process, as well as logistical needs. The CCSE focused on utilizing internal resources such as students, faculty, staff, and internal applied-research centers. The VCAS and Student Sustainability Fee Advisory Board (SFAB) provided additional funding required for the planning process.
The planning process was comprised of the following components:
- Faculty, staff, and students generated input primarily through the expertise of the CCSE, OS staff and graduate assistants, internal consulting, existing consultants
- Fovea Services – consulting – Climate Action Planning (CAP) Tool
- UIC Undergraduate Engineering Design Team Projects, and
- Project Management led by the OS.
STRATEGY 1.0 ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND CONSERVATION
Energy efficiency and conservation initiatives present an enticing opportunity to both reduce GHG emissions and provide cost savings in energy and fuel-related expenditures for UIC. Energy efficiency entails using technology that requires less energy to perform the same function. Energy conservation is any behavior that results in the use of less energy.
Buildings and the energy required to support them (electricity from the grid, onsite production, natural gas, etc.) account for most of UIC’s emissions (roughly 80% or 285,000 MTCO2e of our FY 2014 total). UIC has reduced its overall Energy Use Intensity (Energy Used per Square Foot of built space per heating Degree Day) by 22% since FY 2004. In this same period, total campus energy use was reduced by 26%. FY 2012 and FY 2016 represent two years with very mild winters and correlates to increases in overall Energy use Intensity (EUI) for those years. Although UIC’s Energy Use Intensity for FY 2016 was higher than previous years, overall a declining trend has been realized. Although this progress is noteworthy, there are still many opportunities to implement increased energy efficiency measures on campus and capture savings.
It was estimated that in order for the university to save 11,000 MTCO2e GHG annually, all new construction must aspire to the projected 2025 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC), which could be 50% less energy intense than the current 2015 IECC standard, as projected by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE).
STRATEGY 2.0 CLEAN AND RENEWABLE ENERGY SOURCES
The procurement of cleaner and renewable-sourced energy provides a more reliable and resilient energy system, a lessened environmental impact, and improved public health. Onsite renewable systems also provide educational opportunities for students and the broader community.
UIC has a 106 kW PV system on top of Lincoln Hall and Douglas Hall that generates approximately 120 MWh/year; a granular fraction (~0.10%) of purchased electricity. UIC also owns an onsite geothermal system which serves heating and cooling loads to Grant Hall, Douglas Hall, and Lincoln Hall. There are 64 geothermal wells that go 500 feet underground located to the east of University Hall. This system provided 4,444 MMBtu of heating and cooling in FY 2016.
Additionally, UIC’s Utility Operations runs its two power plants with cogeneration capabilities on campus. Cogeneration, at a minimum, increases fuel efficiency by replacing separate devices that produce either electricity or thermal energy with a single device that provides both.
STRATEGY 3.0 REDUCED TRANSPORTATION-RELATED EMISSIONS
UIC’s transportation-related emission sources comprise a relatively small portion of total GHG emissions, but are difficult to address. (Majority of Scope 3 emissions reported on Second Nature). Institutional structure and policies, individual behavior, and complex interactions between units present obstacles.
Without addressing these barriers, emissions from the transportation sector will continue to grow given the expected population increase at UIC. A rise in student and faculty/staff population is a welcomed trend, but will require comprehensive and collaborative strategies to offset GHG emissions from an increase in daily and business commuting.
In the 2018 Commuter Survey done by UIC, the findings were that students prefer to take the CTA rail (51%) while most faculty and staff prefer to drive alone. Faculty, staff, and students commuting by private vehicles constitutes the largest share of UIC’s transportation-related emissions and on average one way they are travelling 15.9 miles based on the 2018 Commuter Survey. Those who commute from south of Chicago have a higher tendency to drive whereas those north and northwest of Chicago tend to take CTA and Rail. From 2017 to 2018 the CTA rail stations by UIC saw a 1.1% increase in ridership. Campus parking permits have slowly trended upward year over year for the past several years.
To reduce GHG emissions in this sector, UIC will need to modify many incentives and policies to better support more sustainable transportation.
