GSS cIRcle Open Scholar Award (UBCV Non-Thesis Graduate Work)

UBC Athletics & Recreation Sustainability Project: Measuring the Climate Change Potential Impacts of.. Dolf, Matt 2011

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata

Download

Media
Climate Change Potential Impacts of a UBC Basketball Game.pdf [ 1.2MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0222975.json
JSON-LD: 1.0222975+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0222975.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0222975+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0222975+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0222975+rdf-ntriples.txt
Citation
1.0222975.ris

Full Text

	
  UBC	
  CENTRE	
  FOR	
  SPORT	
  &	
  SUSTAINABILITY	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   UBC	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation	
  Sustainability	
  Project	
  Measuring	
  the	
  Climate	
  Change	
  Potential	
  Impacts	
  of	
  a	
  UBC	
  Thunderbirds	
  Men’s	
  Basketball	
  Game	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   	
   FOR:	
  UBC	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation	
  –	
  Andrew	
  Haas	
  and	
  Kavie	
  Toor	
   PROJECT	
  OVERSEEN	
  BY:	
  UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  and	
  Sustainability	
  (CSS)	
  –	
  Matt	
  Dolf	
  (Project	
  Manager)	
   CONTRIBUTORS:	
  Members	
  of	
  the	
  Life	
  Cycle	
  Assessment	
  Alliance	
  	
  (A	
  group	
  of	
  UBC	
  Grad	
  students	
  collaborating	
  on	
  research,	
  education	
  &	
  projects	
  promoting	
  LCA)	
  -­‐	
  Matt	
  Dolf,	
  Alexandre	
  Vigneault,	
  Stefan	
  Storey,	
  Rob	
  Sianchuk,	
  Paul	
  Teehan,	
  Siduo	
  Zhang,	
  and	
  Tegan	
  Adams.	
   DATE:	
  July	
  6,	
  2011	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐2-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   Executive	
  Summary	
  As	
  part	
  of	
  its	
  commitment	
  towards	
  engaging	
  in	
  sustainability	
  best	
  practices,	
  UBC	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation	
  commissioned	
  the	
  UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  and	
  Sustainability	
  to	
  carry	
  out	
  a	
  pilot	
  study	
  of	
  the	
  climate	
  change	
  impacts	
  of	
  a	
  varsity	
  ‘Thunderbirds’	
  basketball	
  event.	
  The	
  UBC	
  Life	
  Cycle	
  Assessment	
  Alliance,	
  a	
  cross-­‐faculty	
  collaboration	
  of	
  UBC	
  grad	
  students	
  applying	
  LCA	
  in	
  a	
  variety	
  of	
  fields,	
  measured	
  impacts	
  for	
  the	
  most	
  significant	
  event	
  organizational	
  sectors:	
  travel,	
  accommodation,	
  food,	
  materials	
  and	
  waste,	
  venue	
  operation	
  and	
  infrastructure.	
  A	
  key	
  aim	
  of	
  this	
  study	
  was	
  to	
  apply	
  rigorous	
  evaluation	
  methods	
  in	
  a	
  resource-­‐efficient	
  manner	
  that	
  estimated	
  major	
  impacts	
  by	
  using	
  easily	
  obtainable	
  activity	
  data.	
  A	
  hybrid	
  LCA	
  method	
  combining	
  both	
  input-­‐output	
  and	
  unit	
  process	
  data	
  was	
  applied	
  to	
  measure	
  climate	
  change	
  potential.	
  The	
  unit	
  of	
  analysis	
  was	
  all	
  services	
  that	
  went	
  into	
  providing	
  an	
  entertainment	
  experience	
  for	
  participants	
  over	
  the	
  four-­‐hour	
  period	
  of	
  the	
  event	
  (food,	
  warmth,	
  transport,	
  safety,	
  etc.).	
  The	
  results	
  showed	
  a	
  total	
  of	
  approximately	
  5	
  tonnes	
  of	
  carbon	
  dioxide	
  equivalents	
  from	
  the	
  five	
  event	
  sectors	
  under	
  study.	
  The	
  major	
  impact	
  came	
  from	
  travel	
  (73%),	
  followed	
  by	
  food	
  &	
  beverage	
  (12%),	
  accommodation	
  (11%),	
  venue	
  operation	
  and	
  infrastructure	
  (3%),	
  and	
  materials	
  &	
  waste	
  (1%).	
  A	
  sensitivity	
  analysis	
  showed	
  that	
  the	
  travel	
  impacts	
  of	
  this	
  event	
  were	
  actually	
  significantly	
  lower	
  than	
  an	
  average	
  UBC	
  basketball	
  event	
  since	
  the	
  visiting	
  team	
  came	
  by	
  bus	
  whereas	
  most	
  events	
  require	
  travel	
  by	
  air.	
  This	
  report	
  includes	
  recommendations	
  for	
  GHG	
  mitigation	
  opportunities	
  for	
  future	
  editions	
  of	
  this	
  event.	
  It	
  also	
  recommends	
  that	
  a	
  robust	
  baseline	
  for	
  all	
  UBC	
  A&R	
  events	
  be	
  developed	
  to	
  set	
  specific	
  targets	
  and	
  measure	
  performance.	
  	
  A	
  more	
  comprehensive	
  sustainability	
  management	
  system	
  that	
  addresses	
  other	
  environmental,	
  social	
  and	
  economic	
  issues	
  is	
  also	
  recommended.	
   	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐3-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   Table	
  of	
  Contents	
   Executive	
  Summary	
  ..........................................................................................................................................	
  2	
   1	
  -­‐	
  INTRODUCTION	
  ............................................................................................................................................	
  4	
  1.1	
  Background	
  ......................................................................................................................................................................................	
  4	
  1.2	
  Aim	
  .......................................................................................................................................................................................................	
  4	
  1.3	
  Objectives	
  ..........................................................................................................................................................................................	
  4	
  1.4	
  Event	
  ...................................................................................................................................................................................................	
  4	
  1.5	
  Life	
  Cycle	
  Assessment	
  ..................................................................................................................................................................	
  4	
  1.6	
  Approach	
  ...........................................................................................................................................................................................	
  5	
   2	
  -­‐	
  RESULTS	
  ..........................................................................................................................................................	
  6	
  2.1	
  Travel	
  ..................................................................................................................................................................................................	
  7	
  2.2	
  Accommodation	
  ..........................................................................................................................................................................	
  10	
  2.3	
  Food	
  ..................................................................................................................................................................................................	
  10	
  2.4	
  Materials	
  and	
  Waste	
  ..................................................................................................................................................................	
  11	
  2.5	
  Venue	
  Operation	
  and	
  Structure	
  ............................................................................................................................................	
  12	
   3	
  -­‐	
  DISCUSSION	
  &	
  RECOMMENDATIONS	
  ..................................................................................................	
  14	
  3.1	
  CCP	
  Impact	
  Reductions	
  ............................................................................................................................................................	
  14	
  3.2	
  Sustainability	
  Management	
  Plan	
  .........................................................................................................................................	
  15	
   4	
  -­‐	
  APPENDIX	
  ....................................................................................................................................................	
  17	
  4.1	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Travel	
  ........................................................................................................................................	
  17	
  4.2	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Accommodation	
  ...................................................................................................................	
  18	
  4.3	
  Background	
  Information	
  –	
  Food	
  ..........................................................................................................................................	
  19	
  4.4	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Materials/Waste	
  ..................................................................................................................	
  19	
  4.5	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Venue	
  ........................................................................................................................................	
  21	
  4.6	
  Climate	
  Change	
  Potentials	
  Used	
  ...........................................................................................................................................	
  22	
  	
   Abbreviations	
  A&R	
  -­‐	
  UBC	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation	
  Department	
  CCP	
  –	
  Climate	
  Change	
  Potential	
  CO2	
  -­‐	
  Carbon	
  Dioxide	
  CO2e	
  -­‐	
  Carbon	
  Dioxide	
  Equivalents	
  CSS	
  -­‐	
  UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
  EF	
  -­‐	
  Emission	
  Factor	
  EIO	
  LCA	
  -­‐	
  Economic	
  Input-­‐Output	
  LCA	
  EPA	
  –	
  (U.S.)	
  Environmental	
  Protection	
  Agency	
  GHG	
  –	
  Greenhouse	
  Gas	
  IPCC	
  -­‐	
  Intergovernmental	
  Panel	
  on	
  Climate	
  Change	
  ISO	
  -­‐	
  International	
  Standards	
  Organization	
  LCA	
  -­‐	
  Life	
  Cycle	
  Assessment	
  UBC	
  -­‐	
  University	
  of	
  British	
  Columbia	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐4-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   1	
  -­‐	
  INTRODUCTION	
   1.1	
  Background	
  UBC	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation	
  (A&R)	
  is	
  looking	
  for	
  ways	
  to	
  mitigate	
  the	
  environmental	
  impacts	
  of	
  their	
  activities	
  in	
  line	
  with	
  UBC’s	
  overall	
  mission	
  of	
  sustainability.	
  A&R	
  is	
  composed	
  of	
  approximately	
  100	
  employees	
  and	
  operates	
  7	
  venues	
  on	
  campus.	
  They	
  manage	
  the	
  activities	
  of	
  the	
  UBC	
  varsity	
  teams	
  inclusive	
  of	
  on-­‐campus	
  varsity	
  events.	
  A	
  UBC	
  Thunderbirds	
  Men’s	
  Basketball	
  game	
  was	
  selected	
  as	
  the	
  subject	
  of	
  a	
  pilot	
  life	
  cycle	
  assessment	
  (LCA)	
  study	
  as	
  it	
  is	
  one	
  of	
  the	
  largest	
  recurring	
  athletics	
  events	
  held	
  by	
  A&R	
  on	
  campus,	
  with	
  500	
  -­‐	
  1,000	
  spectators	
  attending	
  each	
  game.	
  A&R’s	
  intent	
  in	
  mandating	
  and	
  participating	
  in	
  this	
  LCA	
  pilot	
  study	
  is	
  to	
  find	
  ways	
  to	
  reduce	
  their	
  environmental	
  footprint	
  and	
  contribute	
  to	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  a	
  benchmark	
  to	
  be	
  used	
  as	
  a	
  relative	
  measure	
  for	
  future	
  events.	
  A&R	
  aims	
  to	
  use	
  the	
  results	
  of	
  this	
  study	
  to	
  exemplify	
  a	
  model	
  Athletics	
  and	
  Recreation	
  Department	
  engaging	
  in	
  environmental	
  responsibility	
  by	
  implementing	
  activities	
  that	
  would	
  positively	
  influence	
  the	
  behaviour	
  of	
  spectators,	
  athletes,	
  staff,	
  and	
  sponsors.	
   1.2	
  Aim	
  To	
  complete	
  an	
  LCA	
  pilot	
  study	
  on	
  key	
  areas	
  of	
  a	
  UBC	
  A&R	
  basketball	
  event	
  to	
  quantify	
  impacts	
  relative	
  to	
  their	
  climate	
  change	
  potential	
  -­‐	
  also	
  known	
  as	
  a	
  carbon	
  footprint	
  or	
  global	
  warming	
  potential	
  -­‐	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  develop	
  future	
  initiatives	
  to	
  manage	
  and	
  reduce	
  these	
  impacts.	
   1.3	
  Objectives	
  1. To	
  calculate	
  the	
  climate	
  change	
  potential	
  of	
  5	
  key	
  sectors	
  (travel,	
  accommodation,	
  food,	
  materials	
  /	
  waste,	
  and	
  venues)	
  frequently	
  considered	
  to	
  be	
  major	
  environmental	
  impacts	
  of	
  sports	
  events.	
  2. To	
  develop	
  a	
  baseline	
  inventory	
  of	
  environmental	
  impact	
  data	
  in	
  these	
  sectors	
  using	
  LCA	
  methods	
  from	
  ISO	
  standards.	
  3. To	
  recommend	
  environmental	
  impact	
  reduction	
  strategies	
  for	
  future	
  events	
  and	
  A&R	
  activities.	
  4. To	
  communicate	
  results	
  that	
  can	
  be	
  transparently	
  and	
  effectively	
  used	
  for	
  decision	
  making	
  by	
  key	
  stakeholders	
  in	
  the	
  event	
  planning	
  processes	
  at	
  UBC.	
   1.4	
  Event	
  The	
  event	
  under	
  investigation	
  is	
  the	
  UBC	
  Thunderbird	
  Men’s	
  Basketball	
  Game	
  that	
  took	
  place	
  on	
  Saturday,	
  February	
  12th,	
  2011.	
  The	
  event	
  was	
  located	
  in	
  the	
  UBC	
  War	
  Memorial	
  Gym.	
  Approximately	
  665	
  people	
  were	
  in	
  attendance,	
  including:	
  560	
  spectators,	
  a	
  home	
  and	
  a	
  visiting	
  team	
  of	
  25	
  members	
  each,	
  and	
  55	
  staff.	
  The	
  visiting	
  team	
  came	
  from	
  Thompson	
  Rivers	
  University	
  in	
  Kamloops,	
  BC.	
   1.5	
  Life	
  Cycle	
  Assessment	
  Life	
  cycle	
  assessment	
  methods	
  were	
  applied	
  to	
  develop	
  quantified	
  estimates	
  of	
  the	
  impacts	
  caused	
  by	
  the	
  game.	
  LCA	
  is	
  gaining	
  broad	
  acceptance	
  as	
  a	
  transparent	
  and	
  robust	
  method	
  for	
  developing	
  complete	
  and	
  valid	
  claims	
  regarding	
  the	
  environmental	
  performance	
  of	
  products	
  and	
  services.	
  LCA	
  is	
  also	
  increasingly	
  being	
  integrated	
  into	
  a	
  growing	
  list	
  of	
  applications	
  including	
  strategic	
  business	
  management,	
  product	
  and	
  process	
  design,	
  environmental	
  labeling,	
  and	
  product	
  declarations.	
  	
