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

Life Cycle Assessment of the UBC Thunderbirds teams, events, and venues Dolf, Matt 2012

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

Item Metadata

Download

Media
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
UBC_Thunderbirds_LCA_Final_Report.pdf [ 10.01MB ]
[if-you-see-this-DO-NOT-CLICK]
Metadata
JSON: 1.0222978.json
JSON-LD: 1.0222978+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0222978.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0222978+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0222978+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0222978+rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 1.0222978 +original-record.json
Full Text
1.0222978.txt
Citation
1.0222978.ris

Full Text

Life Cycle Assessment of the UBC Thunderbirds teams, events, and venues Author: Matt Dolf | Version: 1.1 | Date: May 10, 2012L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 2 Acknowledgements This project was made possible with the support and guidance of the following organizations: UBC ATHLETICS & RECREATION UBC A&R commissioned this study and supplied the data and logistical support. UBC hosts over 200 high performance and recreational events a year and manages the athletic venues at UBC including elds, stadiums, an aquatic centre, a tennis centre, indoor gymnasiums, tness facilities, and ice hockey arenas. 71% of UBCs 47,000 students participate in UBC A&R activities with over 3,000,000 annual visits to facilities and programs. Varsity “Thunderbird” teams travel across North America to participate in the Canadian (CIS) and American (NAIA) interuniversity Sport leagues. QUANTIS INTL Quantis provided technical LCA and software support for this project. Quantis Intl. is a leading environmental impact assessment company specializing in Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). They were founded in 2009 as a joint venture between a spin-o from the École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL) in Switzerland and the consulting team of the Canadian Interuniversity Research Center for the Life Cycle of Products, Processes and Services (CIRAIG), located at École Polytechnique of Montréal, Canada. UBC CENTRE FOR SPORT AND SUSTAINABILITY The Centre provided academic guidance and is the publisher of this report. UBC established the Centre for Sport and Sustainability in 2010 with a mission to act as a community resource to capture and transfer knowledge on how sport can create sustainable benets locally, regionally and internationally. MITACS This project was supported by a MITACS-Accelerate accelerate research grant. MITACS is Canada’s premiere research internship program. It connects companies to graduate students and postdoctoral fellows at over 50 research-based universities. Contact Matt Dolf UBC Centre for Sport and Sustainability mattdolf@gmail.com | 604.822.2767 6081 University Boulevard | Vancouver, BC | V6T 1Z4 | CanadaL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  3 Executive Summary This study was commissioned by UBC Athletics & Recreation (UBC A&R). The goal was to carry out a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and provide UBC A&R with a tool to assess and manage the environmental impacts of their varsity “Thunderbird” teams, venues, and events. A principal aim of this study was to apply rigorous evaluation methods in a resource-ecient manner to identify major impacts from UBC A&Rs operations, stakeholders, and supply chain. The study uses the IMPACT 2002+ LCA method to determine cradle–to–grave impacts across the environmental damage categories of climate change (Carbon Footprint), human health, water withdrawal, ecosystem quality, and resource depletion. The unit of analysis was the provision of an entertainment / athletic experience to participants of the UBC A&R Thunderbird sports events for the 2011/2012 season. The results showed a total annual footprint of 8,300 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents. The largest contributors were venues (72%) and travel (24%) — with food, oce, waste, communication, and accommodation combining for the remaining 4%. The results, data, and methodology presented in this report have been incorporated into the Quantis SUITE 2.0 LCA software tool. General recommendations for impact mitigation opportunities and ongoing data collection strategies are also included. UBC A&R will use this to track and report on environmental performance. This approach represents a new level of sophistication for sustainability management and assessment of the events industry. 72% Venues 24% Travel 1.1% Office 1.4% Accommodation 0.3% Food 0.2% Communication 1.1% Waste Carbon Footprint of UBC Athletics & Recreation Thunderbirds teams, events, and venues for the 2011/12 season.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 4 Contents 1 .  I N T R O D U C T I O N  4 2 .  L I F E  C YC L E  A S S E S S M E N T   LC A   6 3 .  R E S U LT S  A N D  D I S C U S S I O N  1 0 3 . 1  E V E N T  O R G A N I Z AT I O N A L  A R E A S  1 3  - Accommodation 14  - Communication  15  - Food 16  - Oce 17  - Travel 18  - Waste 24  - Venues 25 3 . 2  T H U N D E R B I R D S  V E N U E S  2 7  - Aquatic Centre + Empire Pool [Swimming] 31  - Baseball Diamond [Baseball] 32  - Doug Mitchell Arena [Ice Hockey] 33  - John M. S. Lecky Boathouse [Rowing] 34  - Rashpal Dhillon Oval [Track & Field] 35  - Student Recreation Centre [Fitness, Multi-use] 36  - Thunderbird Stadium [Football] 37  - UBC Tennis Centre [Tennis] 38  - Varsity Field [Soccer] 39  - War Memorial Gym [Basketball, Volleyball] 40  - Warren Field [Soccer] 41  - Wolfson Fields & Pavilion [Rugby] 42  - Wright Fields [Field Hockey] 43 3 . 3  T H U N D E R B I R D  T E A M S  4 4 4 .  S E N S I T I V I T Y  A N A LY S I S  5 8 5 .  R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S  &  C O N C L U S I O N S  6 0 6 .  R E F E R E N C E S  6 3 7 .  A P P E N D I C E S  6 5  - Appendix I - List of Abbreviations 65  - Appendix II - IMPACT 2002+ LCA Method 66  - Appendix III - Quantis SUITE 2.0 68L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  5 Abbreviations A&R  Athletics & Recreation BC British Columbia CAN Canada CO2-eq Carbon dioxide equivalents CH Switzerland DALY Disability adjusted life years EF Environmental Factor GHG Greenhouse Gas GLO  Global GWP Global warming potential IPCC  International Panel on Climate Change LCA  Life Cycle Assessment LCI  Life Cycle Inventory NA North America PDF  Potentially disappeared fraction of species RER  Europe UBC  University of British ColumbiaL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 6 1. Introduction UBC Athletics & Recreation The University of British Columbia’s Athletics & Recreation department (UBC A&R) aims to be a leading sport and recreation program in Canada by delivering diverse, innovative and sustainable programming. This initiative supports UBCs global vision: “As one of the world’s leading universities, The University of British Columbia creates an exceptional learning environment that fosters global citizenship, advances a civil and sustainable society, and supports outstanding research to serve the people of British Columbia, Canada and the world.” [UBC Vision 2012] UBC A&Rs mandate covers two core areas that reach over 3,000,000 participants per year: Athletics - Organization of the UBC ‘Thunderbirds’ teams, events, and venues: •	 Varsity teams (m=men, w=women): Baseball (m), Basketball (m,w), Cross Country (m,w), Field Hockey (m,w), Football (m), Golf (m,w), Ice Hockey (m,w), Rowing (m,w), Rugby (m,w), Skiing-Alpine (m,w), Skiing-Nordic (m,w), Soccer (m,w), Swimming (m,w), Tennis (m,w), Track (m,w), Volleyball (m,w); •	 Club Sports: Cheerleading (m,w), Debating (m,w); •	 200 events hosted at UBC •	 Venues: 7 buildings, 12 sports elds, 3 ice hockey rinks, 2 swimming pools, 1 football stadium, 1 indoor gymnasium arena, 12 indoor tennis courts. Recreation - Delivery of sport and recreation programmes: •	 Recreation sport leagues and tournaments; •	 Fitness and instructional classes; •	 Youth sports camps; •	 Special events such as: Day of the Longboat, UBC Triathlon, Great Trek Run, and Storm the Wall; •	 Sport facilities rental and operation. Sustainability at UBC UBC has made Sustainability an integral part of its mission. The University Sustainability Initiative (USI) was created to implement an ambitious strategy that sets new environmental, social and economic standards for a University. On the environmental front UBC has already set a particularly ambitious goal of achieving greenhouse gas reduction targets: net zero carbon impacts by 2050 [22]. This project represents a way for UBC A&R to contribute to UBCs eorts and ts particularly well under the two cross-cutting sustainability themes identied to achieve this: UBC as a Living Lab and UBC as an Agent of Change [3]. The Project UBC A&R contracted the UBC Centre for Sport and Sustainability (CSS) to a develop an environmental impact assessment framework to cover their Athletics activities; specically the “Thunderbird” varsity sports teams, their associated venues, and the 500+ events the teams participate in annually on and o campus. The resulting framework will serve as a basis for monitoring and developing new sustainability strategies. Matt Dolf, a UBC PhD student and CSS Manager, was engaged to carry out the project. Financial support was provided by a ‘MITACS Accelerate’ grant. Quantis Intl., a leading company in environmental assessment, provided technical support. This work is an extension of a pilot study carried out in Spring, 2011 by Matt Dolf and a group of interdisciplinary UBC Grad students from the LCA Alliance at UBC. Their report, Measuring the Climate Change Impacts of a UBC Thunderbirds Men’s Basketball Game, is available at www.css.ubc.ca/projects/ubc- athletics-recreation. GOAL AND OBJECTIVES The primary goal of this project is to provide UBC A&R with a tool to estimate and mitigate the impacts of their varsity athletic events. The specic objectives of this study are: •	 To develop an LCA framework to assess the major environmental impacts associated with the UBC Thunderbirds events.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  7 •	 To apply the resulting framework to the UBC Thunderbirds 2011/12 season to serve as a baseline for future years. •	 To integrate the results and framework into a user-friendly tool (Quantis SUITE 2.0) that UBC A&R will use to continually monitor the impacts of its activities. KEY CONSIDERATIONS •	 The framework must be applicable to all UBC A&R varsity sport events, teams and venues. •	 The tool must be user-friendly for UBC A&R and therefore require minimal ongoing expertise/support. •	 Indicators should be specic to UBC covering energy, water, material, transportation, and construction impacts. •	 The framework should include both direct (e.g. UBC venue operation) and indirect (e.g. spectator travel) impacts to determine scope of responsibility and inuence. •	 The framework should make use of existing data and, where required, implement new data collection procedures. •	 Methodology and results from this project may be used and published as a part of a Matt Dolf’s PhD research. •	 Quantis Intl. may use this project to develop a sports event- specic software tool. Context Few small to mid-sized sport organizations assess their environmental impacts because of the high cost and the complexity of collecting data, accessing tools, and applying impact assessment methods. The few who do use approaches that vary widely in how they assess, compare and report on impacts [11,18]. The emergence of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) presents new methods, tools, and databases that can be employed consistently by a large variety of organizations in a credible manner. Quantis SUITE 2.0 oers a robust LCA framework that can be tailored to specic clients. The system provides an interactive and user-friendly tool to help organizations set strategies and priorities for environmental impact reduction. Where most tools require expert users, a non-expert can use Quantis SUITE 2.0 after minimal training. The software also allows for results to be presented in an interactive and attractive manner. Format and Contents This report rst outlines the LCA methodology and requirements. Section 3 provides an overview of the specic assessment framework and approach used to assess impacts of UBC Thunderbirds activities. This is followed by an overview of results for the teams/events and individual venues. Some general recommendations and conclusions are provided in the last section. The following supporting documents contain detailed data, assumptions, impact calculations, and results: •	 Quantis SUITE 2.0 software •	 UBC A&R Environmental Factors & Assumptions [Excel] •	 UBC A&R Event and Team Travel Data [Excel] •	 UBC A&R Spectator & Sta Event Travel Survey [Excel] •	 UBC A&R Venue Data [Excel]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 8 2. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) LCA measures the impact of products and services ‘cradle to grave’, covering the phases of resource extraction, manufacture, distribution, use, and disposal (see Figure 1). The LCA method is rapidly becoming the most internationally accepted way of holistically assessing environmental impacts [12]. A strength of the method is that it can assess multiple impact categories such as land use, water, smog, eutrophication, acidication, resource depletion, and climate change. The ISO 14044 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines is the most widely agreed standard for carrying out LCA studies [7]. In conformity with this standard, this study applies the four phases shown in Figure 2. •	 Goal and Scope: Denes the purpose of the study, the system boundaries, and the major assumptions. •	 Inventory Analysis: Denes the inventory of data, environmental inputs and outputs of the system under study, and the methods for data collection and analysis. •	 Impact Assessment: Species the environmental impacts of the dened input and output ows using a particular LCA assessment method. •	 Interpretation: Interprets the results of the inventory and environmental impact assessment relative to the goals of the study. LCA is used for a widening range of applications including business strategy, product and process design, environmental labeling, and product declarations. It has yet to be applied extensively to the sport events industry but this is beginning to change. The City of Lausanne, Switzerland embedded the use Figure 1: LCA measures impacts from cradle to grave. The IMPACT 2002+ method interprets environmental ows into ve damage categories (image credits: Quantis Intl.). Figure 2: ISO 14044 Phases of an LCA StudyL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  9 of a multi–indicator LCA into the planning process of the 2011 World Gymnaestrada; an event with 20,000 athletes. By contrast, a carbon footprint is an LCA method that refers to the single environmental impact category of climate change (also referred to as Global Warming Potential [GWP]) measured in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions [19]. A growing number of events carry out carbon footprints; two pioneering examples were the FIFA 2006 World Cup and the Vancouver 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games. While the carbon footprint method is widely understood and arguably simpler to implement, it does not allow for an understanding of potential trade-os between various types of impacts, such as between climate change and human health. We have therefore chosen to apply the IMPACT 2002+ method, which examines 5 impact categories. LCA Requirements This section addresses key ISO 14044 requirements. This project adheres as closely as possible to the ISO 14044 process at a “Screening LCA” level — as opposed to a “Full LCA” study. A screening approach was deemed sucient in order to minimize costs and maximize eciency to get a rst order understanding of major impacts. Quantis Intl. provided methodological support and quality reviews. GOALS OF THE STUDY •	 To carry out a preliminary inventory of major environmental impacts applicable to the UBC Athletics & Recreation Thunderbirds season between September 2011 to August 2012. •	 To identify areas with the largest contributions to environmental impacts and recommend options for impact reduction. •	 To develop a benchmark against which future performance can be measured. FUNCTIONAL UNIT The functional unit quanties the services and products of the product system into a measurable unit: “The provision of an entertainment / athletic experience to participants of the UBC A&R Thunderbird sports events for the 2011/12 season” PRODUCT SYSTEM Figure 3 shows all major direct and indirect environmental impacts associated with the UBC Athletics & Recreation Thunderbirds season occurring September 2011 - August 2012 The specic areas under review include: •	 All Thunderbirds events and activities organized by UBC A&R; Figure 3: System boundary for UBC Thunderbirds teams, venues, and events INPUTS SYSTEM BOUNDARY - UBC THUNDERBIRDS 2011-2012 Life Cycle StagesEvent Organizational AreasParticipants OUTPUTSEmissions Wastes MaterialsEnergy UBC Sta Resource extraction Disposal Distribution Manufacturing Use Food Travel Travel Venue Operation and Structure Accommodation Accommodation Communication Oce & Management WasteUBC Spectators UBC Team Opponent Team UBC Team Home Games (at UBC) Away Games (outside UBC) SYSTEM BOUNDARYL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 10 •	 UBC A&R owned and managed sports venues; •	 Spectator travel, accommodation, and on-site activities; •	 Team travel, accommodation, and on-site