STRATEGY 4.0 NATURAL RESOURCES AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES
UIC sits on an urban site; the present watershed and habitat differ from the natural habitat that existed here 200 years ago as part of the Lake Michigan watershed. Today, stormwater flows directly into the combined stormwater-sewer system that is part of the Metropolitan Wastewater Reclamation District (MWRD) where it is treated. UIC has undertaken many steps to improve stormwater management on campus. An award winning, interdisciplinary student project – Urban Transformations: A Phased Approach to Green Infrastructure Implementation at UIC – developed strategies to reduce UIC’s stormwater runoff by 10%; additionally calling for demonstration projects that increase awareness of and support for green infrastructure.
Furthermore, the area historically is considered a lake plain and a tallgrass prairie. Within a few acres of this prairie grassland ecosystem, there is the potential for hundreds of species of plants, bees, butterflies, snakes, salamanders, and meadowlarks.
The predominant species on campus today are turf grasses, native and hardy perennials and grasses, as well as an urban tree canopy covering about 17% of all open space. As UIC continues to plant flowering perennials and native plants, insect pollinator activity will increase. Monarch butterflies have been cited (and released) on campus. Furthermore, restoration plantings are grown from seeds from the James Woodworth Prairie (JWP) in the Plant Research Laboratory, both of which are managed by the Department of Biological Sciences.
UIC has been a certified Tree Campus USA since 2011 and became the first official Bee Campus USA in Illinois, further displaying a commitment to protect and conserve natural resources, as well as addressing UIC’s Climate Commitment of enhanced Biodiversity. There remains plenty of room for improvement however, in addressing UIC’s Climate Commitment of Net Zero Water, in better conserving all natural resources.
STRATEGY 5.0 SUSTAINABLE MATERIALS AND REDUCED WASTE STREAMS
The origins of the Recycling Program at UIC lie in the Illinois Solid Waste Management Act (1995), which required state-supported colleges and universities to achieve at least a 40% per capita reduction in the amount of municipal solid waste (MSW) landfilled by 2010 (from FY 1995 levels). By 2010 UIC achieved a 41% recycling rate and in 2017 was at a 46% recycling rate. Campus level recycling rates through actions of individuals have increased modestly since 2005 from about 23% to 32%. However, since 2008 the overall recycling rates have further increased due to additional material diverted by the material recovery facility (MRF) that receives UIC’s MSW thus consistently achieving recycling rates between 40 and 50% since 2010.
UIC is committed to operating an efficient campus that is continually working towards eliminating waste. UIC’s Climate Commitment to be a Zero Waste Campus to a sustainable waste management system that emphasizes waste prevention as opposed to end-of-pipe waste management. It is a whole systems approach that aims for a massive change in the way materials flow through society, resulting in no waste.
Zero waste systems prevent pollution and avoid costs associated with landfill disposal. It also reduces carbon emissions by diverting discarded materials from methane-generating landfills and avoids carbon emissions associated with extracting, processing, and transporting raw materials and waste. In implementing a Zero Waste Campus, UIC will significantly decrease its waste streams and environmental impact.
There are two basic methods of recycling on campus: individual recycling (the efforts of individuals), and organizational recycling (the efforts of UIC and specialized staff), in which systems established divert waste into recycling and compost. By 2025, we want to incrementally increase our recycling or diversion rate to 50%, and then to 90% by 2050. In addition to recycling and compost, UIC utilizes purchasing policies and vendor requirements that reduce waste going to landfill. There are a variety of new collection programs and the OS produced a Zero Waste Guide for events. The goal of the Recycling Program is to minimize waste by encouraging the conservation of resources.
STRATEGY 6.0 TEACHING AND LEARNING
As a leading Research University, UIC is positioned well to educate undergraduate and graduate students in urban sustainable development and the challenges and opportunities for environmental, economic, and societal well-being in the 21st century and beyond. At the time, UIC’s course catalogue listed over 300 courses that are directly or indirectly linked to the ecological, environmental, social, economic, and cultural facets of sustainability. Many faculty are also engaged in sustainability-related research, through various academic and research programs.
To date, there has been no coordinated approach for developing curricular content for and guiding sequences of courses geared toward delivering the philosophy, knowledge, skills, and tools that prepare students sustainability-focused careers.
Two existing sets of actions for the advancement of sustainability teaching and learning at UIC include integration of the Aspirational Goals and Short-Term Action Items from the UIC Climate Commitments and the recommendations from the UIC Sustainability Strategic Thinking report “To Green and Beyond: Excellence through Sustainability at UIC”.