  LCA	
  sets	
  out	
  a	
  method	
  for	
  measuring	
  impacts	
  of	
  products	
  and	
  services	
  across	
  all	
  stages	
  of	
  their	
  life	
  cycle	
  from	
  ‘cradle	
  to	
  grave’,	
  including	
  resource	
  extraction	
  >	
  processing	
  >	
  distribution	
  >	
  use	
  >	
  disposal	
  (see	
  Figure	
  1	
  next	
  page).	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  carry	
  out	
  a	
  peer	
  reviewed	
  LCA	
  as	
  set	
  out	
  by	
  ISO	
  14044	
  and	
  ISO	
  14040,	
  four	
  key	
  steps	
  are	
  applied	
  (ISO,	
  2006):	
  1)	
  Goal	
  and	
  Scope	
  Definition,	
  2)	
  Inventory	
  Analysis,	
  3)	
  Impact	
  Assessment,	
  4)	
  Interpretation.	
  	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐5-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   We	
  took	
  a	
  hybrid	
  LCA	
  approach	
  to	
  analyze	
  data,	
  using	
  both	
  unit	
  process	
  and	
  environmental	
  input-­‐output	
  data.	
  Impact	
  categories	
  are	
  used	
  to	
  characterize	
  the	
  respective	
  potential	
  environmental	
  damages	
  including	
  climate	
  change	
  potential,	
  ozone	
  layer	
  depletion,	
  acidification,	
  smog	
  formation,	
  eco-­‐toxicity,	
  land	
  use,	
  water	
  use,	
  eutrophication,	
  and	
  human	
  toxicity	
  potential	
  among	
  others.	
  	
  	
  Climate	
  change	
  potential	
  (CCP)	
  over	
  a	
  100-­‐year	
  horizon,	
  measured	
  in	
  greenhouse	
  gas	
  (GHG)	
  emissions,	
  was	
  selected	
  to	
  describe	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  this	
  event	
  for	
  the	
  following	
  reasons:	
   • UBC	
  campus	
  primarily	
  uses	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  to	
  measure	
  environmental	
  performance	
  and	
  set	
  targets.	
  Of	
  note	
  the	
  UBC	
  campus	
  aims	
  to	
  reduce	
  GHGs:	
  to	
  33	
  per	
  cent	
  below	
  2007	
  levels	
  by	
  2015,	
  to	
  67	
  per	
  cent	
  below	
  2007	
  levels	
  by	
  2020,	
  and	
  to	
  100	
  per	
  cent	
  below	
  2007	
  levels	
  by	
  20501.	
   • Widely	
  available	
  data	
  and	
  emission	
  factors	
  exist	
  for	
  CCP.	
  Therefore	
  this	
  was	
  the	
  most	
  effective	
  impact	
  assessment	
  category	
  to	
  apply	
  given	
  limited	
  time	
  and	
  resources.	
   • Simplicity	
  of	
  communication,	
  people	
  have	
  a	
  growing	
  awareness	
  of	
  carbon	
  footprints,	
  which	
  are	
  synonymous	
  with	
  climate	
  change	
  potential.	
   • GHG	
  emissions	
  create	
  global	
  impacts	
  and	
  therefore	
  can	
  include	
  off-­‐site	
  impacts	
  such	
  as	
  long	
  distance	
  travel.	
  Water	
  or	
  biodiversity	
  impacts	
  for	
  example	
  have	
  more	
  local	
  specificity.	
  As	
  this	
  study	
  describes	
  only	
  the	
  potential	
  damages	
  caused	
  to	
  climate	
  change	
  and	
  not	
  other	
  impacts	
  such	
  as	
  water	
  use	
  or	
  land	
  use,	
  it	
  is	
  unable	
  to	
  provide	
  insight	
  into	
  the	
  potential	
  tradeoffs	
  that	
  can	
  be	
  created	
  between	
  impact	
  categories	
  through	
  decision-­‐making.	
   1.6	
  Approach	
  In	
  coordination	
  with	
  A&R,	
  the	
  project	
  team	
  divided	
  the	
  UBC	
  Thunderbirds	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  game	
  into	
  5	
  main	
  event	
  organizational	
  sectors	
  and	
  developed	
  life	
  cycle	
  data	
  collection	
  strategies	
  for	
  each:	
  travel,	
  food,	
  accommodation,	
  materials/waste,	
  and	
  venue	
  operation	
  and	
  structure	
  (Figure	
  1).	
   FIGURE	
  1:	
  SYSTEM	
  BOUNDARY	
  OF	
  LIFE	
  CYCLE	
  STAGES	
  APPLIED	
  TO	
  EVENT	
  ORGANIZATIONAL	
  SECTORS	
   	
  Activity	
  data	
  was	
  collected	
  first-­‐hand	
  where	
  possible	
  and	
  estimated	
  where	
  it	
  was	
  either	
  not	
  available	
  or	
  too	
  resource	
  intensive	
  to	
  gather.	
  Activity	
  data	
  was	
  translated	
  into	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  using	
  emission	
  factors	
  from	
  a	
  combination	
  of	
  unit	
  processes	
  and	
  input-­‐output	
  data	
  sources.	
  	
  Section	
  3	
  provides	
  the	
  results	
  for	
  each	
  event	
  category	
  with	
  detailed	
  methodology	
  and	
  data	
  sources	
  provided	
  in	
  Appendix	
  1.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  1	
  Source:	
  UBC	
  Climate	
  Action	
  Plan.	
  2010.	
  http://www.sustain.ubc.ca/climate-­‐action	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐6-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   The	
  category	
  indicator	
  for	
  climate	
  change	
  potential	
  is	
  kilograms	
  of	
  carbon	
  dioxide	
  equivalents	
  per	
  unit	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  unit).	
  The	
  general	
  formulas	
  used	
  to	
  convert	
  activity	
  data	
  into	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  were:	
  	
   • Materials:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  =	
  Data	
  (kg)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  kg)	
   • Waste:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  =	
  Waste	
  audit	
  value	
  (kg)	
  *	
  %	
  categories	
  (wt%)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  kg)	
   • Travel	
  by	
  car:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  per	
  vehicle	
  km	
  =	
  {Travel	
  distance	
  (km)	
  *	
  Fuel	
  efficiency	
  (l/km)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e/l)}	
  /	
  Occupancy	
  (#	
  passengers)	
   • Travel	
  by	
  bus:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  per	
  passenger	
  km	
  =	
  Travel	
  distance	
  (psg-­‐km)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e/psg-­‐km)	
   • Food:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  =	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  2002	
  US	
  $)	
  *	
  exchange	
  rate	
  (US	
  $	
  to	
  CAN	
  $)	
  *	
  inflation	
  rate	
  ($)	
  *	
  Sales	
  (2011	
  CAN	
  $)	
   • Venue	
  energy:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  =	
  Allocated	
  electricity	
  usage	
  (MW.hr)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  MW.hr)	
  	
  &	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  =	
  Allocated	
  steam	
  usage	
  (lbs)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  lbs)	
   • Venue	
  water:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  =	
  Allocated	
  water	
  usage	
  (m3)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  m3)	
   • Venue	
  wastewater:	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  =	
  Allocated	
  wastewater	
  emissions	
  (m3)	
  *	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  m3)	
   2	
  -­‐	
  RESULTS	
  The	
  results	
  of	
  this	
  pilot	
  LCA	
  study	
  on	
  a	
  UBC	
  Thunderbirds	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  event	
  showed	
  total	
  CCP	
  of	
  5	
  tonnes	
  CO2e).	
  Table	
  1	
  shows	
  a	
  breakdown	
  of	
  the	
  total	
  event	
  impacts	
  by	
  percentage	
  (by	
  vertical	
  distance).	
  Clearly	
  travel,	
  at	
  73%,	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  accommodation	
  (11%)	
  and	
  food	
  (12%),	
  are	
  the	
  major	
  impacts	
  of	
  the	
  event.	
  The	
  venue	
  operation,	
  and	
  materials	
  and	
  waste	
  sectors	
  are	
  relatively	
  minor	
  in	
  terms	
  of	
  this	
  event.	
  	
   TABLE	
  1:	
  GHG	
  EMISSIONS	
  BY	
  EVENT	
  ORGANIZATION	
  SECTOR	
  OF	
  THE	
  BASKETBALL	
  EVENT	
   	
  	
  Impacts	
  have	
  been	
  further	
  broken	
  down	
  by	
  participant	
  type,	
  as	
  seen	
  in	
  Table	
  2.	
  Of	
  the	
  665	
  total	
  participants,	
  560	
  were	
  spectators,	
  55	
  were	
  staff	
  (including	
  volunteers),	
  and	
  50	
  were	
  team	
  members.	
  The	
  teams	
  were	
  further	
  broken	
  down	
  into	
  ‘home’	
  and	
  ‘visiting’	
  since	
  travel	
  impacts	
  significantly	
  different.	
   1%	
  Materials	
  &	
  Waste	
   11%	
  Accommodation	
   73%	
  Travel	
   12%	
  Food	
  3%	
  Venue	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐7-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   TABLE	
  2:	
  TOTAL	
  GHG	
  EMISSIONS	
  (KG	
  CO2E)	
  BY	
  EVENT	
  SECTOR	
  AND	
  PARTICIPANT	
  TYPE	
   	
   Spectators	
   Staff	
   Home	
  team	
   Visiting	
  team	
   Total	
  by	
  sector	
  Travel	
   2,600	
   310	
   120	
   760	
   3,780	
  (73%)	
  Accommodation	
   0	
   0	
   0	
   580	
   580	
  (11%)	
  Food	
   590	
   1	
   0	
   0	
   590	
  (12%)	
  Venue	
   130	
   10	
   6	
   6	
   150	
  (3%)	
  Materials/Waste	
   55	
   -­‐2	
   -­‐1	
   -­‐1	
   50	
  (1%)	
   Total	
  by	
  participant	
  type	
   3,380	
   320	
   110	
   1,340	
   5,150	
   *Note:	
  Figures	
  rounded	
  to	
  nearest	
  significant	
  figure	
  (sums	
  may	
  show	
  rounding	
  errors)	
  Table	
  3	
  shows	
  the	
  impacts	
  per	
  person	
  for	
  each	
  type	
  of	
  participant.	
  Although	
  the	
  visiting	
  team	
  was	
  made	
  up	
  of	
  only	
  25	
  individuals,	
  their	
  impacts	
  were	
  much	
  larger	
  (54	
  kg	
  CO2e	
  per	
  person)	
  than	
  other	
  participant	
  types	
  due	
  to	
  their	
  long	
  distance	
  travel	
  and	
  accommodation	
  impacts.	
  The	
  impacts	
  of	
  the	
  staff,	
  spectators	
  and	
  home	
  team	
  were	
  essentially	
  the	
  same	
  since	
  they	
  followed	
  similar	
  travel	
  and	
  consumption	
  patterns.	
   	