activities; •	 Sponsor, media, and guest travel, accommodation, and on- site activities. PRIMARY FUNCTIONS OF THE PRODUCT SYSTEM The function of this system are two-fold: (a) to provide an entertainment experience to spectators and (b) a competitive athletic experience to athletes. In order to do this, UBC A&R must also ensure a minimum level of comfort and safety, suitable accommodation and transportation options, and oer an excellent event experience to all attendees. SYSTEM BOUNDARY The system boundary for this study included all life cycle stages (cradle to grave) for each organizational area of the even (see Figure 3). For home games occurring at UBC, spectators, sta, and teams (both UBC and their opponents) were counted. For away games, only the UBC team travel and accommodation was included. This study applied a 99% cut-o criteria. In other words, all aspects estimated to contribute an impact of 99% to the total impact were included. LCA TYPE This study is an “Attributional LCA” type because it describes the environmental aspects of the system under study. A “Consequential LCA”, on the other hand, describes the eects of changes in a system. INTENDED AUDIENCE The detailed results of this study are intended primarily for UBC A&R internal use. Any communication of selected results should be accompanied with a statement that the ndings are preliminary. This study is a ‘Screening LCA’ and therefore may not be fully compliant with all components of ISO 14044. PUBLICATION OF RESULTS This study will be primarily used and communicated internally by UBC Athletics & Recreation. Methods and results may also be presented in academic publications or conferences. UNITS OF COMPARISON The following units are used in order to compare impacts: •	 Impacts for one UBC A&R Thunderbirds season — this includes 100% of venue use and all elements in the system boundary. •	 Impacts per venue — 100% of venue use only. The other organizational areas such as accommodation, travel, etc. are excluded in this comparison. •	 Impacts per team — Examines only those impacts attributable to the teams. In particular, only the portion of the venues they use are applied to the teams. For example the Men’s Basketball team used 5% of the War Memorial Gyms over one year since it shares the venue with three other teams, UBC A&R oces, and other users. ASSUMPTIONS Detailed assumptions for each organizational area are provided in Section 3. Results and Discussion. PRIMARY ACTIVITY DATA BY ORGANIZATIONAL AREA Data was collected for the event organizational areas of transportation, accommodation, food, waste, venues, oce management, and communication. Results and methods for each are outlined further in Section 2 of this report. LCA INVENTORY DATA SOURCES Environmental impact factors were applied to activity data with a unit process (individual material impacts) approach [12]. Environmental impact factors were derived from a number of sources including: •	 ecoinvent v2.2 LCA database; •	 scientic literature and LCA studies; and •	 reports, websites, newspapers. LCA METHOD This study applied the IMPACT 2002+ method developed by Jolliet et al. (2003) and updated by Humbert et al. (2011) [14, 15]. The following are the endpoint damage categories and associated units of measurement: Climate Change – kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalents Human Health – disability adjusted life years Ecosystem Quality – potential disappeared fraction of species per square meter per year Resources – megajoules of primary energy Water Withdrawal – litres of water IMPACT 2002+ groups impacts from thousands of material and energy ows into 14 mid-point damage categories, which are then further grouped into 5 end-point, or damage categories. Midpoint categories are dened as “a parameter in a cause- eect chain or network (environmental mechanism) for a particular impact category that is between the inven tory data and the category endpoints” [1]. Damage categories reect stressors at the end of a cause-eect chain and reect society’s understanding of a nal eect. For example, high levels of phosphate and nitrate emissions may lead to eutrophication (midpoint) on a body of water, which in turn can be represented as an overall reduction in ecosystem quality (endpoint). Only L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  11 damage categories are communicated in this report in order to simplify interpretation and decision-making. *For further details on IMPACT 2002+ see Appendix I. LIMITATIONS The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the largest impacts of the 2011/12 Thunderbirds athletic season. The results should not be taken outside of this context. This study applied a selected set of environmental damage categories and conclusions should not be drawn about impacts not represented here. Many of the environmental factors used are taken from an LCA database for a European context. Where possible, eorts have been made to represent a BC / Canadian context, however in many cases this was not possible. The foreground data was based on samples, averages, or assumptions using available data. For the most signicant impacts (travel and venues), every eort has been made to get detailed and specic data. Given the broad scope of this study, some simplications were made and therefore certain important impacts may have been missed or over/under represented. In some areas no data was available. For example, the construction impacts of natural grass elds were not included as information was not available. IMPACT 2002+ characterizes results as potential impacts rather than actual impacts in order for us to better understand how the environment may be damaged by our activities (i.e. the climate change category looks at a 100 year time horizon for the environmental impacts of GHG emissions). Results should be interpreted and communicated as such. Further limitations are also provided in Section 3.1 Event Organizational Areas’ and Section 4. Sensitivity Analysis.’ SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS A sensitivity analysis was undertaken (see Section 4 on page 60) to test alternate assumptions on the following key parameters: •	 Electricity grids applied (BC vs. CAN vs. NA) •	 Passenger travel occupancy rates •	 Venue allocation % to teams Performing a sensitivity analysis illustrates how assumptions and parameters can inuence the results and examines the robustness of recommendations. In this study, the sensitivity analyses have all been performed with respect to climate change as it has the least uncertainty of the damage categories. Tool - Quantis SUITE 2.0 LCA Software Quantis SUITE 2.0 is a client-based software developed by Quantis Intl. to measure environmental impacts and help organizations set strategies and priorities for environmental impact reduction. Its strength compared to other LCA tools is an interface that is user-friendly, intuitive, and visually appealing. A non-expert can use the SUITE after minimal training. Quantis SUITE 2.0 integrates LCA impact assessment databases including ecoinvent, ADEME Bilan Carbone, DEFRA and a number of national Input-Output databases. For this project we developed a template applicable to sports events that UBC can use to input activity data and track their environmental impacts. Further details on Quantis SUITE 2.0 along with user instructions are available in Appendix II on page 69). Image (a) shows an example of the project design and environmental factors used for spectator travel on Quantis SUITE 2.0, and image (b) shows the interactive results overview page. (a) (b) Further user instructions for Quantis SUITE 2.0 are available in ‘Appendix II - Quantis SUITE 2.0’ on page 69.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 12 3. Results and Discussion This chapter presents the results of the study for ve environmental damage categories: climate change, resources, human health, ecosystems quality, and water withdrawal. Impacts, assumptions, data sources, and implications are broken down for each of the following: •	 3.1 Event Organizational Areas •	 3.2 Thunderbirds Venues •	 3.3 Thunderbird Teams Interpreting Results These results should be used in the context of the functional unit (UBC A&R Thunderbird activities for 2011/12 season), the boundaries and assumptions of this study, and in consideration of this study’s limitations (described in Section 2 on page 8). UNCERTAINTY The underlying models used to characterize impacts have uncertainties which cannot be quantied using statistical analysis; guidelines have therefore been proposed by the authors of the IMPACT 2002+ method [14]. They provide thresholds of signicance for each impact category to assist with interpreting results: •	 Any dierence in results lower than 10% is not considered signicant for resource depletion or climate change scores. •	 A dierence lower than 30% is not considered signicant for respiratory inorganics, acidication, and eutrophication (midpoint categories for the ecosystem quality indicator). •	 Toxicity impacts under ecosystem quality and human health typically require an order of magnitude (factor of 10) dierence to be signicant. •	 Results in the water withdrawal category are highly uncertain as water footprinting methods are relatively new and approaches vary widely [3]. Results presented here should only be interpreted as potential areas of concern and can be used to inform future investigations. These guidelines depend on the correlation between the options compared. Deviations lower than those described above can be considered signicant when the systems being compared are very similar. The interpretation given in this section takes into account these considerations. LCA studies typically present impacts across multiple damage categories on a 100% scale to avoid weighting the importance of one category over another (e.g. importance of climate change over human health). According to ISO 14044 requirements, such weighting should only be done internally by the stakeholders. Overview of UBC A&R Thunderbird Impacts The total impacts of UBC A&R Thunderbirds venues, teams, and events during the period September 1, 2011 to September 1, 2012 are listed in Table 4 and illustrated in Figure 5. A detailed breakdown of the assumptions and data used to derive impacts for each organizational area are provided in Section ‘3.1 Event Organizational Areas’ on page 15. Taking into consideration one full year of operation and 100% allocation of impacts to UBC A&R, venues clearly dominate across all damage categories at 72% for climate change, 73% for resources, 75% for human health, 83% for ecosystem quality, and 86% for water withdrawal. This is mainly due to life cycle impacts of the buildings, particularly the Aquatic Centre, Doug Mitchell Arena, War Memorial Gym, and the Student Recreation Centre. Detailed results for each venue are available in Section ‘3.2 Thunderbirds Venues’ on page 29. Travel impacts are also signicant, primarily for climate change at 24%. The major contributors are spectator travel, sta travel, UBC team travel, and opponent team travel. The combined totaled for the organizational areas of Oce, Accommodation, Waste, Food, and Communication is less than 5% for all damage categories; except in terms of water impacts, where food contributed 9%. Material goods consumed per participant were relatively low, in most cases just event brochures, snacks, and merchandise. The areas of travel, waste, communication, and food are most closely tied to participant activities and therefore higher attendance will likely increase impacts. The venues, oce and team accommodation areas are less dependent on spectator participation. Less than 1/3 of events are hosted at UBC since many teams play the majority of games on the road and some teams, such as skiing and golf, don’t have venues on campus. A higher proportion of home games would likely increase impacts. To contextualize results, Figure 6 provides sample benchmarks for each damage category. Further explanation of each category is available in Appendix I - IMPACT 2002+ LCA Method.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  13 Table 4: Total annual impacts for the UBC Thunderbirds 2011/12 season. ORGANIZATIONAL AREA CLIMATE CHANGE kg CO2–eq RESOURCES  MJ prim HUMAN HEALTH DALY ECOSYSTEM QUALITY PDF•m2•yr) WATER L Venues 6,000,000 100,000,000 3.10 1,700,000 190,000,000 Travel 2,000,000 31,000,000 0.94 270,000 8,600,000 Oce 90,000 1,500,000 0.06 22,000 700,000 Accommodation 120,000 1,800,000 0.07 36,000 3,800,000 Waste 93,000 80,000 0.01 1,900 75,000 Food 21,000 270,000 0.00 2,700 21,000,000 Communication 19,000 220,000 0.02 20,000 3,600,000 Total 8,300,000 140,000,000 4.20 2,100,000 230,000,000 Figure 5: Total annual impacts for the UBC Thunderbirds 2011/12 season on a 100% scale. 8,300,000 kg CO2–eq = 2,600 return ights from Vancouver to London;  or 1 car driving around the world 730 times [7] 140,000,000 MJ Prim = Annual resource depletion caused by 330 Canadians [17] 4.2 DALY = Human health impact potential of 200,000 cigarettes smoked [20] 2,100,00 PDF•m2•yr = Loss of 2.1 hectares of forest for 100 years [14] 230,000,000 L = Annual water consumption of 160 Canadians;  or 770 Europeans [9,14] Figure 6: Some reference benchmarks to interpret the overall results for each damage category.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 14 The carbon footprint of UBC A&R Thunderbirds can also be classied according to the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol, which sets out boundary and scoping guidelines to assess and report publicly on GHG Emissions [28]. GHG emissions are classied into three main scopes: Scope 1 – direct emissions, Scope 2 – indirect emissions due to electricity or heating , and Scope 3 – indirect emissions from the supply chain. Scopes 1 and 2 are required for public reporting of emissions. Scope 3 is currently optional as it may result in double counting due to overlaps with reporting from other organizations in the supply chain. SCOPE 1  DIRECT GHG EMISSIONS From sources owned or controlled by the organization: •	 Natural gas for direct heating or steam in UBC A&R venues •	 Fuel used by vehicles owned by UBC A&R (primarily maintenance vehicles) and fuel used by vehicles leased by UBC A&R (team travel in buses on the road) SCOPE 2  INDIRECT GHG EMISSIONS Emissions due the generation of purchased electricity: •	 Purchased electricity from the grid used by the venues SCOPE 3  OTHER INDIRECT GHG EMISSIONS Covers emissions resulting from all other activities within UBC A&Rs scope of inuence including activities in their supply chain and aliated activities of event attendees: •	 Spectator, event sta and team travel in non-owned/leased vehicles such as commercial planes, buses, and cars •	 UBC A&R employee commuting in vehicles not owned by the organization such as public transit or private cars •	 Production, transport and end of life of materials and resources used by UBC A&R such as sporting goods, oce supplies, food, merchandise, etc. RESULTS Figure 7 provides a breakdown of the carbon footprint color– coded by organizational area. Results show that 41% of the carbon footprint for UBC A&R lie in Scope 1 and come from energy use in the venues, fuel use in UBC A&R owned and operated vehicles, and leased vehicles for team travel. Scope 2 emissions are due to purchased electricity and come to approximately 15%. The remaining 44% of impacts fall under Scope 3 because they are under UBC A&R inuence, not control. CARBON OFFSETS UBC currently reports and osets Scopes 1 and 2. They do not oset Scope 3 [22]. UBC pays carbon taxes and purchases osets at $30 and $25 per tonne of CO2-eq respectively for Scopes 1 and 2 under the guidelines of the BC Provincial Carbon Tax and the UBC Carbon Climate Action Plan [4 ,22]. If UBC A&R osets its Scope 3 emissions, this would cost approximately $85,000 applying the UBC rate of $25 per tonne. SCOPE 1 SCOPE 2 SCOPE 3 t CO2-eq 3,700 1,200 3,400 Tax rate ($30/t) $111,000 $36,000 – Osets ($25/t) $92,500 $30,000 $85,000 Figure 7: Carbon Footprint broken down by the GHG Protocol scopes for public reporting [ SIDEBAR - Carbon Footprint according to the GHG Protocol ]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  15 Travel: per participant attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event — broken into spectator / sta / UBC team / opponent team Venue: per UBC Thunderbirds venue operating for 1 year — for each of the 14 game venues. INPUTOUTPUT FLOWS Each organizational area has a number of material an energy ows entering or leaving the system boundary. Activity data, units of measure, and the corresponding environmental factor (EF) are provided for each along with a brief description of the assumptions and data sources used. More details are available in supporting documents and in the Quantis Suite project le. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS The environmental factors (EFs) are taken primarily from the ecoinvent 2.2. LCA database. They allow us to characterize the impacts from the inventory data into environmental impacts. DATA QUALITY Each impact category has an assigned number between 1 - 4 to represent the quality of the data and assumptions based on the following chart: DATA QUALITY RELIABILITY REPRESENTATIVENESS 1 - High Quality Specic validated or calculated data Good geographical and technological represen- tativeness 2 - Acceptable Quality Validated or calculated data from other source Geographical or techno- logical lack of represen- tativeness 3 - Low Quality Qualied estimate Geographical and technological lack of representativeness 4 - Very Low Quality Rough estimation Proxy  Condence in the results should be interpreted accordingly and eorts should be made in future years to improved the levels of data quality. It should be noted that data collection resources for this project were concentrated on the areas of highest impact: travel and venues. Organizational Areas This section outlines the approach taken to determine the environmental impacts of UBC Athletics & Recreations activities. Impacts for the events were broken down into the following seven organizational areas: •	 Accommodation •	 Communication •	 Food •	 Oce •	 Travel •	 Venues •	 Waste While impacts are often categorized by life cycle stages, a grouping by organizational area was chosen to represent the typical breakdown of responsibilities common to most events. These areas are also consistent with the Canadian CSA Z2010 Standard: Requirements and Guidance for Organizers of Sustainable Events (2011). As shown in the system boundary (see Figure 3), the cradle to grave impacts have been included. Sub-Functional Units For each organizational area, a functional unit (FU) represents a group of impacts. By applying the functional to the event activity data collected, such as the number of participants attending an event, a fairly robust estimate of the environmental impacts can be obtained. The functional units are: Accommodation: per person night in a standard North American hotel for participants attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event Communication: per participant attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event Food: per participant attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event Waste: per participant attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event Oce & Management: per employee managing UBC Thunderbirds events full–time for 1 year 3.1 Event Organizational AreasL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 16 Accommodation impacts are included for visiting team members both for UBC teams when on the road and for opponent teams at UBC events. The participants making use of accommodation are almost exclusively away team members. Locals are assumed to stay at home and therefore do not represent a change in impacts due to the event. Only a very small percentage of spectators reported being from out of town and among those, few reported staying at a hotel. As they represent signicantly less than 1% of accommodation nights, they are excluded. Due to the large number of dierent hotels used by travelling teams, an average North American hotel is modelled. The NA energy grid is applied rather than the BC one since most hotels are located outside BC. Electricity is the most signicant impact in terms of climate change and resources and therefore these assumptions should be updated in future to reect the trend of hotels becoming more energy ecient. KEY FIGURES Average number of UBC team nights per event when on the road: 1 Total number of UBC team person nights when on the road: 6,700* Total number of opponent team person nights at UBC events: 2,400* *UBC competes in signicantly more away games than home games, hence the higher number of UBC team hotel nights Data Assumptions and Sources FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Building construction materials 0.002 m3 20 m2 per person * 3 m ceiling for a standard multi-story building with 80 yr lifespan Quantis-Gymnaestrada & TourBench Layman Report ecoinvent 2.2 - building, multi- storey [m2] - RER (549) 2 - Acc. Electricity 10 kWh 0.474 kWh/m2/yr * 20 m2 per person: 10 kWh per person per night US EPA (2005) CHP in the Hotel and Casino Sectors Quantis EF - Electricity, medium voltage, at grid/AmN [kWh] - N-A (N-A Background) 2 - Acc. Fuels 29 MJ 1.44 kWh/m2/yr * 20 m2 per person: 29 MJ per person per night US EPA (2005) CHP in the Hotel and Casino Sectors ecoinvent 2.2 - natural gas, burned in boiler condensing modulating <100kW [MJ] - RER (1357) 2 - Acc. Water 300 L 300 L water per person per night Quantis-Gymnaestrada 2010 study ecoinvent 2.2 - tap water, at user [kg] - RER (2288) 2 - Acc. Wastewater 0.3 m3 100% of tap water to wastewater ecoinvent 2.2 - treatment, sewage, to wastewater treatment, class 2 [m3] - CH (2276) 2 - Acc. Waste 1 kg 1 kg per person per night (100% landlled) Quantis-Gymnaestrada 2010 study ecoinvent 2.2 - disposal, municipal solid waste, 22.9% water, to landll [kg] - CH (2223) 2 - Acc. Travel 20 km 10 km travel return from hotel to venue UBC A&R ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, coach [pkm] - CH (6058) 2 - Acc. ACCOMMODATION  FUNCTIONAL UNIT Per person night in a standard North American hotel for participants attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event. IMPACTS PER FUNCTIONAL UNIT Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 11 180 7.0E-06 3.5 370 AccommodationL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  17 Communication impacts are included for all participants at UBC hosted events. Very little communication material are distributed or sold on site other than some paper event brochures and textile merchandise. TV, radio, newspaper, and advertising impacts are not included as they were considered negligible contributors. These can be quite important contributors in larger events however. End of life impacts for paper and merchandise are included in the waste section in order to avoid double counting. Assumptions for communication data are based on rough estimations by UBC A&R sta. It is strongly recommended that in future the amount of communications materials for each team and/or venue be tracked and reported on an annual basis since they represent the majority of impacts for this category. The transport assumptions are based on industry averages and other studies undertaken by Quantis Intl. The internet time per person is purely an estimation and more specic web trac should be included in future. KEY FIGURES Total paper in a season: 970 kg Total merchandise sold in a season: 485 kg Total internet time: 67 days Data Assumptions and Sources FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Recycled paper 0.02 kg One 4-page recycled event program (5 g per page) per participant (with de-inking) UBC A&R Event Coordinator ecoinvent 2.2 - paper, recycling, with deinking, at plant [kg] - RER (1714) 3 - Low Textiles 0.01 kg 1 item (t-shirt/hat/scarf ) sold for every 20 participants. Reference unit 1 t-shirt (200 g) UBC A&R Event Coordinator ecoinvent 2.2 - textiles, woven cotton, at plant [kg] - GLO (10177) 3 - Low Transport 21.6 kgkm Estimate 720 km travel from regional storage to UBC Quantis guidelines for average transport in NA market Quantis EF - transport, 53’ dry van (Class 8) [tkm] - NA 3 - Low Electricity from internet use 0.0033 kWh Each participant visits the UBC A&R website for 2 mins per event (0.0033 kWh per 2 min) Internet time is estimated.  Quantis guidelines for internet energy use. Quantis EF - Electricity, medium voltage, at grid [kWh] - NA (NA Background) 3 - Low Communication COMMUNICATION  FUNCTIONAL UNIT Per participant attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event. IMPACTS PER FUNCTIONAL UNIT Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 0.33 3.8 3.30E-07 0.35 63L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 18 This indicator includes all food and beverages consumed at UBC events. Since detailed information on the food ingredients and sources were not available, an estimation based on an average meal three course meal at an event in Switzerland is used (Quantis Comptoir Gruyeren Study, 2009). Based on the estimates from UBC A&R food contractors, an estimate of 1/5 of an average meal is applied to each participant of a UBC event. Alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages are separated since their relative impacts dier signicantly — alcoholic drinks have a carbon footprint approximately 3.5 times higher than non-alcoholic drinks. Although total volume of beverages sold was provided by UBC A&R, the breakdown of drink types are also based on the Comptoir Gruyeren event study. The food and beverage section should be covered in more depth in future both to increase accuracy of results and to highlight the dierences in impacts between meats/vegetables, local/ foreign sourcing, organic/non-organic, fresh/processed foods. It should be noted that tap water consumption is not included as this is already covered under stadium usage and would result in double counting. For events with food consumption outside the venue (not the case at UBC events), tap water as beverage should be added. End of life impacts of food are covered in the waste section. KEY FIGURES Total meal equivalents served at UBC events: 9,700 Liters of alcohol consumed at UBC events: 1,200 Liters of non-alcoholic beverages at UBC events: 4,850 Data Assumptions and Sources FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Food 0.2 meals 0.2 meals per person, includes transport UBC A&R Food contractor Quantis-Comptoir Gruyeren 2009 Study 3 - Low Alcoholic beverages 0.05 L 50 ml per person, 50% beer in glass bottle, 50% wine, includes transport UBC A&R Food contractor Quantis-Comptoir Gruyeren 2009 Study 2 - Acc. Non-alcoholic beverages 0.1 L 100 ml per person, 75% coca- cola, 25% water, includes transport UBC A&R Food contractor Quantis-Comptoir Gruyeren 2009 Study 2 - Acc. *Based on a typical three course meal FOOD  FUNCTIONAL UNIT Per participant attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event. IMPACTS PER FUNCTIONAL UNIT Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 0.47 5.9 5.90E-08 0.059 450 FoodL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  19 Oce covers impacts related to UBC Athletics sta that organize the events. Athletics has approximately 100 administration, facilities, and coaching sta that work full-time throughout the year to manage the venues, teams, communication, budgets, administration, etc. Most teams have a full-time coach. Some, such as Football, have additional coaching sta while others, such as tennis, are fully student run. UBC A&R oces are located in the War Memorial Gym, Thunderbird Stadium, and Doug Mitchell Arena venues. Specic oce dimensions and data for energy, water, waste etc. were not available and therefore an estimation is applied based on average British Columbia oce building energy use and North American oce sizes. Because the oces are within the venues, all impacts except sta commuting are excluded from the overall impact since this would have resulted in double counting. When looking at the impacts of individual teams or events, the full list of oce impacts can be applied. A major impact across all damage categories is employee commuting. Oce energy use (fuel and electricity) is signicant in all categories. The building material construction impacts are most signicant in terms of human health, water withdrawal, and ecosystem quality. It is recommended that more specic oce data and travel patterns be obtained to improve the accuracy of these results. KEY FIGURES UBC A&R sta: 100 Data Assumptions and Sources FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Building construction materials 0.75 m3 20 m2 per person * 3 m ceiling for a standard multi-story building with 80 yr lifespan GSA report for average workspace ecoinvent 2.2 - building, multi- storey [m3] - RER (549) 3 - Low Electricity 2600 kWh 130 kWh/m2/yr * 20 m2 per person National Resources Canada - BC oce energy Quantis EF - Electricity, medium voltage, at grid/BC [kWh] - BC (N-A Background) 2 - Acc Fuels 11800 MJ 590 MJ/m2/yr * 20 m2 per person National Resources Canada - BC oce energy average ecoinvent 2.2 - heat, natural gas, at boiler modulating <100kW, RER, (1349) 2 - Acc Water 3750 L 15 L per person day x 250 days Quantis-Gymnaestrada 2010 study ecoinvent 2.2 - tap water, at user [kg] - RER (2288) 2 - Acc Wastewater 3.75 m3 100% of tap water to wastewater ecoinvent 2.2 - treatment, sewage, to wastewater treatment, class 2 [m3] - CH (2276) 2 - Acc Waste 80 kg 4 kg waste/m2/yr to landll * 20 m2 per person UBC Sustainability Oce ecoinvent 2.2 - disposal, municipal solid waste, 22.9% water, to municipal incineration, CH (2103) 2 - Acc Sta commuting 1 unit 49% car 20 km (1.2 p/v), 49% transit 20 km, 1% walk 2 km, 1% bike 10 km UBC TREK Transport Survey - travel distance is an estimate from Main St. to UBC (return) Custom EF - UBC commuter, 1 person day [unit] - UBC 1 - High OFFICE  FUNCTIONAL UNIT Per employee managing UBC Thunderbirds events full–time for 1 year. IMPACTS PER FUNCTIONAL UNIT Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 2,400 38,000 1.30E-03 570 16,000 OceL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 20 Transportation was anticipated to be a major contributor to environmental impacts and therefore detailed results were collected for each of the following participant types: •	 Spectators at UBC home games •	 Sta at UBC home games •	 UBC team at UBC home games •	 Opponent team at UBC home games •	 UBC team at away games Travel data for spectators and sta come from a sample of on- site surveys (detailed on page 21). Travel data for the UBC and opponent teams are calculated by using the Thunderbirds event schedule and UBC A&R travel records. This study was completed part-way through the season and therefore the exact number of games is unknown since it depends on the success of teams in the playos. Estimates are used for teams still in competition. Results should be updated at the end of the season. Transport modesW The carbon footprint per km travelled for each mode is shown in Figure 8. The key elements included for these calculations are described below. BIKE  Impacts are based on the manufacture and end-of- life of a standard aluminum bicycle as well as a share of road infrastructure. BUS CITY  Impacts are based on construction, road and fuel use of a standard bus used for public transportation. An average European mix of trolley, diesel, and other city bus types are assumed. The bus occupancy rate is also based on a European industry average. In future the UBC specic bus occupancy rate could be applied if information can be made specic to UBC event travel patterns. BUS COACH  Impacts are based on construction, road infrastructure, and fuel use of a standard coach used either for intercity travel or dedicated to specic trips, e.g. school buses or rented buses for team travel. The bus occupancy rate and technology are based on a European industry average. CAR   Impacts are based on construction, road infrastructure, and fuel use of a standard small passenger vehicle. A European eet average technology and fuel mix is used. Occupancy rates for cars, however, are specic to UBC events. SCOOTER/MOTORCYCLE  Impacts are based on construction, road infrastructure, and fuel use of an average European scooter. Since a very small % of participants (<0.01%) reported using a scooter/motorcycle, these individuals are counted under “Car” Travel as impacts per km are similar at UBC events. PLANE  Impacts are based on average plane, airport construction, and fuel use. Only 2nd class travel impacts are assumed as all UBC A&R teams are booked 2nd class. It is possible that some spectators ew 1st class but this information was not captured. Since impacts can be almost twice as large due to the reduced number of seats available on a ight, this information could be collected in future. An industry average ight occupancy rate was used. TRAIN  Impacts are based on a European average construction, infrastructure, and energy use of trains. No participants reported using trains in this study and therefore this mode is not included in the results. WALK  Walking is assumed to be a zero impact activity Figure 8: Carbon Footprint per travel mode UBC A&R Spectator AverageL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  21 Spectator & Sta Travel at UBC Home Games To determine spectator and sta travel patterns, surveys were carried out at eight separate events over the period of October 15 - November 19, 2011. The following events were selected, representing 7 of the 23 dierent teams, to include a variety of travel patterns: •	 Mens Football (Oct 15, 2011) •	 Mens Football (Oct 29, 2011) •	 Mens Ice Hockey (Nov 19, 2011) •	 Mens Volleyball (Nov 19, 2011) •	 Womens Basketball (Oct 28, 2011) •	 Womens Field Hockey (Oct 22, 2011) •	 Womens Ice Hockey (Oct 29, 2011) •	 Womens Soccer (Oct 21, 2011) These events cover a cross-section of characteristics - indoor/ outdoor; weekday/weekend; men/women; local away team/ non-local away team; regular season game/playo game; level of public transport and parking services; variable weather; daytime/evening; ticketed/non-ticketed. It is recommended that more events be surveyed in the future to cover a larger sample size and a wider range of characteristics - particularly for playo games. SURVEY METHOD The anonymous survey of participating spectators and sta obtained the following information: •	 mode of travel •	 if they came by car, number of people in the vehicle •	 rst 3 digits of their postal code (to determine distance travelled at a resolution of approximately 1 km) •	 whether they travelled to UBC primarily for the game (if not they were excluded) •	 participant type (spectator, sta, team) The sample size for spectators was 849 out of a total population of 2,520 at 8 events, a total sample rate of 34%. For sta, the sample size was 82 out of a total population of 100 at 2 events, a sample rate of 82%. Travel impacts for spectators and sta are determined by applying the average distances travelled for each mode of transport and the % of each transport mode. In the case of cars, a vehicle occupancy rate for UBC home games was captured. For all other modes of transport, an industry average is used (i.e. for transit, planes, and coaches). FUNCTIONAL UNIT  SPECTATOR TRAVEL Per spectator attending an average UBC Thunderbirds home event. Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 27 420 1.20E-05 4 140 FUNCTIONAL UNIT  STAFF Per sta attending an average UBC Thunderbirds home event. Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 2.6 41 2.60E-06 0.75 17L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 22 TRAVEL MODE TOTAL SPECTATORS % TRAVEL MODE TOTAL TRAVEL DISTANCE KM AVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE KM AVERAGE VEHICLE OCCUPANCY P/V Bike 21 2.5% 120 6 n/a Bus City 63 7.4% 2,000 32 n/a Bus Coach 54 6.4% 4,200 77 n/a Car 580 68.3% 65,000 110 2.6 Motorbike 1 0.1% 17 17 n/a Plane 42 4.9% 120,000 2,800 n/a Walk 88 10.4% 340 4 n/a Totals 849 100% 190,000 223 n/a TRAVEL MODE TOTAL SPECTATORS % TRAVEL MODE TOTAL TRAVEL DISTANCE KM AVERAGE TRAVEL DISTANCE KM AVERAGE VEHICLE OCCUPANCY P/V Bike 8 9.8% 36 5 n/a Bus City 27 32.9% 880 33 n/a Car 32 39.0% 1,500 46 3.1 Walk 15 18.3% 40 3 n/a Totals 82 100% 2,400 30 n/a SPECTATOR TRAVEL PATTERNS As shown in Table 9, the large majority of spectators came by car (68%). The vehicle occupancy rate averaged 2.6 people per vehicle (p/v). This occupancy rate is signicantly above the UBC commuting norm of 1.1 p/v [23]; this can likely due to people going to events with friends and families. Walking was the next most common travel mode at roughly 10%. There were an almost even number of spectators that reported coming by city and coach buses. It should be noted that at one of the events surveyed, a very large school group travelled with charted bus — part of an UBC A&R program for schools. The number of people taking transit uctuated signicantly between games, likely as a result of a variety of factors including proximity to bus stops, the time of the event (aecting schedule frequency), the day of the event (weekday or weekend), and weather. Very few people reported biking to the event. The average may actually be lower than 2.5% since the sample included one event where a “bike to the game” initiative was held — leading to a signicant number of spectators attending by bike. A somewhat surprising result was the relatively large percentage of spectators (4%) that ew primarily to attend events. Note that participants that reported ying to Vancouver primarily for other reasons were excluded. As shown in Figure 11, these ights dominate the carbon footprint contribution. Table 9: Spectator travel modes, distances and vehicle occupancy rates Table 10: Sta travel modes, distances and vehicle occupancy rates Figure 11: Spectator mode share and Carbon Footprint Figure 12: Average spectator travel distance by bike, transit and car modesL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  23 The map in Figure 12 shows the average distance travelled for the modes of biking (3 km), transit (16 km), and driving (65 km) across greater Vancouver. The car average distance is likely higher than transit due to the people who favoured car use for long distance travel from out of town. A breakdown of zones of travel to UBC is shown in Figure 13. Approximately 14% came from within the UBC campus area, 54% from within a 25 km radius. 22% came from a distance of greater than 50 km, showing a signicant proportion of out-of- town travel — mostly aliated with the opposing teams. STAFF TRAVEL PATTERNS It should be reiterated that the sta travel patterns are only based on results from two events and that results varied signicantly (see Table 10). Nevertheless, these results indicate that there is likely a more even distribution of travel modes used and that the travel distances are shorter than for spectators, an average distance of 30 km for sta versus 223 km for spectators. This may be due to many event sta members being students and living close to campus. It is recommended that these numbers be measured more extensively in future. UBC Team Travel Home & Away AWAY GAMES UBC team travel to away games is tracked on an annual basis for most teams by UBC A&R. Where information was missing, coaches were contacted. Detailed travel information was completed for 23 of the 24 teams. Only the Nordic Skiing team information is missing; it is assumed that their impacts are the same as for the Alpine Skiing team. Travel details for the teams are very accurate as they are based on actual schedule data. City to city travel distances are calculated for every trip made and include the mode of travel used. UBC teams travel across Canada and the US for their away games. For events that take place within a radius of 500 km, they predominantly use rented coach buses or minivans (since the impacts of a coach bus and a minivan are relatively similar, the coach bus process is used to represent both). As shown in Figure 14, the average travel distance for Coach travel is approximately 500 km’s, or roughly the distance to Kamloops, BC or Portland, OR. For events that take place further away, the economy ights are the main mode of travel. On average the teams y 1,600 km’s to an away event, about the distance of Saskatoon, SK or San Francisco, CA. HOME GAMES AND PRACTICES No specic travel data were gathered for UBC teams traveling to home games and practices. It was assumed that for home games, the UBC team travel patterns would be similar those of event sta since both are predominantly made up of students. It is recommended that UBC A&R include the UBC team members in future travel surveys to test this assumption. Figure 13: Average spectator travel distances by 1, 10, 25, 50, and 50+ km zones Figure 14: Average travel distance by coach and plane for UBC team to away gamesL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 24 FUNCTIONAL UNIT  UBC TEAM AT AWAY EVENTS Per UBC team member attending an average UBC Thunderbirds away event. Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 440 6,600 2.00E-04 54 1,700 Opponent Team Travel to UBC Games Opponent travel is derived from the UBC A&R competition schedule and assumptions are made based on UBC team characteristics (i.e. travel modes used for travel distances). For events where the equivalent number of athletes are competing, Data Assumptions and Sources for Participant Types SPECTATOR TRAVEL FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Walk distance (return)  0.4 pkm modal split of 9.8% and average return distance of 4 km Travel surveys Zero impact assumed 1 - High Bike distance (return)  0.1 pkm modal split of 2.5% and average return distance of 4 km Travel surveys ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, bicycle, CH (11342) 1 - High Car distance (return)  12 pkm modal split of 67.6% and average return distance of 49 km /  vehicle occupancy rate of 2.7 Travel surveys Custom ecoinvent EF - transport, passenger car, petrol, eet average, 2010, RER - single passenger 1 - High Bus-city distance (return)  2.5 pkm modal split of 8.7% and average return distance of 29 km Travel surveys ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, regular bus, CH (6057) 1 - High Bus- coach distance (return)  17 pkm modal split of 6.4% and average return distance of 263 km Travel surveys ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, coach, CH (6058) 1 - High Plane (economy) distance (return)  137 pkm modal split of 4.9% and average return distance of 2795 km Travel surveys ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, aircraft, passenger, RER (1895) 1 - High FUNCTIONAL UNIT  OPPONENT TEAM TRAVEL Per opponent team member (at home) attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event. Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 370 5,500 1.60E-04 43 1,400 the assumptions are quite accurate. In some sports — such as in golf, track, and swimming, UBC hosts tournaments where a large number of teams participate. The participation numbers and travel details for these were not available.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  25 STAFF TRAVEL FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Walk distance (return)  1 pkm modal split of 20% and average return distance of 3 km Travel surveys Zero impact assumed 2 - Acc Bike distance (return)  1 pkm modal split of 5% and average return distance of 5 km Travel surveys ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, bicycle, CH (11342) 2 - Acc Car distance (return)  2 pkm modal split of 25% and average return distance of 26 km /  vehicle occupancy rate of 3.1 Travel surveys Custom ecoinvent EF - transport, passenger car, petrol, eet average, 2010, RER - single passenger 2 - Acc Bus-city distance (return)  18 pkm modal split of 50% and average return distance of 36 km Travel surveys ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, regular bus, CH (6057) 2 - Acc Bus- coach distance (return)  0 pkm modal split of 0% and average return distance of 0 km Travel surveys ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, coach, CH (6058) 2 - Acc UBC TEAM TRAVEL AT AWAY GAMES FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Bus- coach distance (return)  450 pkm modal split of 100% and average return distance of 450 km UBC A&R ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, coach - CH (6058) 1 - High Plane (economy) distance (return)  3,300 pkm modal split of 100% and average return distance of 3322 km UBC A&R ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, aircraft, passenger - RER (1895) 1 - High UBC TEAM TRAVEL AT UBC HOME GAMES FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Walk distance (return)  1 pkm modal split of 20% and average return distance of 3 km Estimate based on sta travel Zero impact assumed 2 - Acc Bike distance (return)  1 pkm modal split of 5% and average return distance of 5 km Estimate based on sta travel ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, bicycle, CH (11342) 2 - Acc Car distance (return)  2 pkm modal split of 25% and average return distance of 26 km /  vehicle occupancy rate of 3.1 Estimate based on sta travel Custom ecoinvent EF - transport, passenger car, petrol, eet average, 2010, RER - single passenger 2 - Acc Bus-city distance (return)  18 pkm modal split of 50% and average return distance of 36 km Estimate based on sta travel ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, regular bus, CH (6057) 2 - Acc Bus- coach distance (return) 0 pkm modal split of 0% and average return distance of 0 km Estimate based on sta travel ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, coach, CH (6058) 2 - Acc OPPONENT TEAM TRAVEL AT UBC HOME GAMES FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Bus- coach distance (return)  273 pkm modal split of 100% and average return distance of 450 km UBC A&R ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, coach - CH (6058) 2 - Acc Plane (economy) distance (return)  2,800 pkm modal split of 100% and average return distance of 3322 km UBC A&R ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, aircraft, passenger - RER (1895) 2 - AccL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 26 Currently, UBC A&R does not track either the amount of waste generated at their games, or the % recycled and composted. Since the amount of waste generated by UBC A&R events and associated activities is relatively small in terms of the overall impact, it was deemed not to be feasible to carry out a detailed waste audit at each of the 14 game venues. The waste generated per person is therefore based on an audit carried out in a pilot study by Dolf et al. on an individual UBC A&R Basketball Game [5]. On-site observation at a number of events highlighted that there were few bins for recycling and none for composting. It is recommended that an audit be carried out in future and be included as part of regular reporting. Waste includes all on–site garbage at the events. O–site waste (i.e. for hotels and oces) are included separately in those sections. Impacts include transport to end-of-life as well as end- of-life treatment. For recycling, a cut-o, no benets approach is applied to avoid giving credits to both the organization recycling the waste and the organization using the recycled material. This helps avoid the issue of whether 100% of waste sent to recycling actually gets recycled. KEY FIGURES Total waste generated by event participants: 2,400 kg UBC recycling rate: 35% UBC composting rate: 8% Data Assumptions and Sources FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCES ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Municipal waste 0.029 kg 0.05 kg of waste per person per event * 57% of waste to landll Basketball pilot study (Dolf et al. 2011) & UBC Sustainability Oce for recycling % ecoinvent 2.2 - disposal, municipal solid waste, 22.9% water, to landll [kg] - CH (2223) 2 - Acc Waste to recycling 0.018 kg No recycling credits UBC Sustainability Oce n/a 2 - Acc Waste to compost 0.002 kg .08 kg / 2.33 mass conversion. 2.33 kg fresh organics to produce 1 kg compost Amount: UBC Sustainability Oce. Compost conversion: Boldrin et al., 2010 ecoinvent 2.2 - compost, at plant [kg] - CH (58) 2 - Acc Transport to landll 0.860 kgkm Delta landll is 30 km (one way) from UBC Google Maps Quantis EF - transport, 53’ dry van (Class 8) [tkm] - NA 2 - Acc Transport to recycling 0.350 kgkm Assume 20 km trip (one way) to recycling plant Estimate Quantis EF - transport, 53’ dry van (Class 8) [tkm] - NA 1 - High Transport to compost 0.004 kgkm Assume 1 km trip (one-way) to compost plant (at UBC) UBC Sustainability Oce Quantis EF - transport, 53’ dry van (Class 8) [tkm] - NA 1 - High FUNCTIONAL UNIT Waste generated per participant attending an average UBC Thunderbirds event. IMPACTS PER FUNCTIONAL UNIT Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water  (L) 0.017 0.014 1.10E-09 3.50E-04 0.014 WasteL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  27 UBC Thunderbirds compete in 14 dierent venues at UBC that are wholly owned and operated by UBC A&R. While the venues were designed primarily for varsity team competitions, a signicant portion of the use is actually for other purposes including community programs, recreational events, and oce lease space. The annual impacts of each venue are calculated based on the period of September 1, 2010 - September 1, 2011. To determine impacts for a specic use or time period, an hourly or daily use can then be applied accordingly. A detailed list of specic data and sources are listed in this section for each venue. The following indicators describe how the venue data are translated into environmental impacts. Data Assumptions and Sources The following tables outline the common ows applied for UBC A&R buildings, elds, and chemical use. Specic data, sources, and impacts for each venue are itemized in Chapter ‘3.2 Thunderbirds Venues’ on page 29. BUILDINGS FOR ONE YEAR OF OPERATION FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY *Building construction materials - hall see sect. 3.2 m2 Applied to buildings with primarily large open spaces, i.e. gym, pool, arena ecoinvent 2.2 - building, hall, steel construction - CH (547) 3 - Low *Building construction materials - multi-storey see sect. 3.2 m3 Applied to buildings similar to a typical concrete multi-story oce building ecoinvent 2.2 - building, multi-storey RER (549) 3 - Low Electricity see sect. 3.2 kWh For lighting, plug loads, heating Quantis EF - Electricity, medium voltage, at grid/ BC [kWh] - BC (N-A Background) 1 - High Fuels (natural gas) see sect. 3.2 MJ For heating and hot water. UBC buildings primarily use natural gas ecoinvent 2.2 - natural gas, burned in boiler modulating >100kW [MJ] - RER (1362) 1 - High Steam see sect. 3.2 MJ Natural gas Conversion: 1 lb steam = 1.055 MJ energy. Steam conversion eciency 78% and transport loss to building 25% ecoinvent 2.2 - natural gas, burned in boiler modulating >100kW [MJ] - RER (1362) 1 - High Water see sect. 3.2 L Water from Metro Vancouver ecoinvent 2.2 - tap water, at user [kg] - RER (2288) 1 - High Wastewater see sect. 3.2 m3 Assume all water goes to wastewater ecoinvent 2.2 - treatment, sewage, to wastewater treatment, class 2 [m3] - CH (2276) 3 - Low Waste see sect. 3.2 kg 4 kg waste per m2 per year of building area. 57% to landll, 35% to recycling, 8% to compost, includes transport ecoinvent 2.2 - Custom EF - 1 kg average waste [kg] - UBC (custom) 3 - Low *Note that depending on the building type, either the “hall” or “multi-storey” ow is applied. Venues FUNCTIONAL UNIT Operation of each UBC venue for 1 year. IMPACTS PER FUNCTIONAL UNIT Please refer to ‘3.2 Thunderbirds Venues’ on page 29 for a break-down for each venue.