STRATEGY 7.0 CLIMATE RESILIENCE
The Chancellor’s Committee on Sustainability and Energy (CCSE) Climate Resilience Subcommittee used the Nature Conservancy’s Community Resilience Workshop Guide as a method to identify Resiliency Assets for community resilience. The subcommittee identified threats and hazards and reviewed the previously identified strengths/assets with regard to these disruptive events. This information was compiled in a Risk Assessment Matrix called the Resilience and (Climate Impact) Vulnerability Assessment.
Three Climate Resilience Workshops were held with the other CCSE subcommittees, campus stakeholders, and Chicagoland community stakeholders. The Risk Assessment Matrix addressed five domains:
- Government & Engagement
- Health & Wellness
- Ecosystem Services
At each workshop, members added new features to the Risk Assessment Matrix. Each feature was identified as a strength or vulnerability and action items were determined to address each feature. Participants voted, on the most important actions. The co-chairs then linked the assets to metrics and developed the Resilience Fields for the Second Nature reporting. Completed matrices can be found here. Many of these actions were already addressed in the other Strategies of the Climate Action Implementation Plan (CAIP). The resulting resilience action items are presented in Strategy 7.0.
How to read the table
A green number represents the value as an improvement over the business-as-usual reference case (BAU). In other words, UIC Is better off with that solution than we would be without it.
A red number represents the value as worse than the business-as-usual reference case (BAU). In other words, UIC Is worse off with that solution than we would be without it.
Some numbers are indicated with parenthesis which, in financial accounting terms, are used to show negative values. In the CAIP, negative values are a good thing. They either mean a reduction in cost or a reduction in GHG emissions. Thus negative values with parentheses in these tables are in green.
Some numbers are indicated with a negative sign and is only used in front of the percentage values and simply means a negative value.
1.1.1 SEM: Energy Conservation Measure (ECM) Portfolio 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Existing Building Energy Savings – 25.0%
FTE Required – 1.0
FTE Cost - $60,000.00
Capital and Operational Cost Escalation Rates – 2.0%
Average Project Payback – 5.0 years
Years to Full-Implementation – 10.0 years
Reinvestment Required After – 15.0 years.
Net CAPEX (NPV) $31.86 Million (red value) Net O&M (NPV) $0.67 Million (red value) Net Fuel Costs (NPV) ($49.93) Million (green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) ($17.40) Million (green value in parenthesis) Avgerage GHG Impact -37,941 MTCO2e (green value) Percentage of Avgerage Forecasted Emissions -10.47 % (green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement ($46.22) per MTCO2e (green value in parenthesis)
1.1.2 SEM: Green Revolving Fund Investment Summary
Key Funding Mechanism Assumptions
First-Year Fund Level (2019$) - $4,633,000.00
Average Annual Seed Funds - $1,577,667.00
FTE Required – 1.0
FTE Cost - $60,000.00.
First-Year Investment $60,000 $0.00 Second-Year Investment $2,350,000 $0.00 Third-Year Investment $1,940,000 $410,000 Fourth-Year Investment $1,470,000 $880,000 Fifth-Year Investment $1,000,000 $1,350,000 Sixth-Year Investment $530,000 $1,820,000 Seventh-Year Investment $60,000 $2,290,000 Eighth-Year Investment $0.00 $2,760,000
1.2.1 Building Standards (2025 IECC) 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
2015 Standard – ASHRAE 90.1 2013, IECC 2015
Policy Goal – Projected 2025 Standard
Percentage Improvement from 2015 Standard – 50%
Construction Cost Premium - $20 per GSF
Capital Cost Escalation Rate – 2%.
Net CAPEX (NPV) $34.57 Million (red value) Net O&M (NPV) $0.00 Million Net Fuel Costs (NPV) $18.78 Million (red value) Cash Flows (NPV) ($15.79) Million (green value in parenthesis) Average GHG Impact -11,273 MTCO2E (green value) % of Average Forecasted Emissions -3.11% (green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement $165.07 per MTCO2E (red value)
1.2.2 Energy Conscious Campust 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Percentage of Energy Use Avoided – 1.5% per year
Initial Program Cost - $300,000.00
Operational Cost Escalation Rate – 2%.