   The	
  WBCSD/WRI	
  Greenhouse	
  Gas	
  Protocol	
  Corporate	
  Accounting	
  and	
  Reporting	
  Standard	
  defines	
  three	
  scopes	
  of	
  responsibility.	
  Scope	
  1	
  covers	
  direct	
  or	
  owned	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  (e.g.	
  fuel	
  used	
  by	
  company	
  vehicles),	
  scope	
  2	
  emissions	
  are	
  from	
  purchased	
  electricity,	
  and	
  Scope	
  3	
  includes	
  all	
  other	
  indirect	
  emissions	
  from	
  sources	
  not	
  owned	
  or	
  controlled	
  by	
  the	
  entity	
  (e.g.	
  spectator	
  travel).	
  As	
  shown	
  in	
  Figure	
  2,	
  no	
  impacts	
  fell	
  under	
  scope	
  1.	
  Purchased	
  energy	
  for	
  venue	
  operation	
  came	
  under	
  scope	
  2	
  and	
  accounted	
  for	
  3%	
  of	
  total	
  event	
  impacts.	
  The	
  remaining	
  impacts	
  fell	
  under	
  scope	
  3	
  and	
  made	
  up	
  97%	
  of	
  the	
  total.	
  Many	
  organizations	
  only	
  report	
  on	
  scopes	
  1	
  and	
  2.	
  This	
  study	
  included	
  scope	
  3	
  to	
  represent	
  all	
  impacts	
  considered	
  to	
  be	
  significantly	
  caused	
  or	
  influenced	
  by	
  this	
  event.	
  It	
  was	
  considered	
  important	
  to	
  take	
  an	
  inclusive	
  approach	
  to	
  associated	
  impacts	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  develop	
  a	
  comprehensive	
  sustainability	
  strategy.	
   FIGURE	
  2:	
  %	
  EVENT	
  GHG	
  EMISSIONS	
  BY	
  SCOPE	
   	
   2.1	
  Travel	
  Travel	
  included	
  all	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  caused	
  by	
  participants	
  travelling	
  to	
  and	
  from	
  the	
  game	
  venue	
  at	
  UBC	
  (War	
  Memorial	
  Gym).	
  This	
  travel	
  data	
  was	
  collected	
  from	
  participants	
  through	
  an	
  onsite	
  survey	
  conducted	
  during	
  the	
  game.	
  A	
  breakdown	
  of	
  the	
  methods,	
  calculations	
  and	
  assumptions	
  are	
  available	
  in	
  Appendix	
  I.	
   0%	
   3%	
   97%	
   Scope	
  1	
   Scope	
  2	
   Scope	
  3	
   TABLE	
  3:	
  CCP	
  PER	
  PERSON	
  BY	
  PARTICIPANT	
  TYPE	
   Visiting	
  team	
   Home	
  team	
   Staff	
  	
   Spectator	
   54	
   6	
  5	
   6	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐8-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   Travel	
  was	
  by	
  far	
  the	
  major	
  source	
  of	
  impacts	
  for	
  the	
  event,	
  accounting	
  for	
  approximately	
  ⅔	
  of	
  the	
  total.	
  The	
  primary	
  contributors	
  were	
  cars	
  and	
  buses	
  since	
  walking	
  and	
  cycling	
  were	
  considered	
  to	
  be	
  zero	
  impact	
  and	
  no	
  one	
  travelled	
  by	
  motorbike	
  or	
  plane.	
  Table	
  4	
  shows	
  the	
  break	
  down	
  of	
  travel	
  impacts	
  by	
  distance	
  and	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  of	
  the	
  event.	
   TABLE	
  4:	
  TRAVEL	
  DISTANCES	
  AND	
  CCP	
  IMPACTS	
  BY	
  TRAVEL	
  MODE	
   Mode	
   Total	
  distance	
  (km)	
   Total	
  CCP	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
  Walking	
   110	
   0	
  Cycling	
   1	
   0	
  Car	
   9,400	
   2,600	
  Motorbike	
   0	
   0	
  Bus	
  -­‐	
  city	
   2,900	
   420	
  Bus	
  -­‐	
  intercity	
   10,000	
   760	
  Plane	
   0	
   0	
   Total	
   22,400	
   3,780	
   *Note:	
  Figures	
  rounded	
  to	
  nearest	
  significant	
  figure	
  (sums	
  may	
  show	
  rounding	
  errors)	
  The	
  bus	
  impact	
  is	
  relatively	
  high	
  because	
  the	
  visiting	
  team	
  drove	
  400	
  kilometers	
  from	
  Kamloops	
  to	
  Vancouver.	
  It	
  should	
  be	
  noted	
  however	
  that	
  this	
  pilot	
  study	
  does	
  not	
  capture	
  the	
  fact	
  that	
  most	
  UBC	
  Thunderbirds	
  games	
  would	
  involve	
  at	
  least	
  one	
  team	
  flying	
  in.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  better	
  represent	
  the	
  average	
  travel	
  impact	
  of	
  this	
  event,	
  CCP	
  was	
  calculated	
  for	
  the	
  whole	
  regular	
  season	
  schedule	
  and	
  divided	
  by	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  games	
  requiring	
  travel.	
  There	
  were	
  approximately	
  34	
  games	
  across	
  Canada	
  and	
  the	
  USA.	
  Table	
  5	
  shows	
  that	
  the	
  average	
  travel	
  distance	
  and	
  CCP	
  impact	
  are	
  approximately	
  7	
  times	
  higher	
  than	
  this	
  event.	
   TABLE	
  5:	
  COMPARISON	
  OF	
  TRAVELING	
  TEAM	
  DISTANCES	
  AND	
  IMPACTS	
  OF	
  FEB	
  11	
  EVENT	
  WITH	
  AN	
  AVERAGE	
  UBC	
  	
   THUNDERBIRDS	
  EVENT	
   	
   Total	
  distance	
  	
   (km)	
   Total	
  CCP	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
  Feb	
  11	
  Event	
   400	
   770	
  Average	
  Event	
   1,950	
   5,6002	
   *Note:	
  Figures	
  rounded	
  to	
  nearest	
  significant	
  figure	
  Furthermore,	
  a	
  significant	
  number	
  of	
  spectators	
  (89%)	
  that	
  travelled	
  by	
  car	
  were	
  in	
  high	
  occupancy	
  vehicles	
  (HOVs)	
  as	
  opposed	
  to	
  single	
  occupancy	
  vehicles	
  (SOVs)	
  (Table	
  6).	
  This	
  is	
  well	
  above	
  the	
  UBC	
  commuting	
  average	
  of	
  35%	
  HOV	
  and	
  is	
  likely	
  explained	
  by	
  the	
  fact	
  that	
  people	
  tend	
  to	
  go	
  to	
  events	
  with	
  friends	
  or	
  family.	
  It	
  is	
  also	
  interesting	
  that	
  only	
  one	
  person	
  reported	
  cycling	
  to	
  the	
  event,	
  although	
  it	
  should	
  be	
  noted	
  that	
  this	
  game	
  took	
  place	
  on	
  a	
  rainy	
  and	
  cold	
  February	
  evening.	
   TABLE	
  6:	
  SPECTATOR	
  TRAVEL	
  MODES	
  BY	
  PERCENTAGE	
  AND	
  AVERAGE	
  DISTANCE	
  (ROUND	
  TRIP)	
   Mode	
   Spectators	
  (#)	
   %	
   Average	
  travel	
  distance	
  Walking	
   86	
   15%	
   1	
  km	
  Cycling	
   1	
   <0%	
   1	
  km	
  Car	
  –	
  SOVa	
   42	
   7%	
   85	
  km	
  Car	
  -­‐	
  HOVa	
   340	
   61%	
   54	
  km	
  Motorbike	
   0	
   0%	
   0	
  km	
  City	
  bus	
   91	
   16%	
   24	
  km	
  Plane	
   0	
   0%	
   0	
  km	
   Total	
   560	
   100%	
   	
   a.	
  SOV	
  (single	
  occupancy	
  vehicle)	
  =	
  1	
  person,	
  HOV	
  (high	
  occupancy	
  vehicle)	
  =	
  2	
  or	
  more	
  people	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  2	
  Flight	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  estimations	
  derived	
  using	
  http://www.myclimate.org	
  flight	
  calculator.	
  	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐9-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   Table	
  6	
  also	
  shows	
  that	
  spectators	
  attended	
  the	
  game	
  by	
  bus	
  and	
  car	
  from	
  across	
  the	
  GVRD	
  (Greater	
  Vancouver	
  Regional	
  District).	
  This	
  is	
  highlighted	
  in	
  Figure	
  3	
  by	
  the	
  even	
  distribution	
  of	
  spectators	
  travelling	
  from	
  zones	
  of	
  0-­‐1	
  km	
  (UBC),	
  10	
  km,	
  25	
  km,	
  and	
  25-­‐100	
  km.	
  Somewhat	
  surprisingly,	
  only	
  one	
  fifth	
  of	
  spectators	
  came	
  from	
  UBC	
  even	
  though	
  there	
  are	
  approximately	
  16,500	
  residents,	
  47,00	
  students,	
  and	
  40,000	
  staff.	
   FIGURE	
  3:	
  SPECTATOR	
  TRAVEL	
  DISTANCES	
  ACROSS	
  THE	
  GREATER	
  VANCOUVER	
  REGIONAL	
  DISTRICT	
   	
   RECOMMENDATIONS	
  	
  1. Promote	
  a	
  ‘bike	
  to	
  the	
  event’	
  initiative.	
  Only	
  one	
  person	
  travelled	
  by	
  bike	
  so	
  there	
  is	
  significant	
  room	
  for	
  improvement.	
  Perhaps	
  the	
  home	
  team	
  athletes	
  could	
  all	
  lead	
  by	
  example	
  on	
  this.	
  2. Promote	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  public	
  transportation.	
  An	
  example	
  would	
  be	
  a	
  free	
  bus	
  ticket	
  with	
  each	
  game	
  ticket.	
  This	
  strategy	
  is	
  widely	
  used	
  in	
  European	
  events.	
  3. More	
  local	
  UBC	
  participants	
  should	
  be	
  encouraged	
  to	
  come.	
  Approximately	
  20%	
  of	
  spectators	
  polled	
  came	
  from	
  UBC	
  campus.	
  More	
  local	
  spectators	
  would	
  promote	
  more	
  people	
  walking	
  and	
  biking	
  to	
  the	
  event	
  and	
  would	
  at	
  the	
  same	
  time	
  engage	
  more	
  students	
  and	
  UBC	
  community	
  members	
  in	
  the	
  events.	
  4. Although	
  none	
  of	
  the	
  teams	
  flew	
  into	
  this	
  particular	
  event,	
  flight	
  impacts	
  could	
  be	
  optimized	
  for	
  the	
  season	
  through	
  strategies	
  such	
  as:	
   • cluster	
  events	
  to	
  limit	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  trips	
  by	
  plane	
  required	
   • encourage	
  the	
  regionalization	
  of	
  events	
  to	
  promote	
  competition	
  with	
  local	
  cities	
   • prioritize	
  direct	
  rather	
  than	
  indirect	
  flights	
   • travel	
  by	
  bus	
  rather	
  than	
  plane	
  for	
  shorter	
  distances	
   • fly	
  second	
  class	
  instead	
  of	
  first	
  class	
  where	
  possible	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐10-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   2.2	
  Accommodation	
  Accommodation	
  impacts	
  were	
  measured	
  for	
  the	
  25	
  visiting	
  team	
  members	
  of	
  the	
  UBC	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  event	
  who	
  traveled	
  from	
  Kamloops,	
  BC	
  to	
  participate.	
  Impacts	
  took	
  into	
  account	
  both	
  energy	
  impacts	
  of	
  accommodation	
  at	
  the	
  hotel	
  and	
  travel	
  to	
  the	
  venue	
  by	
  city	
  bus.	
  The	
  visiting	
  team	
  stayed	
  for	
  2	
  nights	
  (50	
  person	
  nights	
  total)	
  to	
  play	
  2	
  games	
  however	
  only	
  1	
  night	
  per	
  person	
  was	
  allocated	
  since	
  only	
  one	
  game	
  is	
  being	
  measured.	
  The	
  travel	
  impacts	
  accounted	
  for	
  the	
  25	
  km	
  return	
  trip	
  between	
  the	
  Coast	
  Plaza	
  Hotel	
  and	
  UBC	
  War	
  Memorial	
  Gym	
  for	
  the	
  25	
  team	
  members	
  on	
  a	
  city	
  bus.	
   TABLE	
  7:	
  ACCOMMODATION	
  CCP	
  IMPACTS	
  OF	
  THE	
  VISITING	
  TEAM	
   Impact	
  Areas	
   Total	
  CCP	
  impact	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
  Hotel	
  Accommodation	
   490	
  Travel	
  from	
  hotel	
  to	
  venue	
   90	
   Total	
   580	
   *Note:	
  Figures	
  rounded	
  to	
  nearest	
  significant	
  figure	
  (sums	
  may	
  show	
  rounding	
  errors)	
   RECOMMENDATIONS	
  	
  1. Reduce	
  the	
  travel	
  distance	
  between	
  the	
  hotel	
  and	
  the	
  venue.	
  Note	
  that	
  19%	
  of	
  the	
  accommodation	
  impact	
  was	
  due	
  to	
  travel.	
  2. Ensure	
  that	
  hotels	
  with	
  eco-­‐certification	
  programs	
  are	
  prioritized	
  to	
  host	
  visiting	
  teams	
  and	
  when	
  travelling	
  to	
  other	
  cities.	
  Note	
  that	
  Coast	
  Plaza	
  Hotel	
  in	
  Vancouver	
  is	
  already	
  eco-­‐certified	
  by	
  GreenKey.	
  	