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 28 GRASS FIELDS  ANNUAL OPERATION FOR 1 FIELD FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Fuel (tractors) see 3.2 MJ L fuel x 37.2 energy value into MJ ecoinvent 2.2 - diesel, burned in diesel-electric generating set [MJ] - GLO (1544) 1 - High Water (irrigation) see 3.2 L All water from Metro Vancouver tap water ecoinvent 2.2 - tap water, at user [kg] - RER (2288) 1 - High Fertilizers see 3.2 kg Fertilizer 18-18-18 & Fertilizer 23-3-23 ecoinvent 2.2 - fertilizer [kg] - GLO (custom) 2 - Acc SYNTHETIC FIELDS  FOR 1 SQUARE METER OF SYNTHETIC FIELD FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Sand for base 22.00 kg Impact allocated over 10 years Turf manufacturer ecoinvent 2.2 - silica sand, at plant [kg] - DE (479) 2 - Acc Synthetic grass 1.29 kg Impact allocated over 10 years Turf manufacturer ecoinvent 2.2 - Steel at plant + sheet rolling + cold impact extrusion + manufacturing 2 - Acc Primary backing 0.27 kg Impact allocated over 10 years Turf manufacturer ecoinvent 2.2 - packaging glass, green, at regional storage, CH (825) 2 - Acc Rubber pellets 16.65 kg Impact allocated over 10 years Turf manufacturer ecoinvent 2.2 - polyethylene, HDPE at plant + injection moulding 2 - Acc Secondary coating 0.61 kg Impact allocated over 10 years Turf manufacturer ecoinvent 2.2 - textiles, woven cotton, at plant, GLO (10177) 2 - Acc Waste 18.82 kg Impact allocated over 10 years Turf manufacturer ecoinvent 2.2 - disposal, plastics, mixture, 15.3% water, to sanitary landll [kg] - CH (2230) 2 - Acc Transport from distribution centre to venue 10,205 kgkm Impact allocated over 10 years Turf manufacturer Quantis EF - transport, 53' dry van (Class 8) [tkm] - NA 2 - Acc Transport to landll 565 kgkm Impact allocated over 10 years Quantis guidelines for average transport in NA market Quantis EF - transport, 53' dry van (Class 8) [tkm] - NA 2 - Acc POOL CHEMICALS  ANNUAL OPERATION FOR THE AQUATIC CENTRE  INDOOR & OUTDOOR POOL FLOW DATA UNIT ASSUMPTIONS DATA SOURCE ENVIRONMENTAL FACTOR QUALITY Sodium Hypochlorite 105,000 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - sodium hypochlorite, 15% in H2O, at plant [kg] - RER (337) 1 - High Calcium chloride 14,000 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - calcium chloride, CaCl2, at regional storage [kg] - CH (260) 1 - High Sodium Bicarbonate 28,000 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - sodium carbonate from ammonium chloride production, at plant [kg] - GLO (7246) 1 - High Sodium thio sulfate 100 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - sodium sulphate, powder, production mix, at plant [kg] - RER (343) 1 - High Calcium Hypochlorite 300 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - calcium chloride, from hypochlorination of allyl chloride, at plant [kg] - RER (6255) 1 - High Soda ash 50 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - soda, powder, at plant [kg] - RER (325) 1 - High Cyanuric Acid 100 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - acetic acid from butane, at plant [kg] - RER (6607) 1 - High Muriatic acid 37,440 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - hydrochloric acid, 30% in H2O, at plant [kg] - RER (282) 1 - High Diatomaceous earth 35,000 kg Annual use UBC Pool Manager ecoinvent 2.2 - silica sand, at plant [kg] - DE (479) 1 - High Chemical transport 158,392,800 kgkm Assume 720 km travel from regional storage Quantis guidelines for NA market ecoinvent 2.2 - transport, 53' dry van (Class 8) [tkm] - NA (Quantis EF) 1 - HighL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  29 3.2 Thunderbirds Venues UBC A&R manages seven buildings and approximately 14 athletic elds, of which 4 are synthetic. They are grouped in two clusters on the UBC campus (see map Figure 15). The John M.S. Lecky Boathouse for rowing is located o-campus approximately 15 kilometers to the southeast. This section provides an overview of annual impacts for each UBC venue used by the Varsity teams. The purpose is to both provide the key parameters used to measure impacts and at the same time to provide a baseline for the 2011/12 season. When examining the environmental impacts of an individual event or team, Quantis SUITE 2.0 can apply daily or hourly impacts derived from annual facility impacts. Refer to ‘Venues’ on page 27 for an overview of how impacts were derived. The sports teams of Cross Country running, Skiing, Golf, and Softball do not have any events hosted at UBC and make use of external venues. Impacts of these venues are considered out of scope both because they are not owned and managed by UBC A&R and because the few hours of use are negligible compared to other impacts. The annual impacts for the following 14 UBC A&R event venues are modelled in Quantis SUITE 2.0 for the 2011/12 season: •	 Aquatics Centre & Empire Pool [swimming] •	 Baseball diamond [Baseball] •	 Doug Mitchell Thunderbird Arena [Ice Hockey] •	 John M.S. Lecky Boathouse [Rowing] •	 Rashpal Dhillon Oval [Track & Field] •	 Wolfson Fields and Rugby Pavilion [Rugby] •	 Student Recreation Centre [Multi-use] •	 Thunderbird Stadium [American football] •	 UBC Tennis Centre [Tennis] •	 Varsity Soccer Field [Soccer] •	 War Memorial Gym [Basketball & Volleyball] •	 Warren Soccer Field [Soccer] •	 Wolfson Fields and Pavilion [Rugby] •	 Wright Field [Field Hockey] Figure 15: Location of Athletics Facilities on the UBC Campus Continuous tracking of key venue numbers such as energy, waste, chemical, and water usage will allow both for further renement of the accuracy of these impacts as well as future benchmarking. A comparison of venue impacts follows.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 30 Water Total direct water use by venues for the baseline year September 1, 2010 to September 1, 2011 was 190M Liters. As a comparison, in 2009 UBC purchased 4.3B liters of water [27]. Figure 16 shows the annual water use break-down by venue. The synthetic elds (Warren, Varsity, and the Baseball Diamond use signicantly less water than grass elds. The rugby pavilion has a proportionally very large water use compared to the other facilities. It is not clear why this is and this should be investigated further. It is important to stress that this gure shows ‘direct’ water use, as opposed to ‘indirect’ use, which includes water withdrawal associated with the full supply chain including venue construction, energy use, etc. The venue impacts in this section include both ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ water withdrawal. Figure 16: Direct water (L) use by UBC A&R Venues from September, 2010 to September, 2011 Figure 17: Energy (kWh) use in UBC A&R Venues from September, 2010 to September, 2011 Energy Total energy use by venues for predominantly heating, lighting, and plug loads for the baseline year was approximately 16 GWh, of which 8 GWh was electricity, 7.8 GWh steam, and 365 MWh natural gas (note that natural gas is also used to generate the steam and was factored in the impact assessment). Figure 17 shows the energy use break-down by venue. It should be noted that the elds with lights use approximately 1 MWh each of electricity, however this amount is too small to show up on the chart.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  31 Carbon The total carbon footprint for venues is approximately 6,000 tonnes of CO2–eq. The results are fairly proportional to energy use by the venues. A notable exception is the relatively lower impact of the Doug Mitchell Arena, largely because a larger percentage of its energy use is hydro electricity. The Aquatic Centre, due to its higher energy use for pool heating, is the largest carbon emitter, more than 3 times that of any other venue. Figure 18: GHG Emissions of UBC A&R Venues from September, 2010 to September, 2011 Figure 19: Ecosystem Quality impacts of UBC A&R Venues from September, 2010 to September, 2011 Ecosystem Quality The total ecosystem quality impact for venues is 1,800,00 PDF•m2•yr.	 There	 is	 a	 significant	 change	 in	 relative	 impacts	 for this category compared with energy, water, and energy use. In most cases, this appears to be due to the relatively higher ecosystems impacts related to venue construction and materials. Contributions from wastewater to this damage category are also signicant in a number of venues.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 32 Human Health The total human health impact is approximately 3.2 disability adjusted life years (DALY’s). As in the ecosystem quality category, the Doug Mitchell Arena, the War Memorial Gym, the Student Recreation Centre, and the Thunderbird Stadium gure most prominently. For the synthetic elds, the construction materials are the largest contributor to this category. For the grass elds, the fuel use for eld maintenance is also quite signicant. Figure 21: GHG Emissions of UBC A&R Venues from September, 2010 to September, 2011 Figure 20: Resource Impacts of UBC A&R Venues from September, 2010 to September, 2011 Resources The total resources impact by venues is 100,000,000 MJ of primary (non-renewable) energy. The Aquatic Centre is the major contributor to this category, followed by the remaining buildings. The elds contribute a relatively small impact in comparison to the buildings. The resources category is typically very closely tied to the climate change category.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  33 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 3,100,000 55,000,000 0.840 430,000 73,000,000 INTERPRETATION The results represent combined impacts from the Aquatic Centre, consisting of an indoor facility housing a 50 meter pool, and the 50 meter outdoor Empire Pool. The total impact for this venue is quite signicant; in the climate change and water withdrawal damage categories the Aquatic Centre impact is roughly equivalent to all the other facilities combined. Hydro electricity and steam for heating are major contributors in the categories of climate change, resources, human health, and ecosystem quality (88%, 90%, 52% and 33% respectively). Much of the steam use goes to pool heating, particularly for the year- round heating of the uncovered outdoor pool. UBCs planned conversion of steam to a hot water heating system should lead to a reduction in overall energy use. Construction materials contribute less than 5% each for climate change, resources, and water withdrawal; but more signicantly to human health and ecosystem quality at 26% and 33% respectively. The assumptions are based on average construction materials per m2 of a typical building, which is not necessarily representative of a swimming pool. A relatively large amount of pool chemicals are used per year; this translates into contributions of 15% for human health, 14% for ecosystem quality and 17% for water withdrawal. Waste impacts are negligible at under 1% for all categories. Wastewater impacts in the human health (6%) and ecosystem quality (16%) categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that 75% of water becomes wastewater, with 25% lost to evaporation and leakage. The pool uses approximately 48 million liters of municipal tap water. Including indirect water withdrawal from other areas, the total impact is 73 million liters. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s & Women’s Swimming •	 Year built: 1978 1 •	 Anticipated life span: 40 years 2 •	 Spectator seating capacity: 2,500 1 •	 Venue area: 7,688 m2 (AC) & 1,314 m2 (Empire) 3 •	 Venue volume: 26,429 m3 (AC) 3 •	 Floors: 3 3 •	 Primary construction materials: Concrete 3 •	 Grid electricity: 1,546,800 kWh (AC) 4 •	 Steam: 3,361,318 kWh (AC) & 2,546,594 kWh (Empire) 4 •	 Water: 48,903,000 L 4 •	 Overlay materials: negligible •	 Waste: 105,716 kg 5 •	 Maintenance (pool chemicals): •	 Sodium hypochlorite: 105,000 kg 6 •	 Calcium chloride: 14,000 kg 6 •	 Diatomaceous earth: 35,000 kg 6 •	 Sodium bicarbonate: 28,000 kg 6 •	 Sodium thio sulfate: 100 kg 6 •	 Calcium hypochlorite: 300 kg 6 •	 Soda ash: 50 kg 6 •	 Muriatic acid: 37,440 kg 6 •	 Cyanuric acid: 100 kg 6 1 Source: www.athletics.ubc.ca 2 Source: UBC A&R Facilities Manager 3  Source: UBC Campus & Community Planning & UBC LiDar 4 Source: UBC Utilities 5 Estimate based on UBC average of 4 kg waste per m2 per year (source: UBC Sustainability Oce) 6 Source: UBC Aquatics facilities manager Aquatic Centre + Empire Pool [Swimming]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 34 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 60,000 1,900,000 3.70E-02 10,100 2,880,000 INTERPRETATION The Baseball Diamond consists of a synthetic grass eld and has no permanent facilities attached. Electricity contributes 6% or less of the impact to all damage categories. These impacts come mainly from the use of hydro electricity for eld lighting. Construction materials are the primary impact across all categories at 94%, 97%, 85%, 89%, and 76% for climate change, resources, human health, ecosystem quality, and water withdrawal respectively. Within the materials used to construct the synthetic eld, rubber contributes over 80% of the impact in all categories. Although the turf manufacturer reported using recycled rubber, the LCA process used is based on virgin rubber and therefore these results likely represent a higher impact. Also, information from the turf manufacturer was only provided for one average eld type; the material composition of individual elds may vary. The impacts from water irrigation and chemical fertilizer use are minor as they are only applied to the real grass on the eld periphery. Waste impacts are negligible. Fuel use by tractors for eld maintenance contribute 9% to human health and 1-2% to the remaining categories. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s Baseball •	 Year built: 2008 •	 Anticipated life span: 10 years 1 •	 Spectator seating capacity: None •	 Venue area: 10,426 m2 1 •	 Field type: Synthetic grass •	 Grid electricity (eld lighting): 11,400 kWh 2 •	 Water (for irrigation): 600,000 L 2 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: Negligible •	 Construction materials: •	 Grass (polyethylene): 1.288 kg per m2 3 •	 Primary backing (polypropylene): 0.271 kg per m2 3 •	 Secondary coating .61 kg per m2 3 •	 Sand 22 kg per m2 3 •	 Rubber 16.65 kg per m2 3 •	 Field maintenance: •	 Diesel: 1,800 L 4 •	 Fertilizer 23-3-23: 400 kg 4 1 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 2  Source: UBC Utilities 3 Estimate based on information from turf manufacturer 4 Source: UBC A&R maintenance Baseball Diamond [Baseball]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  35 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 950,000 14,000,000 9.10E-01 450,000 26,000,000 INTERPRETATION The Doug Mitchell Arena houses three ice hockey rinks, oce space, a tness area, and multi-purpose rooms. The new addition of a 6,000 seat arena built to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Design) Silver specications was added in 2008 to the two existing ice hockey arenas. Electricity and heating are the largest contributors to the impact categories of climate change, resources, human health, and ecosystem quality was energy use for electricity and heating (74%, 77%, 69% and 52% respectively). This is primarily due to hydro electricity for lighting and plug loads as well as some natural gas use for heating. Construction materials contribute approximately 19% to climate change. The assumptions are based on average construction materials per square meter of a typical building, which is not necessarily representative of an ice hockey arena. The LEED Silver design specications suggest that it likely has a lower construction–related impact than typical ice hockey arenas. Wastewater impacts in the human health (8%) and ecosystem quality (24%) categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that 100% of water becomes wastewater. Waste impacts, although likely overestimated, contribute less than 5% of the impacts in all categories. Tap water makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts at 84%, with the remainder associated with water requirements of the other areas. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s & Women’s Ice Hockey •	 Year built: 2008 1 •	 Anticipated life span: 60 years 2 •	 Spectator capacity: 5,000 1 •	 Venue area: 36,410 m2 3 •	 Venue volume: not available •	 Floors: 3 3 •	 Primary construction materials: Concrete 3 •	 Grid electricity: 4,361,241 kWh 4 •	 Natural gas: 133,042 kWh 4 •	 Water: 19,070,000 L 4 •	 Overlay materials: negligible •	 Waste: 145,640 kg 5 1 Source: www.athletics.ubc.ca 2 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 3  Source: UBC Campus & Community Planning 4 Source: UBC Utilities 5 Estimate based on UBC average of 4 kg waste per m2 per year (source: UBC Sustainability Oce) *Note: Cooling systems is ammonia based Doug Mitchell Arena [Ice Hockey]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 36 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 82,000 1,400,000 4.10E-02 33,000 4,600,000 INTERPRETATION The John M. S. Lecky Boathouse is located outside of the UBC Campus, approximately 15 km to the Southeast. Electricity and heating are the largest contributors for the impact potential categories of climate change at 91% and resources at 93%. This is largely due to grid electricity for lighting and plug loads, and natural gas for heating. Construction materials contribute approximately 4% to climate change, 4% to resources, 11% to human health, 8% to ecosystem quality, and 2% to water withdrawal respectively. The assumptions are based on average construction materials per square meter of a typical building, which is not necessarily representative of this boathouse. Due to the use of primarily wood materials and the relatively low amount of materials per m2, the construction impacts are likely overestimated. Waste contributes a negligible impact. Wastewater impacts in the human health (38%) and ecosystem quality (67%) categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that 100% of water becomes wastewater. Direct water use from tap water makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts of the supply chain. Wastewater impacts in the human health and ecosystem quality categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens.  FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s & Women’s Rowing •	 Year built: 2006 1 •	 Anticipated life span: 40 years 2 •	 Spectator capacity: 192 1 •	 Venue area: 540 m2 3 •	 Venue volume: not available •	 Floors: 2 3 •	 Primary construction materials: Wood 3 •	 Grid electricity: 100,010 kWh 3 •	 Natural gas: 231,056 kWh 3 •	 Water: 3,855,000 L 4 •	 Overlay materials: negligible •	 Waste: 2,160 kg 5 1 Source: www.athletics.ubc.ca 2 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 3  Source: Boathouse facilities manager 4 Source: UBC Utilities 5 Estimate based on UBC average of 4 kg waste per m2 per year (source: UBC Sustainability Oce) John M. S. Lecky Boathouse [Rowing]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  37 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 7,300 120,000 1.20E+05 2,600 4,200,000 INTERPRETATION The Rashpal Dhillon Oval consists of a synthetic track surrounding a grass eld in the centre. No permanent buildings are attached. Electricity contributes 24% for climate change, 23% for resources, 20% for human health, 23% for ecosystem quality, and <1% for water withdrawal. These impacts can be attributed to the use of hydro electricity for eld lighting. Construction materials are the primary impact for all categories at 16%, 23%, 9%, 8%, and <1% for climate change, resources, human health, ecosystem quality, and water withdrawal respectively. The material break-down of the track was not available and therefore an estimate is made for sand and rubber based on the composition of the other synthetic eld types. It is recommended that further investigation be undertaken to determine the construction materials present in this venue. No construction materials are attributed to the natural grass eld portion of this venue. The impacts from chemical – fertilizer use for the grass eld are 25% for climate change, 20% for resources, 13% for human health, 15% for ecosystem quality, and 1% for water withdrawal. Waste impacts are negligible. Fuel use by tractors for eld maintenance contribute 19% for climate change, 17% for resources, 49% for human health, 9% for ecosystem quality, and <1% for water withdrawal. Tap water makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts at 99%, with the remainder associated with water requirements of the other areas. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s & Women’s Track •	 Year built: 2009 •	 Anticipated life span: 10 years 1 •	 Spectator capacity: None •	 Venue area: 10,426 m2 1 •	 Field type: Rubber track & grass eld •	 Grid electricity (eld lighting): 11,400 kWh 2 •	 Water (for irrigation): 3,681,000 L 2 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: Negligible •	 Construction materials (for track) •	 Sand: 22 kg per m2 3 •	 Rubber: 16.65 kg per m2 3 •	 Field maintenance: •	 Diesel: 400 L 4 •	 Fertilizer 23-3-23: 1,000 kg 4 •	 Fertilizer 18-18-18: 250 kg 4 •	 Lime: 1,680 kg 4 1 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 2  Source: UBC Utilities 3 Estimate based on information from turf manufacturer 4 Source: UBC A&R maintenance Rashpal Dhillon Oval [Track & Field]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 38 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 470,000 7,400,000 3.90E-01 240,000 13,000,000 INTERPRETATION The Student Recreation Centre is a multi-purpose building, housing tness gyms, basketball courts, martial arts studies, oce space, and tness rooms. It does not host a specic Thunderbirds team but it is used by them for training and tness purposes. Electricity and heating contribute 69% for climate change, 75% for resources, 38% for human health, 22% for ecosystem quality, and 1% for water withdrawal. This is primarily due to hydro electricity for lighting and plug loads as well as steam for heating. Construction materials contribute approximately 28% to climate change, 24% to resources, 53% to human health, 56% to ecosystem quality, and 22% to water withdrawal respectively. The assumptions are based on average construction materials per square meter of a typical building, which is not necessarily representative of this building. It is recommended that a future investigation be carried out to improve the accuracy of these estimations. Wastewater impacts in the human health (9%) and ecosystem quality (20%) categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that 100% of water becomes wastewater. Waste impacts, although likely overestimated, contribute less than 2% of the impacts in all categories. Tap water makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts at 76%, with the remainder associated with water requirements of the other areas. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: None •	 Year built: 1995 1 •	 Anticipated life span: 60 years 2 •	 Spectator capacity: none •	 Venue area: 6,790 m2 3 •	 Venue volume: 37,040 m3 4 •	 Floors: 3 3 •	 Primary construction materials: Concrete 3 •	 Grid electricity: 907,200 kWh 5 •	 Heating from steam: 444,770 kWh 5 •	 Water: 8,431,000 L 5 •	 Overlay materials: negligible •	 Waste: 27,160 kg 6 1 Source: www.athletics.ubc.ca 2 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 3  Source: UBC Campus & Community Planning 4  Source: UBC LiDar 5 Source: UBC Utilities 6 Estimate based on UBC average of 4 kg waste per m2 per year (source: UBC Sustainability Oce) Student Recreation Centre [Fitness, Multi-use]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  39 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 240,000 4,400,000 2.70E-01 170,000 19,000,000 INTERPRETATION The Thunderbird Stadium venue comprises cement stands with integrated oce spaces and a synthetic football eld. Electricity and heating contributed 31% for climate change, 26% for resources, 25% for human health, 16% for ecosystem quality, and <1% for water withdrawal. These impacts can be attributed to the use of hydro electricity for lights, plug loads, and heating. Construction materials for the eld contribute 25% for climate change, 43% for resources, 12% for human health, 5% for ecosystem quality, and 12% for water withdrawal. Construction materials for the building contribute 39%, 29%, 53%, 58%, and 10% respectively. The main impact for the synthetic is due to rubber. Although the turf manufacturer reported using recycled rubber, the LCA process used is based on virgin rubber and therefore these results likely represent a higher impact. Also, information from the turf manufacturer was only provided for one average eld type; the material composition of individual elds may vary. The impacts from chemical–fertilizers are minor contributors as they are primarily used for the real grass on the eld periphery. Waste impacts, although likely overestimated, contribute less than 2% of the impacts in all categories. Wastewater impacts in the human health (8%) and ecosystem quality (18%) categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that 40% of water is used by the stadium and becomes wastewater, whereas the 60% used for the eld does not become wastewater. Tap water makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts at 77%, with the remainder associated with water requirements of the other areas. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s Football •	 Year built: 1967 •	 Anticipated life span: 60 years 1 •	 Spectator capacity: 3,500 1 •	 Venue area: 3,156 m2 (building) & 11,250 m2 (eld) 1 •	 Venue volume: 26,608 m3 2 •	 Primary construction materials: Concrete •	 Field type: Synthetic grass •	 Grid electricity: 490,000 kWh 3 •	 Water: 12,969,000 L 3 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: 12,600 kg •	 Construction materials (for eld) •	 Grass (polyethylene): 1.288 kg per m2 4 •	 Primary backing (polypropylene): 0.271 kg per m2 4 •	 Secondary coating .61 kg per m2 4 •	 Sand 22 kg per m2 4 •	 Rubber 16.65 kg per m2 4 •	 Field maintenance: •	 Diesel: 200 L 5 •	 Fertilizer 23-3-23: 475 kg 5 •	 Fertilizer 18-18-18: 125 kg 5 1 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 2  Source: UBC LiDar 3  Source: UBC Utilities 4 Source: UBC A&R 5 Source: UBC A&R maintenance Thunderbird Stadium [Football]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 40 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 89,000 1,200,000 8.00E-02 38,000 1,900,000 INTERPRETATION The UBC Tennis Centre was built in September, 2011 and consists of six indoor tennis courts, oces, and a viewing area. Electricity and heating contribute 46% for climate change, 54% for resources, 47% for human health, 37% for ecosystem quality, and <1% for water withdrawal. This is primarily due to hydro electricity for lighting and plug loads as well as natural gas for heating. Construction materials contribute approximately 42% to climate change, 45% to resources, 47% to human health, 46% to ecosystem quality, and 39% to water withdrawal respectively. The assumptions are based on average construction materials per square meter of a typical building, which is not necessarily representative of this building since it is an open structure with few walls. It is recommended that a future investigation be carried out to improve the accuracy of these estimations. Wastewater impacts in the human health (5%) and ecosystem quality (15%) categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that 100% of water becomes wastewater. Waste impacts, although likely overestimated, contribute 11% to climate change and less than 1% of the impacts in the other categories. Tap water makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts at 60%, with the remainder associated with water requirements of the other areas. A full year’s worth of water metering is not yet available and therefore an estimate is made based on the rst four months of usage. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s & Women’s Tennis •	 Year built: 2011 1 •	 Anticipated life span: 60 years 2 •	 Spectator capacity: none 1 •	 Venue area: 7,178 m2 3 •	 Venue volume: not available •	 Floors: 1 3 •	 Primary construction materials: Steel 3 •	 Grid electricity: 264,600 kWh 4 •	 Heating from natural gas: 540 kWh 4 •	 Water: 1,000,000 L 5 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: 29,000 kg 6 1 Source: www.athletics.ubc.ca 2 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 3  Source: UBC Campus & Community Planning 4 Source: UBC Utilities 5 Estimate based on average use of other UBC A&R buildings (water meter information not yet available) 6 Estimate based on UBC average of 4 kg waste per m2 per year (source: UBC Sustainability Oce) UBC Tennis Centre [Tennis]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  41 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 38,000 1,200,000 2.20E-02 6,200 1,400,000 INTERPRETATION The Varsity Soccer Field consists of a synthetic grass eld and has no permanent facilities attached. Electricity and heating contribute 10% or less of impacts to all damage categories. These impacts can be attributed to the use of hydro electricity for eld lighting. Construction materials are the primary impact for all categories at 95%, 97%, 90%, 89%, and 100% for climate change, resources, human health, ecosystem quality, and water withdrawal respectively. Within the materials used to construct the synthetic eld, rubber contributes over 80% of the impact in all categories. Although the turf manufacturer reported using recycled rubber, the LCA process used is based on virgin rubber and therefore these results likely represent a higher impact. Also, information from the turf manufacturer was only provided for one average eld type; the material composition of individual elds may vary. The impacts from water irrigation and chemical fertilizer use are minor as they are only applied to the real grass on the eld periphery. Waste impacts are negligible at under 0.1% for all categories. Fuel use by tractors for eld maintenance contribute 3% to the human health impact and less than 1% to the remaining categories. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s Soccer •	 Year built: 2008 •	 Anticipated life span: 10 years 1 •	 Spectator capacity: 300 1 •	 Venue area: 6,898 m2 1 •	 Field type: Synthetic grass •	 Grid electricity (eld lighting): 11,400 kWh 2 •	 Water (for irrigation): 0 L 2 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: Negligible •	 Construction materials (for eld) •	 Grass (polyethylene): 1.288 kg per m2 3 •	 Primary backing (polypropylene): 0.271 kg per m2 3 •	 Secondary coating .61 kg per m2 3 •	 Sand 22 kg per m2 3 •	 Rubber 16.65 kg per m2 3 •	 Field maintenance: •	 Diesel: 30 L 4 •	 Fertilizer 23-3-23: 75 kg 4 1 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 2  Source: UBC Utilities 3 Source: UBC A&R 4 Source: UBC A&R maintenance Varsity Field [Soccer]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 42 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 880,000 15,000,000 4.50E-01 300,000 17,000,000 INTERPRETATION The War Memorial Gymnasium consists of an indoor basketball/ volleyball gymnasium with spectator seats, oces, classrooms, and research laboratories. Electricity and heating contribute 75% for climate change, 81% for resources, 21% for human health, 10% for ecosystem quality, and 2% for water withdrawal. This is primarily due to hydro electricity for lighting and plug loads as well as steam for heating. Construction materials contribute approximately 22% to climate change, 18% to resources, 69% to human health, 68% to ecosystem quality, and 25% to water withdrawal respectively. The assumptions are based on average construction materials per m2 of a typical building, which is not necessarily representative of this building since it has a number of open spaces with few walls. It is recommended that a future investigation be carried out to improve the accuracy of these estimations. Wastewater impacts in the human health (10%) and ecosystem quality (21%) categories are a result of treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that 100% of water becomes wastewater. Waste impacts, although likely overestimated, contribute less than 2% of the impacts in all categories. Tap water makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts at 72%, with the remainder associated with water requirements of the other areas. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s & Women’s Basketball, Men’s & Women’s Volleyball •	 Year built: 1950 1 •	 Anticipated life span: 65 years 2 •	 Spectator capacity: 2,800 1 •	 Venue area: 12, 674 m2 3 •	 Venue volume: 61,082 m3 3 •	 Floors: 5 3 •	 Primary construction materials: Concrete 3 •	 Grid electricity: 275,000 kWh 4 •	 Heating from steam: 1,469,000 kWh 4 •	 Water: 10,840,000 L 4 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: 51,000 kg 5 1 Source: www.athletics.ubc.ca 2 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 3  Source: UBC Campus & Community Planning 4 Source: UBC Utilities 5 Estimate based on UBC average of 4 kg waste per m2 per year (source: UBC Sustainability Oce) War Memorial Gym [Basketball, Volleyball]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  43 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 31,000 970,000 1.80E-02 5,400 1,200,000 INTERPRETATION The Warren Soccer Field consists of a synthetic grass eld and has no permanent facilities attached Electricity and heating contribute 11% or less of impacts to all damage categories. These impacts can be attributed to the use of hydro electricity for eld lighting. Construction materials were the primary impact for all categories at 93%, 97%, 88%, 88%, and 100% for climate change, resources, human health, ecosystem quality, and water withdrawal respectively. Within the materials used to construct the synthetic eld, rubber contributes over 80% of the impact in all categories. Although the turf manufacturer reported using recycled rubber, the LCA process used is based on virgin rubber and therefore these results likely represent a higher impact. Also, information from the turf manufacturer was only provided for one average eld type; the material composition of individual elds may vary. The impacts from water irrigation and chemical fertilizer use are minor as they are only applied to the real grass on the eld periphery. Waste impacts are negligible at under 0.1% for all categories. Fuel use by tractors for eld maintenance contribute 3% to the human health impact and less than 1% to the remaining categories. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Women’s Soccer •	 Year built: 2008 •	 Anticipated life span: 10 years 1 •	 Spectator capacity: 300 1 •	 Venue area: 5,434 m2 1 •	 Field type: Synthetic grass •	 Grid electricity (eld lighting): 11,400 kWh 2 •	 Water (for irrigation): 0 L 2 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: Negligible •	 Construction materials (for track) •	 Grass (polyethylene): 1.288 kg per m2 3 •	 Primary backing (polypropylene): 0.271 kg per m2 3 •	 Secondary coating .61 kg per m2 3 •	 Sand 22 kg per m2 3 •	 Rubber 16.65 kg per m2 3 •	 Field maintenance: •	 Diesel: 31 L 4 •	 Fertilizer 23-3-23: 75 kg 4 1 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 2  Source: UBC Utilities 3 Estimate based on information from turf manufacturer 4 Source: UBC A&R maintenance Warren Field [Soccer]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 44 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 19,000 275,000 5.50E-02 66,000 16,000,000 INTERPRETATION The Rugby venue comprises two grass elds and a small wood frame pavilion with locker rooms and oce space. Electricity and heating contribute 30% for climate change, 31% for resources and less than 10% in the other categories. This is primarily due to hydro electricity for lighting, plug loads, and heating. Construction materials contribute 11% to climate change, 10% to resources, 5% to human health, 2% to ecosystem quality, and <1% to water withdrawal respectively. The assumptions are based on average construction materials per square meter of a typical building, which is not necessarily representative of this venue. It is recommended that a future investigation be carried out to improve the accuracy of these estimations. The impacts from chemical fertilizer use for the grass eld are 8% for climate change, 7% for resources, 2% for human health, 1% for ecosystem quality, and <1% for water withdrawal. Waste impacts, although likely overestimated, contribute less than 3% of the impacts in all categories Wastewater impacts contribute 19% for climate change, 18% for resources, 73% for human health and 87% for ecosystem quality. Wastewater impacts are large compared to other venues due to the high water consumption for the relatively small pavilion. Impacts include treatment of wastewater contents and the associated infrastructure materials, transports, and land use burdens. This scenario assumes that only the water used by the pavilion becomes wastewater; the water for irrigation is evaporated of drains naturally. Tap water used by the pavilion makes up the largest portion of the water withdrawal impacts at 72%, followed by 27% from water for irrigation. The remainder is associated with water requirements of the other areas. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s & Women’s Rugby •	 Year built: 1963 •	 Anticipated life span: 50 years 1 •	 Spectator capacity: 3,500 1 •	 Venue area: 376 m2 2 (pavilion) & 13,796 m2 (elds) 1 •	 Venue volume (pavilion): 1,309 m3 2 •	 Floors: 1 2 •	 Primary construction materials: Wood 2 •	 Field type: Grass •	 Grid electricity (pavilion): 36,700 kWh 3 •	 Water: 10,017,000 L (pavilion) & 7,525,000 L (elds) 3 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: 1,500 kg 5 •	 Field maintenance: •	 Diesel: 600 L 6 •	 Fertilizer 23-3-23: 1,500 kg 6 •	 Fertilizer 18-18-18: 500 kg 6 •	 Lime: 3,600 kg 6 1 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 2  Source: UBC Campus and Community Planing & UBC LiDar 3  Source: UBC Utilities (electricity gure missing, estimate for pavilion based on 100 kWh per m2 based on usage of other Athletics buildings) 4 Source: UBC A&R 5 Estimate based on UBC average of 4 kg waste per m2 per year (source: UBC Sustainability Oce) 5 Source: UBC A&R maintenance Wolfson Fields & Pavilion [Rugby] Photo by Komail NaqviL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  45 IMPACTS FOR ONE YEAR  SEPT 2011/12 Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 17,000 300,000 7.80E-03 2,200 5,100,000 INTERPRETATION The Wright Field Hockey Field consists of a synthetic turf eld and has no permanent facilities attached. Electricity and heating contribute 11% to climate change, 9% to resources, 22% to human health, and 55% to ecosystem quality. These impacts can be attributed to the use of hydro electricity for eld lighting. Construction materials are the primary impact for most categories at 78%, 89%, 66%, 39%, and 99% for climate change, resources, human health, ecosystem quality, and water withdrawal respectively. Within the materials used to construct the synthetic eld, nylon for the synthetic grass contribute the majority of impacts in all categories. Information from the turf manufacturer was only provided for one average eld type; the material composition of individual elds may vary. The impacts from water irrigation and chemical fertilizer use are minor as they are only applied to the real grass on the eld periphery. Waste impacts are negligible at under 0.1% for all categories. Fuel use by tractors for eld maintenance contribute 11% to the human health impact and less than 5% to the remaining categories. FACTS & FIGURES (Based on annual consumption Sept. 2010 - Sept. 2011) •	 Varsity sports teams: Men’s Baseball •	 Year built: 2003 •	 Anticipated life span: 8 years 1 •	 Spectator capacity: none •	 Venue area: 5,973 m2 1 •	 Field type: Synthetic turf •	 Grid electricity (eld lighting): 11,400 kWh 2 •	 Water (for irrigation): 3,500,000 L 2 •	 Overlay materials: Negligible •	 Waste: Negligible •	 Construction materials (for track) •	 Grass (nylon): 2.046 kg per m2 3 •	 Primary backing (polypropylene): 0.26 kg per m2 3 •	 Secondary coating 0.186 kg per m2 3 •	 Sand 22 kg per m2 3 •	 Field maintenance: •	 Diesel: 40 L 4 •	 Fertilizer 23-3-23: 100 kg 4 1 Source: UBC A&R facilities manager 2  Source: UBC Utilities 3 Estimate based on information from turf manufacturer 4 Source: UBC A&R maintenance Wright Fields [Field Hockey]L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 46 3.3 Thunderbird Teams This section provides an overview of the environmental impacts attributed to each UBC Thunderbirds team for the 2011/12 season. Associated activity data is also included for: •	 average number of team members (if they vary signicantly between home and away games this is noted) •	 number of events (home, regular, playo) •	 % games played at home versus away •	 allocation of associated venue to the team (estimated on an annual % basis to cover unused time, practice times, rentals to other users, oce use, etc.) •	 number of annual spectators in attendance •	 total km travelled by the UBC team •	 total number of UBC hotel nights (per person) •	 total paper and waste generated CARBON FOOTPRINT PER TEAM The carbon footprint per team is shown in Figure 24 (next page). Travel dominates climate change impacts — and indeed all damage categories except water (see following pages for detailed impacts per team for all damage categories). Travel impacts are mostly due to long distance travel by the teams and spectators. Importantly, on a per team or per event basis, travel has a larger impact than venues because only a portion of the venue is allocated (see “Sensitivity Analysis” on page 60). Also, certain teams such as Baseball, Skiing, and Golf, don’t host any events at UBC and therefore have their venue impacts displaced to the host Universities. CARBON FOOTPRINT INTENSITY PER TEAM Figure 25 (next page) shows the carbon footprint intensity per participant for each team. Intensity is arrived at by dividing the total impact by the number of participants attending each team’s events over a season. UBC A&R has a mandate to increase the total number of spectators at events and therefore a key aim should be to reduce the intensity per person along with the total impact. The impact intensity per team varies signicantly and is aected by a number of factors including the number of games requiring long distance travel; the number of spectators and sta; the number of team members; the impact and use of the associated venue; and the number of home and away games. CARBON FOOTPRINT OF PARTICIPANT TRAVEL Participant travel is dominant for teams, however signicant variation exists between participant types. The total carbon footprint is dominated by spectators and teams, largely from air travel (Figure 22). On a per person basis (intensity), spectators and sta contribute less (Figure 23). This is due to the large amount of long-distance travel by teams. The discrepancy between UBC and opponent teams is explained by the fact that both home and away games are counted for UBC whereas only away games are counted for the visiting team (as dened by the system boundary). Figure 22: Carbon Footprint for total participants travelling to Thunderbird events in the 2011/12 season Figure 23: Carbon Footprint per typical participant travelling Thunderbird events in the 2011/12 seasonL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  47 Figure 24: Total Carbon Footprint for each Thunderbird team in the 2011/12 season. Figure 25: Carbon Footprint per typical participant (includes sta/spectator/team) of each Thunderbird team in the 2011/12 season.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 48 Baseball (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 110,000 1,800,000 6.70E-02 24,000 2,400,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 29 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 25 Regular / 11 Playo •	 Games played at home: None •	 Venue: Baseball Diamond (10% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 1,800 •	 UBC team travel: 11,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 22 •	 Paper: 50 kg •	 Waste generated: 120 kg Softball (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 110,000 1,800,000 6.70E-02 24,000 2,400,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 33 Regular / 4 Playo •	 Games played at home: None •	 Venue: Baseball Diamond (5% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: Not applicable •	 Total UBC team travel: 19,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 23 •	 Paper: 0 kg •	 Waste generated: 0 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  49 Basketball (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 560,000 8,600,000 2.50E-01 93,000 10,000,000 FACTS & FIGURES  (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 11 Exhibition / 19 Regular / 7 Playo •	 Games played at home: 52% •	 Venue: War Memorial Arena (5% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 12,000 •	 UBC team travel: 16,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 18 •	 Paper: 270 kg •	 Waste generated at events: 670 kg Basketball (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 250,000 3,800,000 1.20E-01 47,000 4,400,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 8 Exhibition / 17 Regular / 7 Playo •	 Games played at home: 44 % •	 Venue: War Memorial Arena (5% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 3,800 •	 UBC team travel: 13,000 km •	 UBC hotel nights: 19 •	 Paper: 90 kg •	 Waste generated at events: 230 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 50 Cross Country (Men, Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 34,000 540,000 2.40E-02 8,000 220,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 4 Regular / 4 Playo •	 Games played at home: 13 % •	 Venue: O-site (no venue allocation) •	 Spectators: 100 •	 UBC team travel: 6,400 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 4 •	 Paper: 0 kg •	 Waste generated: 0 kg Track and Field (Men, Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 140,000 2,100,000 6.70E-02 21,000 2,400,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 45 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 19 Regular / 3 Playo •	 Games played at home: 32 % •	 Venue: Rashpal Dhillon Oval (10% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 1,600 •	 UBC team travel: 13,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 9 •	 Paper: 50 kg •	 Waste generated: 120 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  51 Field hockey (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 54,000 840,000 3.00E-02 11,000 1,600,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 22 •	 Events: 4 Exhibition / 32 Regular / 0 Playo •	 Games played at home: 44 % •	 Venue: Wright Field (10% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 800 •	 UBC team travel: 4,400 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 6 •	 Paper: 30 kg •	 Waste generated: 80 kg Field Hockey (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 56,000 870,000 2.90E-02 10,000 1,300,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 22 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 12 Regular / 5 Playo •	 Games played at home: 55 % •	 Venue: Wright Field (10 % annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 600 •	 Travel UBC team travel: 4,500 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 11 •	 Paper: 20 kg •	 Waste generated: 40 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 52 Football (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 440,000 6,800,000 2.40E-01 95,000 10,000,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 100 (50 on the road) •	 Events: 1 Exhibition / 8 Regular / 2 Playo •	 Games played at home: 45 % •	 Venue: Thunderbird Stadium (20% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 6,200 •	 UBC team travel: 12,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 10 •	 Paper: 150 kg •	 Waste generated: 370 kg Tennis (Men, Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 29,000 430,000 1.50E-02 4,800 360,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 16 •	 Events: 4 Exhibition / 6 Regular / 3 Playo •	 Games played at home: 25 % •	 Venue: UBC Tennis Centre (1% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 200 •	 UBC team travel: 8,600 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 8 •	 Paper: 10 kg •	 Waste generated: 20 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  53 Golf (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 59,000 920,000 3.90E-02 12,000 360,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 6 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 16 Regular / 4 Playo •	 Games played at home: None •	 Venue: O-site (no venue allocation) •	 Spectators: Not applicable •	 UBC team travel: 17,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 30 •	 Paper: 0 kg •	 Waste generated: 0 kg Golf (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 41,000 640,000 2.20E-02 7,900 270,000  FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 6 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 16 Regular / 4 Playo •	 Games played at home: None •	 Venue: O-site (no venue allocation) •	 Spectators: Not applicable •	 UBC team travel: 27,000 km •	 Total UBC team hotel nights: 30 •	 Paper: 0 kg •	 Waste generated: 0 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 54 Ice Hockey (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 300,000 4,500,000 1.60E-01 61,000 5,100,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 27 •	 Events: 6 Exhibition / 29 Regular / 3 Playo •	 Games played at home: 37 % •	 Venue: Doug Mitchell Thunderbird Arena (5% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 3,500 •	 UBC team travel: 27,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 38 •	 Paper: 90 kg •	 Waste generated: 220 kg Ice Hockey (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 300,000 4,500,000 1.60E-01 59,000 4,700,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 6 Exhibition / 23 Regular / 0 Playo •	 Games played at home: 38 % •	 Venue: Doug Mitchell Thunderbird Arena (5% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 3,000 •	 UBC team travel: 27,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 24 •	 Paper: 80 kg •	 Waste generated: 190 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  55 Rowing (Men, Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 94,000 1,500,000 4.90E-02 19,000 1,400,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 40 •	 Events: 2 Exhibition / 6 Regular / 0 Playo •	 Games played at home: None •	 Venue: John M. S. Lecky Boathouse (20% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: Not applicable •	 UBC team travel: 12,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 16 •	 Paper: 0 kg •	 Waste generated: 0 kg Swimming (Men, Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 93,000 1,500,000 4.00E-02 15,000 1,400,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 13 Regular / 6 Playo •	 Games played at home: 16 % •	 Venue: Aquatic Centre (1% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 300 •	 UBC team travel: 11,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 16 •	 Paper: 10 kg •	 Waste generated: 20 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 56 Rugby (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 120,000 1,800,000 6.90E-02 27,000 3,000,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 31 •	 Events: 2 Exhibition / 9 Regular / 11 Playo •	 Games played at home: 36 % •	 Venue: Wolfson Fields & Rugby Pavilion  (10% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 800 •	 UBC team travel: 9,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 13 •	 Paper: 30 kg •	 Waste generated: 70 kg Rugby (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 40,000 620,000 2.70E-02 14,000 2,000,000  FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 22 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 4 Regular / 0 Playo •	 Games played at home: 75 % •	 Venue: Wolfson Fields & Rugby Pavilion (10% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 150 •	 UBC team travel: 100 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 3 •	 Paper: 10 kg •	 Waste generated: 20 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  57 Ski Alpine (Men, Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 20,000 320,000 1.30E-02 4,800 170,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 10 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 6 Regular / 7 Playo •	 Games played at home: None •	 Venue: O-site (no venue allocation) •	 Spectators: Not applicable •	 UBC team travel: 9,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 17 •	 Paper: 0 kg •	 Waste generated: 0 kg Ski Nordic (Men, Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 20,000 320,000 1.30E-02 4,800 170,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 10* •	 Events: 0* Exhibition / 6* Regular / 7* Playo •	 Games played at home: None •	 Venue: O-site (no venue allocation) •	 Spectators: Not applicable •	 UBC team travel: 9,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 17 •	 Paper: 0 kg •	 Waste generated: 0 kg *Note: Figures for Nordic Skiing team not available and therefore the same gures as the Alpine Skiing team are applied.