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.00 Million Net O&M (NPV) $3.36 Million (red value) Net Fuel Costs (NPV) ($5.66) Million (green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) ($2.30) Million (green value in parenthesis) Average GHG Impact -3,859 MTCO2E (green value) % of Average Forecasted Emissions -1.07% (green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement ($53.57) per MTCO2E (green value)
2.1.1 Indirect PPA 15-Year Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Installed Capacity – 28.6 MW
Capacity Factor – 40.0% Illinois wind
Annual Production – 99,716 MWh per year
Degradation Factor – 0.5% per year
Starting Purchase Price - $0.065 per kWh
Price Escalation Factor – 1.0% per year
Percentage of Purchased Electricity – 50.0%.
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.00 Million Net O&M (NPV) $0.00 Million Net Fuel Costs (NPV) ($3.62) Million (green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) ($3.62) Million (green value in parenthesis) Average GHG Impact -53,589 MTCO2E (green value) % of Average Forecasted Emissions -14.79% (green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement ($6.00) per MTCO2E (green value)
2.1.2 Onsite PPA 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Installed Capacity – 1.0 MW
Capacity Factor – 15.1%
Annual Production – 1,320.6 MWh per year
First-Year 3rd Party PPA Price - $0.0794 per kWh
Annual PPA Escalation Rate – 0%
Avoided Demand Charge - $70.71 per kW-month
Demand Charge Escalation – 0%
and Peak Capacity Credit – 100%
Net CAPEX (NPV) $2.74 Million (red value) Net O&M (NPV) $0.00 Million Net Fuel Costs (NPV) ($0.62) Million (green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) $2.12 Million (red value) Average GHG Impact -686 MTCO2E (green value) % Average Forecasted Emissions -0.19% (green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement $2,283.12 per MTCO2E (red value)
2.2.1 Onsite Power Plant Electricity Production 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Purchased Electricity Avoided – 50,000 MWh per year
Plant Electric Generation Efficiency – 40.0%
Plant Heat Recovery – 40.0%
Natural Gas Required for CHP Generators – 426,500 MMBTU
Natural Gas Emissions from CHP Generators – 22,675.60 MTCO2e
Heat Recovered – 170,600 MMBTU
Boiler Natural Gas Consumption Avoided – 213,250 MMBTU
Boiler Natural Gas Emissions Avoided – 11,337.80 MTCO2e
Net Natural Gas Avoided through Cogeneration – 213,250 MMBTU
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.00 Million Net O&M (NPV) $0.00 Million Net Fuel Costs (NPV) ($2.11) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Average GHG Impact -17,820 MTCO2E (Green value) % of Average Forecasted Emissions -4.92% (Green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement ($118.13) per MTCO2E (Green value in parenthesis)
3.1.1 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
FTE Required – 0.5
FTE Cost - $60,000.00
Labor Escalation Rate – 2.0%
2023 Commuting-Related Emissions Reduction – 10.0%
2028 Commuting-Related Emissions Reduction – 15.0%
2050 Commuting-Related Emissions Reduction – 30.0%.
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.00 Million Net O&M (NPV) $0.34 Million (Red value) Net Fuel Costs (NPV) $0.00 Million Cash Flows (NPV) $0.34 Million (Red value) Average GHG Impact -3,246 MTCO2e (Green value) % of Average Forecasted Emissions -0.90% (Green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement $10.06 per MTCO2e (Red value)
3.2.1 Fleet Efﬁciency (Fuel Switch) 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Electric Vehicles – 9
CNG Vehicles – 10
Hybrid Vehicles – 9
Total Current Fuel Consumption for Fleet – 28,486 gallons
Revised Fuel Consumption – 3,052 gallons
Revised Electric – 62,263 kWh
Revised Natural Gas – 748 MMBTU
Years to Full Implementation – 15.0 years
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.00 Million Net O&M (NPV) $0.00 Million Net Fuel Costs (NPV) ($0.32) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) ($0.32) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Average GHG Impact -68 MTCO2e (Green value) % of Average Forecasted Emissions -0.02 % (Green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement ($475.26) per MTCO2e (Green value in parenthesis)
3.2.2 Air Travel Carbon Offset Program 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Cost per Offset - $5.00
Percentage of Air Travel Offset – 100.0%.