  3. Encourage	
  the	
  use	
  of	
  walking,	
  bikes,	
  buses	
  or	
  public	
  transit	
  for	
  transportation	
  from	
  hotel	
  to	
  venue.	
   2.3	
  Food	
  Food	
  and	
  beverage	
  impacts	
  were	
  estimated	
  for	
  all	
  items	
  sold	
  at	
  the	
  game	
  to	
  spectators.	
  Food	
  and	
  non-­‐alcoholic	
  beverages	
  were	
  sold	
  by	
  a	
  snack	
  bar	
  contracted	
  to	
  a	
  catering	
  company.	
  Alcoholic	
  beverages	
  (primarily	
  beer)	
  were	
  sold	
  at	
  two	
  A&R	
  managed	
  beer	
  gardens.	
  The	
  food	
  sold	
  by	
  on-­‐site	
  vending	
  machines	
  was	
  not	
  included.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  estimate	
  the	
  food	
  and	
  beverage	
  GHG	
  emissions,	
  the	
  US	
  National	
  Purchaser	
  2002	
  economic	
  input-­‐output	
  database	
  was	
  used	
  based	
  on	
  the	
  total	
  dollar	
  amount	
  of	
  items	
  sold.	
  It	
  was	
  not	
  considered	
  feasible	
  to	
  perform	
  a	
  full	
  LCA	
  on	
  individual	
  food	
  items	
  since	
  there	
  was	
  not	
  a	
  large	
  volume	
  of	
  goods	
  sold	
  and	
  data	
  of	
  the	
  supply	
  chain	
  are	
  difficult	
  to	
  obtain.	
  Impacts	
  include	
  estimations	
  for	
  food	
  and	
  food	
  packaging	
  resource	
  extraction,	
  manufacture,	
  and	
  distribution.	
  The	
  energy	
  impacts	
  relevant	
  to	
  the	
  use	
  phase	
  (or	
  preparation)	
  of	
  the	
  food	
  were	
  allocated	
  to	
  venue	
  energy.	
  Waste	
  processing	
  impacts	
  for	
  food	
  items	
  have	
  been	
  allocated	
  to	
  the	
  general	
  waste	
  category.	
  Appendix	
  III	
  shows	
  the	
  calculations	
  used	
  to	
  determine	
  the	
  food	
  GHG	
  emissions.	
   ITEMS	
  SOLD	
   • Cold	
  drinks:	
  soft	
  drinks,	
  bottled	
  water,	
  juice,	
  beer	
   • Hot	
  drinks:	
  coffee,	
  tea,	
  hot	
  chocolate	
   • Snacks:	
  nachos	
  &	
  cheese,	
  popcorn,	
  pretzels,	
  churros,	
  chocolate	
  bars,	
  candy,	
  peanuts	
   • Ice	
  cream	
  &	
  popsicles	
   • Pizza	
   	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐11-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   TABLE	
  8:	
  FOOD	
  &	
  BEVERAGE	
  CCP	
  IMPACTS	
   Impact	
  Areas	
   Total	
  sales	
   Total	
  CCP	
  impact	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
  Food	
  &	
  beverage	
   $2,300	
   590	
   *Note:	
  Figures	
  rounded	
  to	
  nearest	
  significant	
  figure.	
   RECOMMENDATIONS	
  	
  Approaches	
  to	
  reducing	
  the	
  CCP	
  impact	
  of	
  food	
  and	
  beverage	
  activities	
  are	
  difficult	
  to	
  generalize	
  since	
  aspects	
  such	
  as	
  travel	
  mode,	
  travel	
  distance,	
  pesticide	
  use,	
  water	
  use,	
  change	
  of	
  seasons,	
  etc.	
  vary	
  significantly	
  and	
  can	
  show	
  contrary	
  results.	
  However	
  we	
  recommend	
  the	
  following	
  general	
  approaches:	
  1. Purchase	
  seasonal	
  and	
  local	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  organic	
  where	
  possible.	
  Avoid	
  products	
  that	
  are	
  air-­‐transported.	
  3	
  2. Reduce	
  food	
  waste	
  impacts	
  by	
  limiting	
  food	
  packaging	
  (e.g.	
  bottled	
  water)	
  and	
  composting	
  organic	
  waste.	
  3. The	
  majority	
  of	
  options	
  were	
  processed	
  and	
  high	
  fat/sugar	
  foods.	
  Going	
  beyond	
  global	
  warming	
  impacts,	
  there	
  would	
  also	
  be	
  an	
  opportunity	
  to	
  use	
  the	
  event	
  to	
  provide	
  healthy	
  and	
  fresh	
  food	
  to	
  tie	
  in	
  with	
  the	
  positive	
  health	
  associations	
  of	
  sport.	
   2.4	
  Materials	
  and	
  Waste	
  All	
  materials	
  used	
  and	
  waste4	
  created	
  at	
  the	
  event	
  were	
  measured	
  (see	
  Table	
  9).	
  Materials	
  included	
  all	
  merchandise	
  and	
  paper	
  products	
  used	
  at	
  the	
  event.	
  Food	
  packaging	
  was	
  not	
  measured	
  in	
  this	
  category	
  as	
  they	
  were	
  accounted	
  for	
  in	
  the	
  food	
  section.	
  Permanent	
  communication	
  materials	
  such	
  as	
  Thunderbird	
  banners	
  were	
  not	
  included	
  as	
  their	
  impact	
  was	
  distributed	
  across	
  a	
  significant	
  number	
  of	
  events,	
  making	
  their	
  impacts	
  in	
  a	
  single	
  event	
  insignificantly	
  small.	
  The	
  total	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  from	
  materials	
  were	
  75	
  kg	
  CO2e	
  (Error!	
  Reference	
  source	
  not	
  found.).	
  Only	
  a	
  small	
  amount	
  of	
  paper	
  and	
  merchandise	
  were	
  used/sold	
  and	
  therefore	
  this	
  is	
  an	
  extremely	
  small	
  impact	
  in	
  comparison	
  with	
  other	
  event	
  sectors.	
   TABLE	
  9:	
  TOTAL	
  MATERIALS	
  CCP	
  IMPACTS	
   Categories	
   Value	
   CCP	
  Impacts	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
  Event	
  programs	
  (paper)	
   5	
  kg	
   15	
  Merchandise	
  (T-­‐shirts,	
  caps	
  &	
  jackets)	
   $75	
   23	
  Give-­‐aways	
  (e.g.	
  mini-­‐basketballs)	
   $100	
   36	
   Total	
   	
   75	
  	
  A	
  waste	
  audit	
  was	
  also	
  carried	
  out	
  on-­‐site	
  for	
  the	
  event.	
  All	
  recycling	
  and	
  trash	
  bins	
  were	
  emptied	
  by	
  staff	
  prior	
  to	
  the	
  game.	
  After	
  the	
  game,	
  staff	
  and	
  volunteers	
  collected	
  the	
  contents	
  of	
  the	
  garbage	
  and	
  recycling	
  bins	
  in	
  the	
  stadium.	
  Contents	
  were	
  weighed	
  using	
  a	
  “bathroom”	
  mechanical	
  scale	
  to	
  obtain	
  two	
  categories	
  of	
  data:	
  trash	
  and	
  recycling	
  weights	
  (	
  Table	
  10).	
  4	
  bags	
  were	
  sampled,	
  corresponding	
  to	
  20%	
  of	
  the	
  total	
  trash	
  weight,	
  and	
  sorted	
  4	
  waste	
  types:	
  recyclable	
  plastic	
  &	
  metals,	
  recyclable	
  paper,	
  compostable	
  and	
  non-­‐recyclable/non-­‐compostable	
  (trash).	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  3	
  Jungbluth,	
  N.,	
  Tietje,	
  O.,	
  &	
  Scholz,	
  R.	
  W.	
  (2000).	
  Food	
  purchases:	
  Impacts	
  from	
  the	
  consumers’	
  point	
  of	
  view	
  investigated	
  with	
  a	
  modular	
  LCA.	
  The	
  International	
  Journal	
  of	
  Life	
  Cycle	
  Assessment,	
  5(3),	
  134-­‐142.	
  4	
  Definitions:	
  Waste	
  -­‐	
  solid	
  materials	
  that	
  the	
  holder	
  discards,	
  including	
  materials	
  to	
  landfill,	
  incinerator	
  and	
  recycling	
  center.	
  Trash	
  -­‐	
  waste	
  going	
  to	
  landfill	
  or	
  incinerator.	
  Recycling	
  -­‐	
  waste	
  going	
  to	
  a	
  recycling	
  center.	
  Materials	
  -­‐	
  communication	
  and	
  marketing	
  materials	
  distributed	
  and	
  merchandise	
  sold	
  during	
  the	
  game.	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐12-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   The	
  total	
  waste	
  produced	
  by	
  the	
  event	
  was	
  44	
  kg	
  with	
  a	
  diversion	
  rate	
  of	
  16%	
  to	
  recycling.	
  Total	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  for	
  waste	
  processing	
  were	
  -­‐22	
  kg	
  CO2e.	
  Negatives	
  emissions	
  come	
  from	
  the	
  fact	
  that	
  by	
  recycling,	
  emissions	
  can	
  be	
  avoided	
  by	
  reducing	
  the	
  extraction	
  of	
  additional	
  natural	
  resources.	
   TABLE	
  10:	
  WASTE	
  AUDIT	
  RESULTS	
   Categories	
   Mass	
  (kg)	
   CCP	
  Impacts	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
   Notes	
  Trash	
   37	
   	
  4	
   	
  Recycling	
   7	
   -­‐26	
   	
   Total	
  waste	
   44	
   -­‐22	
   	
   Diversion	
  rate	
  (wt%)	
   16	
  wt%	
   	
   Recycling	
  /	
  total	
  waste	
   *Note:	
  Figures	
  rounded	
  to	
  nearest	
  significant	
  figure	
  (sums	
  may	
  show	
  rounding	
  errors)	
   RECOMMENDATIONS	
  Although	
  waste	
  had	
  a	
  comparatively	
  small	
  environmental	
  impact	
  relative	
  to	
  the	
  other	
  event	
  sectors.	
  It	
  is	
  however	
  an	
  aspect	
  that	
  is	
  highly	
  visible.	
  An	
  action	
  plan	
  that	
  does	
  not	
  directly	
  address	
  waste	
  reduction	
  will	
  likely	
  not	
  be	
  seen	
  as	
  credible	
  by	
  the	
  public.	
  The	
  diversion	
  rate	
  of	
  16%	
  of	
  waste	
  to	
  recycling	
  during	
  the	
  event	
  was	
  much	
  lower	
  than	
  the	
  UBC5	
  (44%)	
  and	
  Metro	
  Vancouver6	
  (55%)	
  averages.	
  From	
  our	
  waste	
  audit	
  (see	
  Table	
  17	
  in	
  Appendix	
  IV),	
  79%	
  of	
  the	
  waste	
  could	
  be	
  recycled.	
  Here	
  are	
  some	
  suggestions	
  to	
  reduce	
  the	
  impacts	
  of	
  waste:	
  1. Establish	
  a	
  composting	
  program	
  that	
  is	
  championed	
  by	
  the	
  food	
  caterer.	
  2. Create	
  waste	
  stations.	
  Trash	
  bins	
  should	
  always	
  be	
  paired	
  with	
  recycling	
  and	
  composting	
  bins.	
  3. Provide	
  cleanup	
  crew	
  training	
  about	
  what	
  is	
  recyclable	
  and	
  what	
  is	
  compostable	
  at	
  UBC	
  and	
  provide	
  them	
  with	
  equipment	
  to	
  separate	
  the	
  waste.	
  4. To	
  reduce	
  the	
  volume	
  of	
  waste,	
  implement	
  a	
  discount	
  or	
  deposit	
  system	
  to	
  collect/reuse	
  cups	
  for	
  drinks.	
  Many	
  UBC	
  food	
  outlets	
  give	
  discounts	
  to	
  customers	
  who	
  bring	
  their	
  own	
  coffee	
  mug	
  for	
  instance.	
  In	
  Europe,	
  the	
  cup	
  deposit	
  system	
  is	
  widely	
  used	
  for	
  events.	
  5. Use	
  kegs	
  and	
  reusable	
  cups	
  instead	
  of	
  cans	
  for	
  beer	
  in	
  order	
  to	
  reduce	
  waste.	
  Typically,	
  waste	
  action	
  plans	
  focus	
  on	
  addressing	
  waste	
  treatment	
  of	
  products	
  and	
  materials	
  since	
  they	
  are	
  most	
  visible;	
  more	
  significant	
  are	
  the	
  embodied	
  impacts	
  from	
  resource	
  extraction,	
  production,	
  distribution,	
  and	
  use	
  (e.g.	
  electricity	
  requirements)	
  phases.	
  Purchase	
  decisions	
  of	
  less	
  and	
  low-­‐life	
  cycle	
  impact	
  materials	
  are	
  therefore	
  the	
  best	
  way	
  to	
  reduce	
  impacts.	
  Although	
  communication	
  materials	
  and	
  merchandise	
  had	
  a	
  small	
  impact	
  for	
  this	
  event,	
  they	
  could	
  be	
  significant	
  in	
  larger	
  sporting	
  events	
  with	
  broader	
  marketing	
  and	
  communication	
  strategies.	
  Here	
  are	
  some	
  suggestions:	
  1. Print	
  material	
  should	
  make	
  use	
  of	
  lower	
  impact	
  materials	
  such	
  as	
  those	
  that	
  are	
  100%	
  recycled	
  and	
  FSC	
  certified.	
  2. Avoid	
  paper	
  by	
  using	
  electronic	
  technological	
  solutions.	
  E.g.	
  Give	
  electronic	
  program	
  with	
  smart	
  phone	
  code	
  bars	
  on	
  the	
  ticket.	
  3. Weigh	
  the	
  benefit	
  of	
  giving	
  away	
  promotional	
  items.	
  Reducing	
  is	
  always	
  better.	
  Choose	
  low	
  impact	
  gift	
  and	
  promotional	
  materials	
  when	
  necessary.	
   2.5	
  Venue	
  Operation	
  and	
  Structure	
  The	
  UBC	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  game	
  took	
  place	
  at	
  the	
  War	
  Memorial	
  gymnasium	
  venue.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  capture	
  the	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  associated	
  with	
  this	
  venue,	
  three	
  main	
  areas	
  were	
  considered.	
  These	
  included	
  accounting	
  for	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  5	
  UBC	
  Waste	
  Action	
  Plan	
  -­‐	
  Discussion	
  Paper	
  2011.	
  	
  6	
  Metro	
  Vancouver	
  Recycling	
  and	
  Solid	
  Waste	
  Management	
  2008	
  Report.	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐13-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   impacts	
  associated	
  with	
  energy	
  usage,	
  water	
  usage	
  and	
  the	
  construction	
  of	
  the	
  building	
  itself.	
  Table	
  11	
  shows	
  the	
  final	
  results.	
  Sensitivity	
  to	
  the	
  most	
  influential	
  assumptions	
  was	
  tested.	
  The	
  most	
  sensitive	
  assumption	
  was	
  the	
  building	
  utilization	
  factor.	
  If	
  the	
  factor	
  is	
  lowered	
  to	
  1/2	
  from	
  2/3,	
  then	
  this	
  results	
  in	
  a	
  21.2%	
  decrease	
  in	
  total	
  associated	
  emissions.	
  This	
  shows	
  that	
  the	
  model	
  is	
  susceptible	
  to	
  small	
  changes	
  in	
  the	
  percentage	
  of	
  the	
  building	
  used	
  during	
  the	
  event.	
  If	
  less	
  of	
  the	
  building	
  is	
  used	
  during	
  the	
  event,	
  then	
  the	
  total	
  venue	
  impacts	
  are	
  considerably	
  smaller.	
   TABLE	
  11:	
  TOTAL	
  VENUE	
  CCP	
  IMPACT	
   Venue	
  Operation	
  Area	
   Total	
  CCP	
  impact	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
   Total	
  Impact	
  %	
  Thermal	
  heating	
   130	
   89.7%	
  Electricity	
   10	
   6.9%	
  Water	
  delivery	
   0.7	
   0.5%	
  Water	
  treatment	
   0.5	
   0.4%	
  Embodied	
  in	
  structure	
   3.7	
   2.5%	
   Total	
   140	
   100%	
   *Note:	
  Figures	
  rounded	
  to	
  nearest	
  significant	
  figure	
  (sums	
  may	
  show	
  rounding	
  errors)	
   IMPACTS	
  FROM	
  ENERGY	
  USE	
  The	
  assessment	
  of	
  energy	
  use	
  included	
  all	
  the	
  electricity	
  used	
  by	
  the	
  building	
  operating	
  systems,	
  including	
  air	
  handling,	
  lighting	
  systems,	
  water	
  heating	
  and	
  plug	
  loads.	
  We	
  also	
  included	
  energy	
  delivered	
  by	
  steam	
  to	
  provide	
  thermal	
  heating	
  of	
  the	
  building	
  during	
  the	
  game.	
  	
  Calculations	
  were	
  averaged	
  from	
  3	
  years	
  worth	
  of	
  metered	
  steam	
  and	
  electricity	
  usage.	
  We	
  assumed	
  the	
  venue	
  was	
  used	
  for	
  4	
  hours,	
  and	
  that	
  2/3	
  of	
  its	
  square	
  footage	
  was	
  dedicated	
  to	
  hosting	
  the	
  game.	
  This	
  gave	
  us	
  respective	
  results	
  of	
  CO2	
  equivalent	
  emissions	
  resulting	
  from	
  electricity	
  (10	
  kgCO2e)	
  and	
  steam	
  (130	
  kgCO2e)	
  usage	
  per	
  UBC	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  game.	
  	
   IMPACTS	
  FROM	
  WATER	
  DELIVERY	
  AND	
  TREATMENT	
  Water	
  impact	
  estimates	
  took	
  into	
  account	
  all	
  hot	
  and	
  cold	
  water	
  coming	
  into,	
  and	
  all	
  wastewater	
  leaving,	
  the	
  War	
  Memorial	
  building.	
  The	
  same	
  methodology	
  used	
  to	
  calculate	
  energy	
  use	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  was	
  used	
  to	
  calculate	
  water	
  use	
  (ie.	
  impact	
  of	
  pumping	
  to	
  site)	
  and	
  waste	
  water	
  emission	
  (ie.	
  impacts	
  of	
  treatment	
  at	
  waste	
  water	
  treatment	
  facility)	
  impacts.	
  We	
  allocated	
  4	
  hours	
  of	
  building	
  use	
  for	
  water	
  and	
  that	
  2/3	
  of	
  the	
  building’s	
  water	
  usage	
  was	
  used	
  during	
  the	
  game.	
  This	
  gave	
  us	
  respective	
  results	
  of	
  CO2	
  equivalent	
  emissions	
  resulting	
  from	
  water	
  usage	
  (0.7	
  kgCO2e)	
  and	
  wastewater	
  emitted	
  (0.5	
  kgCO2e)	
  usage	
  per	
  UBC	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  game.	
  These	
  impacts	
  are	
  small	
  enough	
  to	
  be	
  negligible.	
   IMPACTS	
  OF	
  VENUE	
  STRUCTURE	
  The	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  of	
  the	
  venue	
  structure	
  took	
  into	
  account	
  the	
  resource	
  extraction,	
  manufacturing	
  of	
  construction	
  materials	
  and	
  construction	
  of	
  the	
  War	
  Memorial	
  building’s	
  structure	
  and	
  envelope,	
  as	
  well	
  as	
  related	
  transportation.	
  This	
  scope	
  of	
  the	
  life	
  cycle	
  is	
  commonly	
  referred	
  to	
  as	
  cradle-­‐to-­‐gate.	
  An	
  estimate	
  of	
  this	
  scope	
  for	
  the	
  venue	
  was	
  derived	
  from	
  the	
  average	
  CCP	
  impact	
  of	
  UBC	
  academic	
  buildings	
  from	
  the	
  UBC-­‐LCA	
  database	
  (24.4	
  kg	
  CO2	
  e/	
  ft2).	
  This	
  average	
  impact	
  was	
  extrapolated	
  using	
  War	
  Memorial’s	
  square	
  footage	
  (18,730	
  ft2)	
  and	
  assumptions	
  regarding	
  the	
  building	
  life	
  (50	
  years)	
  and	
  game	
  length	
  (4	
  hours).	
  The	
  resulting	
  CCP	
  impact	
  of	
  the	
  War	
  Memorial	
  venue	
  was	
  subsequently	
  estimated	
  to	
  be	
  3.7	
  kg	
  CO2e	
  per	
  UBC	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  game.	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐14-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   RECOMMENDATIONS:	
  Clearly,	
  the	
  energy	
  impacts	
  dominate	
  the	
  water	
  and	
  embodied	
  impacts.	
  Reducing	
  venue	
  impacts	
  involves	
  improving	
  the	
  general	
  energy	
  efficiency	
  strategies	
  employed	
  by	
  the	
  building.	
  	
  1. For	
  winter	
  events,	
  the	
  greatest	
  gains	
  can	
  be	
  made	
  by	
  reducing	
  the	
  maximum	
  temperature	
  set	
  point.	
  	
  2. For	
  the	
  remainder	
  of	
  the	
  year,	
  ensuring	
  low	
  plug	
  loading	
  and	
  using	
  efficient	
  lighting	
  systems	
  will	
  reduce	
  carbon	
  emissions.	
  	
  	
   3	
  -­‐	
  DISCUSSION	
  &	
  RECOMMENDATIONS	
   3.1	
  CCP	
  Impact	
  Reductions	
  The	
  total	
  climate	
  change	
  impacts	
  of	
  the	
  UBC	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  event	
  organizational	
  sectors	
  measured	
  was	
  estimated	
  to	
  be	
  approximately	
  5	
  tonnes	
  of	
  carbon	
  dioxide	
  equivalents.	
  To	
  put	
  this	
  in	
  context,	
  the	
  average	
  Canadian	
  emits	
  22	
  tonnes	
  of	
  GHGs	
  per	
  year.	
  While	
  5	
  tonnes	
  for	
  one	
  event	
  may	
  seem	
  small,	
  the	
  GHG	
  emissions	
  of	
  all	
  UBC	
  A&R	
  sport	
  events	
  and	
  activities	
  could	
  be	
  significant.	
  The	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  team	
  travel	
  impacts	
  alone	
  for	
  the	
  34	
  games	
  in	
  a	
  season	
  are	
  estimated	
  to	
  be	
  190	
  tonnes	
  of	
  kg	
  CO2e.	
  In	
  this	
  event,	
  the	
  majority	
  of	
  the	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  came	
  from	
  travel	
  at	
  72%,	
  food	
  and	
  accommodation	
  contributed	
  12%	
  each,	
  and	
  venue	
  operations	
  and	
  materials	
  &	
  waste	
  were	
  each	
  minor	
  contributors	
  under	
  5%.	
  	