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.00 Million Net O&M (NPV) $0.30 Million (Red value) Net Fuel Costs (NPV) $0.00 Million Cash Flows (NPV) $0.30 Million (Red value) Average GHG Impact -5,316 MTCO2e (Green value) % of Average Forecasted Emissions -1.47% (Green value) Levelized Cost of GHG Abatement $5.00 per MTCO2e (Red value)
4.1.1 Green Stormwater Infrastructure Implementation Plan 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Average Annual Rainfall - 37.83”
Area of Campus - 244 acres
Total Stormwater Volume - 251 million gallons
Potential Stormwater Retention - 50%
Average Annual Stormwater Investment (FY2018 - FY2027 ) - $1,000,000.00
Life Cycle Costs - Similar/ Less than conventional
Water Reused for Irrigation - 49 million gallons; Cost - $7.76/k-gal
Total Annual Water and Sewer Savings - $380,240.00
Net CAPEX (NPV) $9.00 Million (Red value) Net O&M (NPV) $0.00 Million Net Water and Sewer Services Costs (NPV) ($5.70) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) $3.30 Million (Red value) Water Retained On Site 187.5 Million Gallons (Green value) % of Water Use Reduction -7.0% (Green value)
4.2.2 Manual and Low-Flow Fixtures 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Toilet Pre-Gallons per Flush – 4.50 gallons
Toilet Post-Gallons per Flush – 1.28 gallons
Annual Gallons Used – 95,818,370 gallons
Annual Gallons Saved – 68,563,367 gallons
Urinal Pre-Gallons per Flush – 2.20 gallons
Urinal Post-Gallons per Flush – 0.50 gallons
Annual Gallons Used – 13, 229, 984 gallons
Annual Gallons Saved – 10,223,169 gallons
Cost of Upgrade - $190.00-$500.00 per unit
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.61 Million (Red value) Net Water Savings (NPV) ($9.17) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) ($8.56) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Water Use Avoided -1.18 Million Gallons (Green value) % of Water Reduction -7.0% (Green value)
4.3.2 Tree Care Plan Fiscal Requirements Summary
Number of Trees Inventoried – 3,682
Number of Species – 96
Tree Cover – 37.33 acres
Pollution Removal – 1794 pounds per year
Carbon Storage – 847.2 tons
Carbon Sequestration – 20.52 tons per year
Oxygen Production – 54.71 tons per year
Avoided Runoff – 425,000 gallons per year
Structural Values - $4,060,000.00
Annual Benefit - $15,310.00
First-Year Cost – NA
Annual Cost (After First Year) - $85,000.00
Year 1 Ongoing Commitment in Place Parking $50,000 $50,000 Yes Facilities Management (Grounds) $35,000 $35,000 Yes Office of the Vice Chancellor for Health Affairs (each responsible unit) $25,000 $10,000 No Office of the Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs (each responsible unit) $25,000 $10,000 No Athletics $25,000 $10,000 No
5.2.1 Operational Waste Collection Efﬁciency 15-Year Fiscal Impact Summary
Key Model Assumptions
Full Implementation (2023) Annual Avoided Solid Waste Emissions – 183 MTCO2e
Annual Avoided Diesel Fleet through Single Stream (10%) - 4,108 gallons
Annual Operational Cost Savings through Single Stream - $252,016.00
Operational Cost Escalation Factor - 2%
Net CAPEX (NPV) $0.00 Million Net O&M (NPV) ($3.40) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Net Fuel Costs (NPV) ($0.19) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Cash Flows (NPV) ($3.59) Million (Green value in parenthesis) Avg. GHG Impact -186 MTCO2e (Green value)
UIC Commuter Related Emissions
The 2015 Multimodal Plan prepared by the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP) found that UIC’s commuter mode split is lower for single-occupant driving (40%) compared to Chicago (51%) and the broader region (70%). A recent survey shows that while UIC students prefer walking and taking the bus, UIC faculty and staff drive a single-occupancy vehicle as their preferred method of commuting to UIC (2016 UIC Commuter Survey). Faculty, staff, and students commuting by private vehicles constitutes the largest share of UIC’s transportation-related emissions (as shown in the associated graph).
Additionally, current data collection methods do not account for the variance in emissions by distance; thus, travel data must be improved to include greater detail on origin and destination. Full-time students are most likely to commute via public transit as more than 35% live within five miles of campus. Although nearly 40% of faculty and staff live in areas with good/excellent transit accessibility, these subgroups are the most likely to drive alone and least likely to use transit. Understanding the characteristics and habits of subgroups in our campus supports more informed planning.