  Opportunities	
  exist	
  to	
  reduce	
  the	
  amount	
  of	
  energy	
  and	
  resources	
  consumed	
  in	
  each	
  of	
  the	
  sectors.	
  In	
  order	
  to	
  achieve	
  net	
  zero	
  GHG	
  impacts	
  in	
  the	
  short	
  term	
  however,	
  UBC	
  A&R	
  would	
  need	
  to	
  ‘offset’	
  their	
  unavoidable	
  impacts	
  by	
  bringing	
  about	
  net	
  GHG	
  emission	
  reductions	
  elsewhere.	
  This	
  could	
  be	
  done	
  by	
  using	
  its	
  profile	
  as	
  an	
  agent	
  of	
  change	
  to	
  encourage	
  a	
  wider	
  adoption	
  of	
  sustainable	
  behaviours	
  locally	
  and,	
  if	
  necessary,	
  by	
  purchasing	
  voluntary	
  carbon	
  offsets.	
  An	
  example	
  would	
  be	
  to	
  use	
  the	
  profile	
  of	
  UBC	
  athletes	
  to	
  encourage	
  event	
  participants	
  to	
  make	
  a	
  behaviour	
  change.	
  As	
  a	
  general	
  strategy,	
  we	
  recommend	
  that	
  A&R	
  put	
  in	
  place	
  ongoing	
  data	
  collection	
  strategies	
  and	
  applying	
  LCA	
  methods	
  to	
  track	
  key	
  aspects	
  such	
  as	
  travel	
  patterns	
  and	
  energy	
  use.	
  A	
  summary	
  of	
  specific	
  GHG	
  reduction	
  opportunities	
  for	
  each	
  sector	
  is	
  provided	
  below.	
   TRAVEL	
  Spectator	
  and	
  staff	
  travel	
  impacts	
  could	
  be	
  reduced	
  through	
  initiatives	
  to	
  increase	
  walking,	
  biking,	
  public	
  transit,	
  and	
  car	
  share	
  modes	
  of	
  transport.	
  For	
  most	
  basketball	
  events,	
  long	
  distance	
  team	
  travel	
  by	
  air	
  would	
  be	
  the	
  largest	
  single	
  impact	
  and	
  strategies	
  to	
  reduce	
  this	
  could	
  include	
  increased	
  clustering	
  of	
  events,	
  traveling	
  by	
  bus	
  for	
  moderate	
  distances,	
  and	
  adapting	
  the	
  league	
  schedule	
  to	
  increase	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  local	
  events.	
   ACCOMMODATION	
  Accommodation	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  could	
  most	
  significantly	
  reduced	
  by	
  using	
  energy	
  efficient	
  hotels	
  and	
  reducing	
  travel	
  distances	
  to	
  the	
  venue.	
   FOOD	
  We	
  recommend	
  reducing	
  overall	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  of	
  food	
  and	
  beverages	
  by	
  promoting	
  seasonal	
  and	
  local	
  foods,	
  low-­‐meat	
  diets,	
  and	
  organic	
  produce	
  where	
  possible.	
  A	
  more	
  detailed	
  examination	
  of	
  individual	
  food	
  items	
  impacts	
  were	
  outside	
  the	
  scope	
  of	
  this	
  pilot	
  study	
  but	
  this	
  would	
  certainly	
  merit	
  further	
  investigation.	
  	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐15-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   MATERIALS	
  &	
  WASTE	
  Materials	
  and	
  waste	
  represented	
  less	
  than	
  1%	
  of	
  the	
  total	
  event	
  CCP	
  impacts	
  and	
  were	
  not	
  an	
  important	
  CCP	
  impact	
  contributor	
  in	
  this	
  event.	
  We	
  recommend	
  a	
  two-­‐fold	
  strategy	
  of	
  continuing	
  to	
  reduce	
  the	
  amount	
  of	
  materials	
  purchased	
  and	
  increasing	
  the	
  percentage	
  of	
  waste	
  reused	
  and	
  recycled.	
   VENUE	
  OPERATION	
  AND	
  STRUCTURE	
  The	
  biggest	
  impact	
  reductions	
  from	
  the	
  venue	
  would	
  come	
  by	
  reducing	
  thermal	
  heating	
  needs	
  of	
  the	
  building	
  (90%	
  of	
  venue	
  CCP	
  impacts).	
  A	
  thorough	
  review	
  of	
  this	
  has	
  already	
  been	
  done	
  in	
  the	
  A&R	
  Strategic	
  Energy	
  Management	
  Plan	
  (2010)	
  undertaken	
  by	
  the	
  Campus	
  Sustainability	
  Office.	
   3.2	
  Sustainability	
  Management	
  Plan	
  It	
  should	
  be	
  reiterated	
  that	
  this	
  study	
  only	
  considered	
  climate	
  change	
  related	
  environmental	
  impacts	
  and	
  that	
  a	
  comprehensive	
  sustainability	
  strategy	
  is	
  needed	
  to	
  address	
  a	
  wider	
  spectrum	
  of	
  environmental,	
  social	
  and	
  economic	
  issues	
  such	
  as	
  health,	
  accessibility,	
  equity,	
  and	
  ethical	
  practices.	
  Addressing	
  this	
  spectrum	
  more	
  holistically	
  would	
  enable	
  UBC	
  A&R	
  to	
  be	
  a	
  leader	
  among	
  Canadian	
  and	
  North	
  American	
  athletics	
  departments	
  by	
  showcasing	
  a	
  broad	
  commitment	
  to	
  sustainability.	
  Applying	
  the	
  latest	
  research	
  methods	
  being	
  developed	
  at	
  UBC	
  to	
  sports	
  events	
  would	
  also	
  be	
  in	
  line	
  with	
  the	
  University	
  Sustainability	
  Initiative’s	
  two	
  major	
  themes:	
  ‘campus	
  as	
  a	
  living	
  laboratory’	
  and	
  ‘the	
  university	
  as	
  an	
  agent	
  of	
  change’.	
   DEVELOP	
  A	
  GLOBAL	
  WARMING	
  IMPACT	
  ASSESSMENT	
  FRAMEWORK	
  FOR	
  ALL	
  A&R	
  ATHLETIC	
  EVENTS	
  USING	
  LCA	
  Beyond	
  implementing	
  the	
  specific	
  recommendations	
  listed	
  for	
  this	
  basketball	
  event,	
  we	
  suggest	
  commissioning	
  impact	
  studies	
  using	
  LCA	
  on	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  UBC	
  varsity	
  sports	
  events	
  to	
  develop:	
  1. An	
  estimate	
  of	
  impacts	
  for	
  each	
  sport,	
  venue,	
  and	
  event	
  type.	
  2. A	
  benchmark	
  for	
  A&R	
  to	
  measure	
  the	
  sustainability	
  performance	
  of	
  its	
  activities	
  against.	
  3. An	
  internal	
  A&R	
  impact	
  assessment	
  tool	
  that	
  can	
  be	
  used	
  for	
  decision-­‐making.	
  4. A	
  standardized	
  Goal	
  and	
  Scope	
  document	
  to	
  ensure	
  a	
  rigorous	
  standard	
  is	
  maintained	
  for	
  all	
  A&R	
  LCA	
  studies.	
  To	
  elaborate	
  on	
  point	
  2,	
  this	
  study	
  contributes	
  to	
  the	
  development	
  of	
  a	
  benchmark	
  to	
  be	
  followed	
  by	
  future	
  events,	
  but	
  it	
  is	
  not	
  in	
  itself	
  a	
  benchmark.	
  However,	
  the	
  methods	
  developed	
  in	
  this	
  study	
  could	
  be	
  applied	
  to	
  a	
  number	
  of	
  events	
  and	
  used	
  to	
  develop	
  event	
  benchmarks.	
   CREATE	
  A	
  SUSTAINABILITY	
  MANAGEMENT	
  PLAN	
  FOR	
  A&R	
  ACTIVITIES	
  COMPLIANT	
  WITH	
  CSA	
  Z2010	
  	
  Launch	
  a	
  strategy	
  for	
  ‘Sustainability	
  at	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation’	
  to	
  follow	
  a	
  road	
  map	
  such	
  as	
  the	
  one	
  offered	
  by	
  the	
  Canadian	
  Standards	
  Association	
  (CSA)	
  Z2010	
  Sustainable	
  Management	
  of	
  Events	
  standard.	
  CSA	
  Z2010	
  was	
  published	
  in	
  2010	
  as	
  a	
  part	
  of	
  a	
  legacy	
  of	
  the	
  Vancouver	
  2010	
  Olympics	
  and	
  supports	
  public	
  claims	
  of	
  contributions	
  to	
  sustainability	
  by	
  event	
  organizers.	
  Broadly,	
  it	
  asks	
  event	
  organizers	
  to:	
  1. Make	
  a	
  public	
  commitment	
  to	
  sustainability.	
  2. Define	
  the	
  scope	
  of	
  commitment	
  and	
  responsibilities.	
  3. Designate	
  a	
  sustainability	
  team	
  with	
  the	
  necessary	
  authority	
  to	
  implement	
  sustainability	
  commitments.	
  4. Engage	
  important	
  partners	
  (e.g.	
  sponsors	
  or	
  the	
  UBC	
  Campus	
  Sustainability	
  Office).	
  5. Identify	
  major	
  sustainability	
  issues	
  with	
  the	
  planned	
  event.	
  6. Set	
  and	
  track	
  key	
  objectives	
  and	
  performance	
  measures.	
  7. Ensure	
  compliance	
  with	
  applicable	
  legal	
  requirements.	
  	
  	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐16-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   CSA	
  Z2010	
  also	
  applies	
  principles	
  from	
  the	
  ISO	
  14001	
  Environmental	
  Management	
  System.	
  A	
  cornerstone	
  of	
  this	
  system	
  is	
  its	
  Plan-­‐Do-­‐Check-­‐Act	
  approach,	
  which	
  can	
  be	
  applied	
  to	
  events	
  as	
  follows:	
  	
  1. Plan:	
  Set	
  clear	
  sustainability	
  objectives,	
  strategies,	
  and	
  targets.	
  2. Do:	
  Implement	
  actions,	
  assign	
  responsibility,	
  and	
  record	
  progress.	
  3. Check:	
  Measure	
  how	
  well	
  you	
  did	
  and	
  share	
  this	
  with	
  others.	
  4. Act:	
  Incorporate	
  learning	
  into	
  future	
  plans.	
  Developing	
  this	
  plan	
  should	
  be	
  an	
  ongoing	
  process	
  that	
  involves	
  key	
  individuals	
  from	
  within	
  A&R	
  and	
  relevant	
  experts	
  and	
  stakeholders.	
  Initially	
  the	
  scope	
  of	
  this	
  plan	
  could	
  focus	
  on	
  a	
  few	
  key	
  areas	
  that	
  are	
  resource	
  efficient,	
  effective,	
  and	
  with	
  few	
  barriers	
  to	
  implementation.	
  As	
  part	
  of	
  its	
  mission	
  to	
  provide	
  educational	
  opportunities	
  with	
  core	
  research	
  activities	
  focused	
  around	
  sport	
  and	
  sustainability,	
  the	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  and	
  Sustainability	
  would	
  be	
  pleased	
  to	
  continue	
  to	
  support	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation	
  in	
  its	
  sustainability	
  endeavors.	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐17-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   4	
  -­‐	
  APPENDIX	
   4.1	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Travel	
   METHODS	
  Travel	
  activity	
  data	
  collected	
  through	
  an	
  on-­‐site	
  survey.	
  Of	
  the	
  estimated	
  665	
  people	
  in	
  attendance,	
  390	
  were	
  polled:	
  a	
  sample	
  size	
  of	
  59%.	
  Survey	
  participants	
  were	
  asked	
  the	
  following:	
  1. Which	
  mode	
  of	
  travel	
  they	
  used	
  -­‐	
  walking,	
  cycling,	
  motorbike,	
  car,	
  public	
  transport,	
  or	
  flight.	
  2. If	
  they	
  came	
  by	
  car,	
  how	
  many	
  passengers	
  there	
  were.	
  Car	
  impacts	
  were	
  then	
  divided	
  by	
  the	
  number	
  of	
  passengers.	
  3. The	
  first	
  3	
  digits	
  of	
  their	
  postal	
  code.	
  Google	
  maps	
  was	
  used	
  to	
  obtain	
  approximate	
  travel	
  distances	
  to	
  the	
  venue.	
  This	
  approach	
  was	
  generally	
  accurate	
  within	
  1-­‐2	
  square	
  kilometers.	
  Requesting	
  full	
  postal	
  codes	
  was	
  avoided	
  to	
  allow	
  for	
  home	
  address	
  confidentiality.	
  4. Whether	
  their	
  primary	
  reason	
  for	
  travel	
  to	
  UBC	
  was	
  to	
  watch	
  the	
  game.	
  This	
  question	
  allowed	
  us	
  to	
  subtract	
  those	
  that	
  travelled	
  to	
  UBC	
  for	
  work	
  and	
  may	
  not	
  otherwise	
  have	
  stayed	
  to	
  watch	
  the	
  game.	
  93%	
  said	
  they	
  travelled	
  primarily	
  to	
  UBC	
  to	
  watch	
  the	
  game.	
   TABLE	
  12:	
  TRAVEL	
  IMPACTS	
  FOR	
  EACH	
  MODE	
  OF	
  TRANSPORT	
  IN	
  GHG	
  EMISSIONS	
   Mode	
   EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  km	
  person)	
   Notes	
  Walking	
   0	
   No	
  GHG	
  impacts	
  allocated	
  to	
  walking	
  Cycling	
   0	
   No	
  GHG	
  impacts	
  allocated	
  to	
  cycling	
   Car	
   0.2772	
   EF	
  for	
  an	
  average	
  car	
  derived	
  using:	
  	