Identifying the Large Water Users
Studies show that the power plants use the majority of water on campus (as shown in the associated figure). High temperature hot water and steam are used for heating while chilled water is used for cooling. Anytime there is a major leak or break in these closed-looped systems it creates a spike in water usage for that year, which is disproportionate to the average use. A significant component of water use efficiency is prevention and management of piping for central heating and cooling systems. The two peaks in campus water use that occurred between FY 2008-2011 and FY 2014 can be attributed to breaks in the closed-loop systems that provide cooling and heating to campus buildings.
Manual and Low-Flow Fixtures in Taft Hall
The Sustainability Internship Program (SIP) and an Industrial Engineering Design Team researched restroom water use at UIC. The results of this study suggest a quick payback for regularly used restrooms that are equipped with automatic flushers.
The steps the Team took to arrive at a final recommendation included: audit of women’s and men’s bathrooms in one building, distribution of campus-wide survey, calculation of a cost analysis, and the use of the Analytical Hierarchy Process to select amongst alternatives. Toilets inside Taft Hall bathrooms have automatic flushers and the models used are five years old or older. Each time an occupant opens the door, uses the toilet, and closes the door, an automatic flush occurs. This totals to an average of three flushes per occupant. If each toilet were to be flushed once per user, 562,272 gallons of water consumption could be avoided but could go as high as 843,408 gallons at 3 flushes per occupant. Upgrading Taft Hall toilets to the recommended model would cost between $2,000.00-2,800.00 dependent on whether bowls need to be replaced as well.
After a systematic analysis of alternatives based on weighted preferences for dollars saved, water consumed, required maintenance, and environmental impact, the Team concluded that installation of the Sloan ROYAL 111 manual flushers would be the best choice. Even under the worst case scenario, it was predicted water usage by the toilets would be reduced 72% from this implementation, with a payback shorter than a year, and greatly reduce maintenance costs.
Productive Land Use for Local Food
A different type of landscape is sprouting up at UIC, which provides productive land use opportunity for locally grown food. There are several gardens that produce food, each one serving a different purpose. College of Aplied Health and Sciences nutritional garden is a model for different types of urban gardening on campus. All campus gardens represent the applied teaching and learning opportunities that they provide whether related to cultural connections, nutrition, self-care, or community education. Inside and outside the classroom, these living laboratories provide opportunities that UIC will explore and support.
- The Plant Research Laboratory at the UIC Greenhouse is maintained by the Department of Biological Sciences. A small amount of produce is grown for distribution to faculty, staff, and students within their department.
- The Heritage Garden, housed within the the seven Centers for Cultural Understanding and Social Change (CCUSC) collaborate on this project with program infrastructure provided by the Latino Cultural Center, is a hands-on learning internship program for students to connect horticulture with environmental sustainability, cultural diversity, and social justice. The gardens grow plants that tell stories of our heritage and culture.
- The College of Applied Health Sciences Nutrition Garden is an extensive site that is managed by a trained chef and experienced gardener. Growing food responsibly is taught to the students of two undergraduate foods and nutrition courses. Students assist with planting and harvesting, washing produce, and preparing it as meals.
UI Health waste audit
A waste audit performed Fall semester 2015 helped re-initiate the Hospital Green Team. In that audit, we noted the large volume of plastic water bottles found in the waste stream.
The following year, UI Health initiated the installation of numerous water bottle refill stations in the hospital. When a much larger waste audit was conducted summer 2017, the impact was quite clear: there had been a dramatic decline in the volume of plastic water bottles.
Also from the 2015 audit we observed that there were much greater volumes of bottles and cans and cardboard that weren’t being captured in the recycling program. The Environmental Services director required in the hauling contract for municipal solid waste that the material be taken to a material recovery facility. This increased the weight of the recycling streams by 22%.
College of Dentistry Waste Audit
The Dean’s office in the College of Dentistry contacted the Office of Sustainability to work on reducing waste and increasing recycling in their building. To advise Dentistry, a waste audit was performed. By volume, there’s a lot of plastic film and gowns. By weight, gloves are the largest.
The College of Dentistry’s waste audit discovered that plastic film and food scraps constitute over 11% of the waste stream, and programs already exist at UIC for these materials. The first step is to develop a program to collect specific recyclable materials that are generated through the dental clinic, such as dental chair sleeves and wrap used in sterilizing instruments. With an optimized program including updated recycling infrastructure and education in the college, capturing recyclable materials from the building’s waste stream (cardboard, paper, bottles and cans) would result in significant savings of $1,200 annually by removing 24 tons of recycling from the waste stream.