  -­‐	
  %	
  vehicle	
  types	
  (57%	
  light	
  duty	
  vehicle	
  &	
  43%	
  vans,	
  pickups,	
  SUVs).	
  -­‐	
  %	
  vehicle	
  fuel	
  types	
  (98.3%	
  gas	
  light	
  duty	
  vehicle	
  and	
  98%	
  diesel	
  vans,	
  pickups,	
  SUVs.	
  1.7%	
  diesel	
  light	
  duty	
  vehicle	
  and	
  2%	
  diesel	
  vans,	
  pickups,	
  SUVs).	
  -­‐	
  Average	
  fuel	
  extraction	
  and	
  production	
  impacts	
  (0.2749	
  kg	
  CO2e)	
  added	
  to	
  average	
  tailpipe	
  emission	
  factor	
  (2.2448	
  kg	
  CO2e).	
  Motorbike	
   0.2772	
   Car	
  EF	
  used	
  due	
  to	
  insufficient	
  data	
  for	
  motorbikes	
  and	
  lack	
  of	
  event	
  participants	
  who	
  used	
  this	
  mode.	
  Bus	
  -­‐	
  city	
   0.1445	
   Tailpipe	
  EF	
  for	
  city	
  buses	
  (0.1302	
  kg	
  CO2e/km)	
  multiplied	
  by	
  11%	
  (assumed	
  the	
  same	
  increase	
  that	
  was	
  added	
  to	
  cars).	
  Bus	
  -­‐	
  intercity	
   0.0760	
   Tailpipe	
  EF	
  for	
  intercity	
  buses	
  (0.0685	
  kg	
  CO2e/km)	
  multiplied	
  by	
  11%	
  (assumed	
  the	
  same	
  increase	
  that	
  was	
  added	
  to	
  cars).	
  Plane	
  -­‐	
  short	
  haul	
   0.2236	
   0	
  –	
  463	
  km	
  Plane	
  -­‐	
  med.	
  haul	
   0.1264	
   463	
  –	
  1108	
  km	
  Plane	
  -­‐	
  long	
  haul	
   0.1475	
   >	
  1108	
  km	
   LIMITATIONS	
   • Different	
  emission	
  factors	
  can	
  be	
  derived	
  based	
  on	
  information	
  specific	
  to	
  UBC,	
  Vancouver,	
  BC,	
  Canada,	
  or	
  internationally.	
  Which	
  EFs	
  were	
  used	
  depended	
  on	
  information	
  availability,	
  accuracy,	
  completeness,	
  and	
  the	
  future	
  usefulness	
  for	
  other	
  events.	
  It	
  should	
  be	
  noted	
  that	
  while	
  it	
  is	
  more	
  accurate	
  to	
  take	
  into	
  account	
  more	
  regionalized	
  information	
  (e.g.	
  bus	
  types	
  on	
  UBC	
  routes),	
  this	
  specificity	
  reduces	
  the	
  ability	
  to	
  compare	
  impacts	
  with	
  events	
  in	
  other	
  locations.	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐18-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   DATA	
  SOURCES	
   • Travel	
  emission	
  factors	
  &	
  fuel	
  efficiencies	
  for	
  cars,	
  buses,	
  and	
  planes	
  -­‐	
  BC	
  Ministry	
  of	
  Environment,	
  2011.	
  Methodology	
  for	
  Reporting	
  B.C.	
  Public	
  Sector	
  Greenhouse	
  Gas	
  Emissions.	
   • Flight	
  emission	
  factors	
  -­‐	
  Canadian	
  GHG	
  Challenge	
  Registry	
  Guide	
  to	
  Entity	
  and	
  Facility-­‐Based	
  Reporting-­‐Emission	
  Vectors,	
  Version	
  5,	
  2007.	
   • Global	
  warming	
  characterization	
  factors	
  -­‐	
  IPCC	
  4th	
  Assessment	
  Report	
  (2007)	
   • Vehicle	
  fuel	
  type	
  %	
  -­‐	
  Vancouver	
  City,	
  2007.	
  Community	
  Energy	
  and	
  Emissions	
  Inventory	
  Percentages	
   • Vehicle	
  type	
  %	
  -­‐	
  Transport	
  in	
  Canada,	
  2009.	
  Table	
  RO3:	
  Provincial	
  Light	
  Vehicle	
  Fleet	
  Statistics	
   • Fuel	
  extraction	
  and	
  production	
  impacts	
  -­‐	
  NREL,	
  2008.	
  Crude	
  oil,	
  in	
  refinery.	
  Data	
  Years	
  1997e2003.	
  U.S.	
  LCI	
  Database.	
  Golden,	
  CO:	
  National	
  Renewable	
  Energy	
  Laboratory.	
  www.nrel.gov/lci	
  (accessed	
  July	
  2008).	
  	
   4.2	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Accommodation	
   TABLE	
  13:	
  EMISSION	
  FACTORS	
  FOR	
  HOTEL	
  AND	
  TRAVEL	
   Impact	
   Area	
   Emission	
  Factor	
   Notes	
  Hotel	
   19.42	
  kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  night	
   25	
  nights	
  allocated.	
  Although	
  visiting	
  team	
  stayed	
  for	
  2	
  nights	
  to	
  play	
  2	
  games,	
  only	
  1	
  night	
  was	
  allocated	
  per	
  person	
  since	
  only	
  one	
  game	
  is	
  being	
  measured.	
  Travela	
   0.1445	
  kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  psg-­‐km	
   12.5	
  km	
  each	
  way	
  (25km)	
  between	
  Coast	
  Plaza	
  Hotel	
  and	
  UBC	
  War	
  Memorial	
  Gym	
  for	
  25	
  team	
  members	
  on	
  a	
  city	
  bus.	
   a.	
  see	
  travel	
  appendix	
  for	
  city	
  bus	
  emission	
  factor	
  derivation	
   ASSUMPTIONS	
   • It	
  was	
  assumed	
  that	
  all	
  spectators,	
  staff,	
  and	
  home	
  team	
  members	
  stayed	
  at	
  their	
  usual	
  residence	
  and	
  therefore	
  no	
  additional	
  impact	
  occurred.	
  	
   DATA	
  SOURCES	
   • Emission	
  factor	
  for	
  hotel	
  accommodation	
  -­‐	
  sourced	
  from	
  the	
  BC	
  Ministry	
  of	
  Environment	
  (2011)	
   Methodology	
  for	
  Reporting	
  B.C.	
  Public	
  Sector	
  Greenhouse	
  Gas	
  Emissions.	
  It	
  should	
  be	
  noted	
  that	
  this	
  emission	
  factor	
  is	
  based	
  on	
  an	
  average	
  impact	
  for	
  a	
  sample	
  of	
  hotels	
  across	
  Canada	
  calculated	
  by	
  CHIP	
  Hospitality	
  (2004).	
  Only	
  energy	
  use	
  of	
  the	
  hotel	
  was	
  factored	
  in,	
  avoiding	
  impacts	
  from	
  food,	
  water,	
  etc.	
  at	
  the	
  hotel.	
  It	
  is	
  recommended	
  that	
  in	
  future	
  a	
  regional	
  specific	
  or	
  hotel	
  specific	
  emission	
  factor	
  be	
  used	
  that	
  includes	
  a	
  more	
  complete	
  LCA	
  of	
  environmental	
  impacts.	
   • Team	
  hotel	
  and	
  travel	
  arrangements	
  -­‐	
  sourced	
  from	
  UBC	
  Athletics	
  &	
  Recreation	
   • Travel	
  emission	
  factors	
  -­‐	
  sourced	
  from	
  BC	
  Ministry	
  of	
  Environment	
  (2011)	
  Methodology	
  for	
   Reporting	
  B.C.	
  Public	
  Sector	
  Greenhouse	
  Gas	
  Emissions.	
  	
  	
  	
  	
  	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐19-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   4.3	
  Background	
  Information	
  –	
  Food	
  Food	
  impacts	
  took	
  into	
  account	
  all	
  food	
  and	
  beverages	
  sold	
  at	
  the	
  event	
  to	
  spectators	
  excluding	
  on-­‐site	
  vending	
  machines.	
  An	
  input-­‐output	
  LCA	
  approach	
  was	
  taken	
  to	
  estimate	
  food	
  impacts	
  by	
  using	
  the	
  total	
  event	
  food	
  sales	
  budget.	
  Table	
  14	
  shows	
  the	
  approach	
  taken	
  to	
  calculate	
  the	
  result.	
   TABLE	
  14:	
  DERIVATION	
  OF	
  FOOD	
  GHG	
  EMISSIONS	
  WITH	
  AN	
  ECONOMIC	
  INPUT-­‐OUTPUT	
  APPROACH	
  	
   Results	
   Units	
   Notes	
  Emission	
  factor	
   0.321	
   kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  US	
  $	
  2002	
   Economic	
  Input-­‐Output	
  model	
  applied	
  using	
  US	
  National	
  Purchases	
  2002	
  model	
  ‘Arts,	
  Entertainment,	
  Hotels	
  and	
  Food	
  Services	
  -­‐	
  Food	
  services	
  and	
  drinking	
  places’	
  Inflation	
  ‘02-­‐’11	
   1.24	
   US	
  $	
  	
   Used	
  http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm	
  Exchange	
  rate	
   1	
   US	
  $	
  /	
  CAN	
  $	
   Assumed	
  exchange	
  rate	
  of	
  1	
  CAN	
  $	
  =	
  1	
  US	
  $	
  Event	
  food	
  sold	
  	
   2,295	
   CAN	
  $	
   Sales	
  estimation	
  supplied	
  by	
  A&R	
  food	
  caterer	
  Total	
  impact	
   594.1	
   kg	
  CO2e	
   	
   DATA	
  SOURCES	
   • Emission	
  factor	
  for	
  food	
  -­‐	
  Carnegie	
  Mellon	
  Input-­‐Output	
  Estimator	
  -­‐	
  US	
  2002	
  National	
  Purchaser	
  Model.	
  http://www.eiolca.net/	
   • Food	
  sales	
  data	
  -­‐	
  A&R	
  staff	
  and	
  A&R	
  food	
  caterer	
  	
   4.4	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Materials/Waste	
   TABLE	
  15:	
  MATERIALS	
  INVENTORY	
   Categories	
   Value	
   Unit	
   Notes	
  Event	
  programs	
  (paper)	
   3.9	
   Kg	
   300	
  printed	
  (UBC	
  A&R)	
  weighing	
  13	
  g	
  each	
  (direct	
  measurement	
  of	
  one	
  sample)	
  Player	
  programs	
  (paper)	
   1.3	
   Kg	
   Assumed	
  25	
  printed	
  (average	
  told	
  by	
  vendor),	
  assuming	
  weight	
  of	
  50	
  g	
  each	
  Merchandise	
  (T-­‐shirts,	
  caps	
  &	
  jackets)	
   75	
   $	
   Assumed	
  5	
  items	
  sold	
  (average	
  told	
  by	
  vendor)	
  at	
  $15	
  average	
  price	
  Give-­‐aways	
  (e.g.	
  mini-­‐basketballs)	
   100	
   $	
   Assumed	
  20	
  items	
  (LCA	
  alliance	
  team	
  visual	
  count)	
  at	
  $5	
  each	
   TABLE	
  16:	
  MATERIALS	
  EMISSION	
  FACTORS	
  Categories	
   EF	
   Unit	
   Notes	
  Paper	
   2.9	
   kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  kg	
   Assumed	
  0%	
  recycled	
  fibera	
  Merchandise	
  (t-­‐shirt,	
  caps,	
  jackets)	
  	
   0.31	
   kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  2011	
  CAN	
  $c	
   Applied	
  “Men’s	
  and	
  boy’s	
  cut	
  and	
  sew	
  apparel	
  manufacturing”b	
  Give-­‐aways	
   0.36	
   kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  2011	
  CAN	
  $c	
   Applied	
  “Athletics	
  and	
  sporting	
  goods	
  manufacturing”b	
   a.	
  BC	
  Ministry	
  of	
  Environment	
  -­‐	
  Methodology	
  for	
  Reporting	
  B.C.	
  Public	
  Sector	
  Greenhouse	
  Gas	
  Emissions,	
   Version	
  1.0,	
  Victoria,	
  February	
  2011.	
   b.	
  Carnegie	
  Mellon	
  University	
  Green	
  Design	
  Institute.	
  (2008)	
  Economic	
  Input-­‐Output	
  Life	
  Cycle	
  Assessment	
   (EIO-­‐LCA),	
  US	
  2002	
  Purchaser	
  Model,	
  Available	
  from:	
  <http://www.eiolca.net>	
  Accessed	
  March	
  2011.	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐20-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   c.	
  To	
  convert	
  from	
  2002	
  US$	
  to	
  2011	
  CAN	
  $,	
  we	
  used	
  a	
  conversion	
  factor	
  of	
  1:1.24	
  to	
  take	
  in	
  account	
  inflation	
   (retrieved	
  from	
  (	
  www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm	
  ),	
  and	
  1:1	
  for	
  the	
  exchange	
  rate.	
   TABLE	
  17:	
  TRASH	
  SAMPLE	
  AUDIT	
  DATA	
   Categories	
   Weight	
  (kg)	
   wt%	
  sample	
  Mixed	
  plastic	
  &	
  metals	
  (recyclable)	
   5.4	
   63%	
  Mixed	
  paper	
  (recyclable)	
   0.5	
   5%	
  Mixed	
  organics	
  (compostable)	
   0.9	
   11%	
  Non-­‐recyclable	
  &	
  non-­‐compostable	
   1.8	
   21%	
   Total	
   7.5	
   100%	
   TABLE	
  18:	
  RECYCLING	
  AUDIT	
  DATA	
   Categories	
   Weight	
  (kg)	
   Wt%	
   Notes	
  Paper	
  &	
  cardboard	
   5	
   79%	
   	
  Plastics	
  &	
  metals	
   2	
   29%	
   Mostly	
  aluminum	
  cans	
   Total	
   7	
   100%	
   	
   TABLE	
  19:	
  TRASH	
  IMPACTS	
  IN	
  GHG	
  EMISSIONS	
   Categories	
   Emissions	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
   Notes	
  Mixed	
  plastics	
  and	
  metals	
  (recyclable)	
   0.94	
   Assumed	
  100%	
  to	
  landfill	
  facilities	
  Mixed	
  paper	
  (recyclable)	
   0.70	
   Assumed	
  100%	
  to	
  landfill	
  facilities	
  Mixed	
  organic	
   0.94	
   Assumed	
  100%	
  to	
  landfill	
  facilities	
  Non-­‐recyclable	
  &	
  non-­‐compostable	
   1.25	
   Assumed	
  as	
  mixed	
  recyclables	
   Total	
   3.83	
   	
   TABLE	
  20:	
  RECYCLING	
  IMPACTS	
  IN	
  GHG	
  EMISSIONS	
   Categories	
   Emissions	
  (kg	
  CO2e)	
   Notes	
  Mixed	
  plastics	
  and	
  metals	
  (recyclable)	
   -­‐6.5	
   Assumed	
  100%	
  going	
  as	
  mixed	
  recyclables	
  Mixed	
  paper	
  (recyclable)	
   -­‐19.4	
   	
  Mixed	
  organic	
   0	
   No	
  composting	
  for	
  this	
  event	
   Total	
   -­‐25.9	
   	
   TABLE	
  21:	
  WASTE	
  EMISSION	
  FACTORSA	
   Categories	
   Recycling	
  EF	
  (kg	
  CO2e	
  /	
  kg	
  waste)	
   Landfill	
  EF	
  (kg	
  Co2e	
  /	
  kg	
  waste)	
   Notes	
  Mixed	
  metals	
   -­‐5.780	
   0.0404	
   	
  Mixed	
  plastics	
   -­‐1.657	
   0.0404	
   	
  Mixed	
  paper	
   -­‐3.880	
   0.3638	
   	
  Mixed	
  recyclables	
   -­‐3.193	
   0.1617	
   	
  Mixed	
  organics	
   -­‐2.202	
   0.2425	
   	
  Mixed	
  solid	
  waste	
   	
   0.4850	
   	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐21-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   a.	
  Adapted	
  from	
  US	
  Environmental	
  Protection	
  Agency	
  -­‐	
  Solid	
  Waste	
  Management	
  and	
  Greenhouse	
  Gases,	
  A	
   Life-­‐Cycle	
  Assessment	
  of	
  Emissions	
  and	
  Sinks	
  -­‐	
  3rd	
  edition,	
  September	
  2006.	
  Landfill	
  EF	
  values	
  reflect	
   estimated	
  US	
  national	
  average	
  CH4	
  recovery	
  in	
  year	
  2003.	
   LIMITATIONS	
   • Garbage	
  bins	
  from	
  the	
  bathrooms	
  were	
  not	
  measured	
   • Plastic	
  bottles	
  were	
  not	
  emptied	
  of	
  liquids	
   • Percentage	
  of	
  non-­‐recyclable	
  material	
  in	
  the	
  recycling	
  bins	
  (contamination)	
  was	
  not	
  measured	
   4.5	
  Background	
  Information	
  -­‐	
  Venue	
   ENERGY	
  USAGE	
   TABLE	
  22:	
  VENUE	
  INVENTORY	
  DATA	
   Categories	
   Value	
   Unit	
   Notes	
  Annual	
  Electricity	
  Usage	
   298,500	
   kWh/year	
   Averaged	
  from	
  2007	
  to	
  2010	
  consumption	
  metered	
  dataa	
  Annual	
  Steam	
  Usage	
   5,027,350	
   lbs/year	
   Averaged	
  from	
  2007	
  to	
  2010	
  consumption	
  metered	
  datab	
  Annual	
  Water	
  Usage	
   10.605	
   m3/year	
   Averaged	
  from	
  2007	
  to	
  2010	
  consumption	
  metered	
  datac	
  Annual	
  Wastewater	
  Emitted	
   10.605	
   m3/year	
   Assumed	
  all	
  water	
  used	
  is	
  treated	
  War	
  Memorial	
  floor	
  area	
   18,730	
   ft2	
   Reported	
  onlinee	
   a.	
  2010	
  Athletics	
  and	
  Recreation	
  Utility	
  Report,	
  which	
  was	
  put	
  together	
  by	
  UBC	
  Infrastructure	
  and	
   Development	
   b.	
  2010	
  Athletics	
  and	
  Recreation	
  Utility	
  Report,	
  which	
  was	
  put	
  together	
  by	
  UBC	
  Infrastructure	
  and	
   Development	
   c. 2010	
  UBC	
  Campus	
  Operations	
  A&R	
  Energy	
  and	
  Water	
  Metering	
  Analysis	
   e.	
  http://www.hostingbc.ca/content/ubc-­‐war-­‐memorial-­‐gymnasium	
  	
   TABLE	
  23:	
  VENUE	
  EMISSION	
  FACTORS	
  Categories	
   EF	
   Unit	
   Notes	
  Electricity	
   84	
   t	
  CO2e	
  /	
  GW∙hr	
   Assume	
  same	
  energy	
  sources	
  contributing	
  to	
  grid	
  mix	
  as	
  2006a	
  Steam	
  	
   0.0658	
   t	
  CO2e	
  /	
  klb	
   Based	
  on	
  amount	
  of	
  steam	
  generated	
  per	
  GJ	
  of	
  gas	
  and	
  oil	
  burned	
  at	
  the	
  plant	
  between	
  2007	
  and	
  2010b	
  Water	
  delivered	
   0.158	
   kg	
  CO2e/m3	
   Based	
  on	
  EU	
  conditions	
  c	
  Water	
  treated	
   0.119	
   kg	
  CO2/m3	
   Based	
  on	
  EU	
  conditions	
  for	
  grey	
  and	
  black	
  water	
  treatment	
  d	
  Embodied	
  in	
  structure	
   24.4	
   kg	
  CO2/ft2	
   Based	
  on	
  kg	
  CO2e	
  embodied	
  in	
  average	
  UBC	
  academic	
  buildings	
  e	
   a.	
  UBC	
  2006	
  Greenhouse	
  Gas	
  Inventory	
  Report,	
  v4,	
  January,	
  2009	
   b.	
  Personal	
  communication	
  with	
  Lilian	
  Zaremba.	
  UBC	
  Sustainability	
  Office	
  on	
  February	
  4th,	
  2011.	
   c.	
  Crettaz,	
  Jolliet,	
  Cuanillon,	
  &	
  Orlando.	
  (1999).	
  Life	
  cycle	
  assessment	
  of	
  drinking	
  water	
  and	
  rain	
  water	
  for	
   toilets	
  flushing.	
  Aqua,	
  48(3),	
  73-­‐83.	
   UBC	
  Centre	
  for	
  Sport	
  &	
  Sustainability	
   -­‐22-­‐	
   July	
  6,	
  2011	
   d.	
  Monteith,	
  Sahely,	
  MacLean,	
  &	
  Bagley,	
  (2005).	
  A	
  rational	
  procedure	
  for	
  estimation	
  of	
  greenhouse-­‐gas	
   emissions	
  from	
  municipal	
  wastewater	
  treatment	
  plants.	
  Water	
  Environment	
  Research:	
  A	
  Research	
  Publication	
   of	
  the	
  Water	
  Environment	
  Federation,	
  77(4),	
  390-­‐403.	
   e.	
  Sianchuk,	
  R.	
  (2010).	
  ‘LCA	
  in	
  Green	
  Building:	
  Complying	
  with	
  the	
  new	
  paradigm	
  set	
  out	
  by	
  ISO	
  21931-­‐1’.	
   Conference	
  Presentation,	
  LCA	
  X,	
  Portland.	
  http://www.lcacenter.org/LCAX/abstracts/abstract.php?id=200	
   ASSUMPTIONS	
   • Allocation	
  –	
  The	
  venue	
  inventory	
  data	
  is	
  representative	
  of	
  the	
  entire	
  building.	
  For	
  our	
  study,	
  we	
  assume	
  that	
  only	
  2/3	
  of	
  the	
  building	
  is	
  used	
  for	
  the	
  event.	
  We	
  define	
  this	
  as	
  the	
  building	
  utilization	
  factor	
  set	
  to	
  0.67.	
   • Operating	
  Hours	
  –	
  The	
  number	
  of	
  functional	
  hours	
  for	
  building	
  usage	
  is	
  set	
  to	
  18	
  hours.	
  The	
  building	
  is	
  assumed	
  to	
  be	
  idle	
  for	
  the	
  remaining	
  6	
  hours	
  of	
  the	
  day.	
  	
   • Basketball	
  Game	
  Length	
  –	
  Only	
  the	
  length	
  of	
  the	
  event	
  is	
  considered	
  –	
  ie.	
  4	
  hours.	
  	
  This	
  includes	
  3	
  hours	
  of	
  game	
  time	
  and	
  1	
  hour	
  of	
  logistical	
  support	
  time	
  (e.g.	
  site	
  cleaning).	
   • Energy	
  Consumption	
  per	
  Hour	
  –	
  	
  In	
  the	
  absence	
  hourly	
  data	
  for	
  utilities,	
  annual	
  average	
  electrical	
  and	
  steam	
  usage	
  are	
  assumed.	
  The	
  event	
  will	
  likely	
  have	
  a	
  high	
  utility	
  demand	
  than	
  for	
  average	
  data.	
   • Electricity	
  Use	
  -­‐	
  BC	
  Hydro	
  energy	
  is	
  predominantly	
  hydroelectric	
  but	
  some	
  disagreement	
  exists	
  with	
  regards	
  to	
  the	
  emission	
  factor	
  for	
  electricity	
  production.	
  The	
  figures	
  reported	
  in	
  the	
  2006	
  UBC	
  GHG	
  inventory	
  vary	
  from	
  between	
  24-­‐84	
  tCO2e/GW∙hr,	
  the	
  latter	
  including	
  GHG	
  impacts	
  for	
  imported	
  electricity.	
  For	
  our	
  analysis,	
  the	
  most	
  conservative	
  figure	
  of	
  84	
  tCO2e/GW∙hr	
  is	
  used	
  because	
  BC	
  currently	
  requires	
  imported	
  power	
  during	
  night-­‐time	
  use.	
   • Water	
  Consumption	
  per	
  Hour	
  –	
  In	
  the	
  absence	
  hourly	
  data	
  for	
  utilities,	
  annual	
  average	
  water	
  usage	
  are	
  assumed.	
  The	
  event	
  will	
  likely	
  have	
  a	
  high	
  utility	
  demand	
  than	
  the	
  average	
  data.	
   • Water	
  Treatment	
  –	
  Every	
  drop	
  of	
  water	
  coming	
  used	
  in	
  the	
  building	
  will	
  be	
  treated	
  as	
  waste	
  black	
  and	
  grey	
  water	
  at	
  a	
  treatment	
  plant.	
   • Building	
  Structure	
  Emission	
  Factor	
  –	
  The	
  emission	
  factor	
  per	
  square	
  foot	
  sourced	
  from	
  the	
  UBC-­‐LCA	
  Database	
  was	
  developed	
  from	
  the	
  study	
  of	
  the	
  cradle-­‐to-­‐gate	
  effects	
  of	
  constructing	
  academic	
  buildings	
  at	
  the	
  UBC	
  Vancouver	
  campus.	
  	
  The	
  War	
  Memorial	
  building	
  is	
  not	
  an	
  academic	
  building,	
  however,	
  the	
  UBC-­‐LCA	
  Database	
  average	
  was	
  considered	
  sufficient	
  given	
  the	
  minor	
  contribution	
  of	
  the	
  structure	
  within	
  the	
  UBC	
  men’s	
  basketball	
  game	
  LCA	
  study.	
  	
  Furthermore,	
  the	
  carbon	
  impacts	
  embodied	
  in	
  the	
  structure	
  are	
  only	
  measured	
  cradle-­‐to-­‐gate.	
  	
  Future	
  impacts	
  of	
  building	
  maintenance	
  and	
  demolition	
  are	
  not	
  included.	
   4.6	
  Climate	
  Change	
  Potentials	
  Used	
   Name	
   Abbreviation	
   Climate	
  change	
  potential	
  for	
  100-­‐yr	
  horizon	
  Carbon	
  dioxide	
   CO2	
   1	
  Methane	
   CH4	
   25	
  Nitrous	
  oxide	
   N20	
   298	
   DATA	
  SOURCE:	
  	
   • Fourth	
  Assessment	
  Report	
  of	
  the	
  Intergovernmental	
  Panel	
  on	
  Climate	
  Change.	
  2007.	
  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
France 2 0
United States 1 0
City Views Downloads
Unknown 2 0
Ashburn 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}

Share

Share to:

Comment

Related Items