Establishment of Outdoor Recycling at UIC
In 2014, UIC Engineering student and EcoCampus president David Klawitter submitted a proposal to the Sustainability Fee noting that there is no outdoor recycling, and saw the opportunity to not only change this and bring recycling to students outside of classrooms, but to also implement such a system that will help create more sustainable waste and recycling management, while reducing carbon emission and capturing the attention of students.
UIC and BigBelly Solar teamed up to evaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the university’s outdoor waste and recycling collection operations. UIC has experienced multiple issues through the implementation of traditional recycling receptacles, primarily high levels of cross-contamination and lack of infrastructural continuity throughout the receptacles on the main academic campus.
UIC’s traditional outdoor waste and recycling consisted of 948 31-gallon trash receptacles deployed throughout campus. UIC’s goal is deploy the BigBelly System in “The Quad”, which is highest waste collection volume location on campus, consisting of 18 traditional trash cans that are currently being serviced 10 times per week by two facilities staff members. The BigBelly Solar system will replace all of the traditional receptacles in the area with 10 BigBelly Duo Stations, which include both compacting trash and recycling stations, along with the CLEAN Management Console- BigBelly Solar’s cloud based sustainability and work force management tool.
It is extremely important to introduce UIC’s initial BigBelly deployment in a controlled area, where all other traditional trash receptacles can be removed. This will ensure that facilities personnel will only need to collect waste in the BigBelly zone when the BigBelly Solar CLEAN wireless system notifies stakeholders via email that the stations need to be collected.
The solar-compacting units are of course compacting for a reason: the increased capacity. Simply put, they can hold more items because they compact them into smaller spaces. What this means in terms of operations and maintenance is quite remarkable. Based on an analysis of the Quad’s current 18 trash cans and knowledge of their operations having bins with increased capacity will reduce the number of necessary trips to that area from about 462 times per year to 190 times per year. This would reduce Annual Operating Cost by about $24,433.00.
Being that this system would reduce labor and operations costs, it has not only an immediate impact of reducing the work load put on Facilities, but also the added benefit of making an expanded future system more viable. If this network of smart recycling bins were grown to be campus-wide, the impacts could be even greater. There would be an even more significant reduction in labor and operating costs, as the higher capacity around campus would allow for less pick-ups on all parts of campus.
Furthermore, thsi system also reduces greenhouse gas emmisions. Emissions are reduced by the decreased number of vehicle trips out to service the current trash system, leading to about 7.31 tons of conserved GHG emissions annually. Additionally, there would be GHG emission reductions from the fact that materials are being recycled, rather than thrown away. This is estimated at 42.27 tons of GHG emissions reduced annually, leading to a total of 49.58 tons per year of GHG emissions reduction.
- UIC current quantity of collections: 462/year
- BigBelly Solar quantity of collections: 190/year
- Total reduction in collections: 272/year
Annual Green House Gas Emissions Impact through reduced vehicle use
- UIC current operations: 10.08 tons/year
- BigBelly Solar: 2.77 tons/year
- Total reduction in Carbon Emissions: 7.31 tons/year
Annual GHG conserved through BigBelly Solar
- Reduction through reduced vehicle use: 7.31 tons/year
- Reduction through recycling implementation: 42.27 tons/year
- Total GhG conserved annually: 49.58 tons/year
Annual Operating Cost
- UIC current operations: $29,098
- BigBelly Solar: $4,665
- Total Annual Operational Savings: $24,433
Estimated Capital Purchase Costs
- 10 BigBelly Duo Stations: $60,000
- CLEAN Management Console: 12 months of complimentary license: $0
- Total Estimated Pilot System Cost Estimate: *$60,000
- Net monthly savings: $1,038
- Net annual savings: $12,453
UI Health Food Waste Audit
A waste audit conducted in the UI Health Hospital kitchen in February 2017 lead to four impactful changes. The very high volume of food scraps and prepared food that were thrown out – 1400 pounds in a single day – was eye opening. In addition, over 400 pounds of prepared food that wasn’t touched was disposed of as well.
The director of Food and Dietary Services responded by initiating measures to reduce the amount of food prepared. The Vice Chancellor of Health Affairs promoted the development of food recovery to address the problem of food insecurity in the low-income population in the surrounding communities. Hospital administration agreed to the launch of a food scrap collection for compost, which will raise the recycling rate in the building between 3% and 5% annually.