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 58 Soccer (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 69,000 1,100,000 3.70E-02 12,000 1,100,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 21 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 14 Regular / 6 Playo •	 Games played at home: 35 % •	 Venue: Varsity Field (10% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 1,400 •	 UBC team travel: 5,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 11 •	 Paper: 20 kg •	 Waste generated: 50 kg Soccer (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 86,000 1,400,000 4.30E-02 14,000 1,100,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 22 •	 Events: 0 Exhibition / 12 Regular / 4 Playo •	 Games played at home: 44 % •	 Venue: Warren Field (10% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 700 •	 UBC team travel: 9,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 7 •	 Paper: 20 kg •	 Waste generated: 50 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  59 Volleyball (Men) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 270,000 4,100,000 1.30E-01 50,000 4,600,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 15 Exhibition / 20 Regular / 2 Playo •	 Games played at home: 29 % •	 Venue: War Memorial Gym (5% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 4,200 •	 UBC team travel: 31,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 28 •	 Paper: 100 kg •	 Waste generated: 250 kg Volleyball (Women) IMPACTS FOR 2011/12 SEASON Climate Change  (kg CO2–eq) Resources  (MJ Prim) Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF•m2•yr) Water Withdrawal (L) 290,000 4,500,000 1.30E-01 54,000 5,900,000 FACTS & FIGURES (For the Season Sept. 2011 - Sept. 2012) •	 Team members: 20 •	 Events: 6 Exhibition / 20 Regular / 7 Playo •	 Games played at home: 43 % •	 Venue: War Memorial Gym (5% annual allocation) •	 Spectators: 5,600 •	 UBC team travel: 17,000 km •	 UBC team hotel nights: 17 •	 Paper: 140 kg •	 Waste generated: 360 kgL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 60 4. Sensitivity Analysis LCA studies are required to perform a sensitivity analysis to test critical assumptions and parameters [16]. Since it is not feasible to carry out statistical uncertainty analysis on all parameters, the following are selected based on data uncertainty and potential to signicantly change results. Climate change is used since it contains the lowest uncertainty of the damage categories. VARYING THE ELECTRICITY GRID The UBC A&R venues reported using approximately 8,000 MWh of electricity in their venues. Figure 26 provides a comparison of dierent environmental factors across three dierent energy grids. This study applies an environmental factors for the BC Grid supplied by Quantis Intl (based on the Canadian LCI database under development). BC energy has a very low carbon footprint as it generates primarily hydro electricity. Applying the Canadian or North American grid averages would lead to substantially higher carbon emissions since they derive a higher percent of energy from coal, oil, gas, and nuclear sources. On the other hand, applying the environmental factor supplied by the BC Ministry of Environment guidelines for reporting on Public Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions (taken from BC Hydro) [2], leads to a much lower estimate of emissions for the BC Grid: a six fold dierence. Further investigation into these dierences is needed, however they are mostly attributable to the fact that imports and exports of energy are not included in the BC Ministry environmental factor. Figure 27 shows the carbon footprint proportion of the venues due to energy use. The current assumptions show that energy makes up approximately 15% of the total impact. Applying the Canadian Grid would increase this to 30% of the total and applying the NA Grid to 44%, holding all other assumptions constant. This sensitivity test shows that if other energy grid numbers are applied, the results would either decrease only slightly or increase quite signicantly. In all scenarios the total venues have the largest impact among organizational areas and should be a key area for impact reduction initiatives. TRAVEL OCCUPANCY RATE ESTIMATES The carbon footprint environmental factors (EF) for passenger travel use a per person km unit: GHG emissions = people (p) * distance (km) * EF (kg CO2-eq / pkm) For example, in the case of 100 spectators travelling by city bus to a UBC event, the equation would be: 100 p * 50 km (ave) * 0.104 kg CO2-eq = 520 kg CO2-eq A number of underlying assumptions aect how the vehicle EF is derived including occupancy rate, fuel type and eciency, and vehicle life. Vehicle occupancy in particular can aect results signicantly. Using background information supplied by the ecoinvent LCA database [7] and by Tuchschmid & Halder [21], we factor in the vehicle occupancy rate as follows: GHG emissions = people (p) * distance/person (km) * EF (kg CO2-eq/ vkm) / occupancy (p/v) For this study we gathered the vehicle occupancy rates for spectator and sta car travel and therefore modied the population average of 1.6 persons per vehicle to 2.7. Figure 26: Carbon Footprint comparison of environmental factors for energy grids in BC, Canada, and North America Figure 27: Carbon Footprint of various energy grid assumptions as a percent of the total venue impactL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  61 Figure 28: Carbon Footprints based on pessimistic, average and optimistic vehicle occupancy rates by mode Figure 29: Total Carbon Footprint using dierent occupancy scenarios for travel Figure 28 shows sensitivity of each mode of travel to changes in occupancy. The red marker shows the average rate, the upper bound shows the maximum occupancy rate possible (optimistic) and the lower bound shows a minimal (pessimistic rate). The considerable overlap of the ranges demonstrates the importance of obtaining accurate occupancy rates. As can be seen in Figure 29, when applying the three scenarios (pessimistic, average, and optimistic) to the total impact, the results range from an increase of 20% to a decrease of 6%. Sport events often have unique patterns due to the high volume of participants travelling over a short period of time. More research is needed to capture this both at UBC and at other events. VENUE ALLOCATION FOR TEAMS While we allocate 100% of venue use to UBC A&R overall impacts, results per team are based on assigning only a portion of venue use. This is because (a) venues are used by multiple teams, (b) venues are made available to other users, and (c) some of the venue space is allocated to other uses such as oces or classrooms. The Men’s Ice Hockey and Women’s Soccer teams are shown below with venue allocation scenarios varying between <1% and 100% compared to the allocations assumed for this study (5% and 10% respectively). The Ice Hockey Team is assigned a maximum of 50% of the venue because it shares the arena with the Women’s team. The sensitivity analysis shows that venue allocation changes results quite signicantly, increasing the overall team impact by up to 134% in the case of the Men’s Ice Hockey team and by 33% for the Women’s Soccer team. Figure 30: Contribution of Doug Mitchell Arena to Mens Ice Hockey Carbon Footprint based on allocation assumptions Figure 31: Contribution of Wright Field to Womens Soccer Carbon Footprint based on allocation assumptionsL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 62 5. Recommendations & Conclusions This study demonstrates that of all UBC A&R Thunderbirds activities over the 2011/2012 season examined here, the two organizational areas with the biggest climate change impacts are venues at 72% and travel at 24%. However, from the perspective of a single team or event, travel is the most signicant contributor. Future initiatives should therefore focus on mitigating the environmental impact of buildings — throughout their construction, operation, and end-of-life phases — and on travel distance and mode prioritization. On the other hand, other interventions still have symbolic value and could be considered as a means of gathering support for a comprehensive strategy. Such a comprehensive strategy would address all organizational areas. The following recommendations could form the basis of a detailed investigation and feasibility plan for sustainability initiatives. Recommendations are tied primarily to climate change results because this damage category is the most robust and because it has been identied as a priority area by UBC. It is recommended however, that any sustainability action plan include considerations for potential impacts across multiple damage categories. Recommendations by Organizational Area ACCOMMODATION Accommodation accounts for approximately 1.4% of the total carbon footprint. This is primarily due to energy use and construction materials of the hotels but includes travel impacts to and from the venues. To reduce impacts in this area, UBC A&R could designate hotels that are energy ecient and located close to the venue. UBC A&R could also set up agreements with their primary hotel to partner on impact reduction initiatives and to record data in order to prole their specic impacts. COMMUNICATION Although the carbon footprint of communication is relatively small at 0.2%, strategies to reduce the paper and non-recyclable/ non-compostable products nevertheless carry symbolic value. Possible strategies include: provide web-based tickets, event program and results; webcast games; target local spectators (of the events surveyed, only 14% came from campus); and use recycled / FSC certied / and chlorine free paper. One potential paper supplier of interest may be the new Canadian company Prairie Pulp & Paper. They are launching an 80% tree-free paper that is made from wheat straw waste, bleached with a chlorine- free process, and is certied by FSC and the Rainforest Alliance (www.prairie-paper.com). It may even make sense to increase the level of communication in order to encourage behaviour change and raise awareness of UBC A&Rs sustainability initiatives. Using athletes as a communication platform is often an eective way of raising visibility and engaging fans. FOOD Food is a small contributor in all categories at <1%, except in terms of water withdrawal, where it contributed 9% of the total. Environmental impacts of food are highly variable depending on the ingredients, farming method, climate, distance, etc. This study used a generic meal to represent food impacts, however UBC A&R  would benet from working with their food suppliers to track specic up-stream food sourcing information. Food at the events consists primarily of pre–packaged snacks such as chips, chocolate bars, and popcorn. Some venues also sell hot food, which consists primarily of high-fat and processed foods such as hot dogs, burgers, chicken ngers and french fries. Beverages sold on-site are primarily bottled soft-drinks, juices, beer, and wine. The environmental and health impacts of the food and beverages could be improved by promoting fresh, unpackaged, local, seasonal, organic foods, and low-meat options [10]. The UBC farm represents a unique opportunity to promote local ingredients produced on-site. The UBC CIRS building (Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability) has, for example, adopted a tiered strategy prioritizing local/organic/fresh food when available and feasible. Such an approach allows for exibility and improvements over time as suppliers adapt. Providing tap-water and reusable food and beverage containers could also reduce the impact. UBC A&R could tie into the UBC Food Services program that oers a 15 cent discount for using personal mugs or dishes [25]. Because A&R provides food sales through contractors and sponsors, we suggest that initiatives be developed in partnership with all key stakeholders. OFFICE This organizational area contributes 1.1% to the total carbon footprint, all of it due to employee commuting. All L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  63 other oce impacts were included within existing Athletics venues. In general we recommend that UBC A&R develop a sta sustainability program and nominate sustainability coordinators to put in place oce and transportation initiatives. The UBC Sustainability Oce oers a comprehensive programs and resources such as the “New Employee Sustainability Guide” [26]. TRAVEL Travel contributes 24% of the overall carbon footprint. The environmental performance can generally be improved in two ways, decrease carbon intensity (impacts per person) and decrease the absolute total impact. General travel recommendations: •	 Encourage low/no impact travel such as walking, cycling, public transit, and trains. •	 Promote the use of vehicles with high fuel eciency, low weight, and using eco-friendly fuels [21]. •	 Increase vehicle occupancy rates. The higher the occupancy rate, the lower the travel impact per person. •	 Reduce long distance travel. UBC A&R specic recommendations: •	 Teams could prioritize low-impact transportation, reduce the number of people travelling, and regionalize leagues where possible. Schedules could be adapted to cluster events and play more games close to UBC. •	 Spectator travel impact intensity could be reduced by encouraging people to attend who live close to UBC. Long distance travel of spectators (primarily visiting team fans) could potentially be reduced by televising or webcasting games. •	 Put in place programs that encourage low impact travel such as “walk/bike to the game” incentives, “car-share” and “bus- game ticket combos”. •	 Clearly communicate transportation options, maps and schedules on all relevant UBC A&R channels. VENUE Venues are the largest overall contributor for all damage categories. Within each venue however, there is signicant variation depending on venue type, size, use, etc. The following recommendations are generally applicable and should form the basis of a more thorough venue review in future: •	 Install smart meters to track real-time energy use and identify reduction opportunities. Some venues such as the Doug Mitchell Arena already have this in place. •	 Monitor water use and implement water reduction strategies such as low-ow taps, showers, and toilets. •	 Investigate how much wastewater is generated by each venue. In particular, the ecosystem quality and human health impacts associated with wastewater were signicant for buildings with high water use. •	 Look for opportunities to reduce the amount of water for irrigation. UBC is currently investigating stormwater capture solutions; it may be possible to use this water for eld irrigation instead of tap water. •	 Reduce fertilizer and fuel use on the grass elds and select suitable grass varieties [6]. •	 The impact of plastic materials dominate for synthetic elds. Prolonging the life of these elds and prioritizing eco- friendly materials with end-of-life reuse potential would reduce their impact [6]. •	 The pool facilities contribute signicant impacts. UBC is currently deliberating the construction of a new facility. This represents a strong opportunity for UBC A&R to support a state-of-the-art facility that would prioritize long-term energy, water, and pool chemical use reductions. It is strongly recommended that UBC A&R carry out individual LCAs of their venues to improve the level of detail and accuracy for this area. For buildings in particular, the UBC Sustainability Initiative strongly encourages the use of LCA and in fact UBC has North America’s largest LCA database for building stocks. UBC A&R has an opportunity to contribute to this. WASTE Although waste represents only 1.1% of the total carbon footprint, it has important visual and symbolic importance that aect the credibility of environmental programs. Within the waste impacts, the vast majority were attributed to landll treatment. According to the UBC Waste Action Plan, in 2009-2010 UBC had a waste diversion rate of 44% and it aspires to reach 55% in the short term [24]. As a point of comparison, the City of Vancouver has a waste diversion rate of 52%. UBC is also prioritizing composting; currently approximately 25% of the 350 tonnes of organic waste UBC produces are being treated by their award winning large-scale composting system. UBC A&R could design its waste strategies to tie in with the UBC Waste Action Plan objectives. In general, impact reduction initiatives should prioritize a reduction of the total amount of materials disposed of and increasing the percentage of materials reused, recycled, and composted. More specically, we recommend that: •	 All UBC venues should have clearly marked recycling and composting bins to aid in eective waste sorting. •	 Awareness and communication campaigns be put in place to highlight these eorts. •	 Food sales — which produce the largest proportion of waste L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 64 — should minimize packaging, prioritize reusable serving- ware, and compost food waste. Strategic Plan & Performance Monitoring This study provides a tool and a baseline of environmental impacts related to UBC A&R Thunderbirds activities for the 2010/2011 season. A comprehensive sustainability strategy is important to continually monitor performance and to address other UBC A&R environmental, social and economic considerations such as health, accessibility, equity, and ethical practices. MEASUREMENT AND MONITORING To assess ongoing performance, it is recommended that a monitoring and tracking system be put in place. The framework of this LCA is designed to simplify data inputting as much as possible by providing aggregated indicators for each of the seven organizational areas, e.g. one hotel night per person. UBC A&R should collect data at least once a year for: •	 Event participants •	 Venue energy and water use •	 Waste amounts and % recycled/composted •	 Team, spectator and sta travel distances and modes •	 Food and beverage sales and types of food sold •	 Fertilizer and other chemical use •	 Fuel use for eld maintenance In order to do this eectively, data collection could be made part of the job description for the relevant sta members. In addition one member would ideally be responsible for centralizing this information and updating the result in Quantis SUITE 2.0. UBC A&R could also provide internships to UBC students to collect data, implement strategies, and generate learning opportunities. This report also highlighted data quality in terms of reliability and representativeness for each organizational area. Some areas, such as travel, were based on primary data collection and were of high quality. Other areas, such as food and waste, were based on estimations as little data was available. Aspects with a low data quality rating and a high overall impact should be prioritized. In particular, assumptions for venue construction and operation could be investigated further. STRATEGIC PLAN A sustainability strategy and management plan would allow UBC A&R to concentrate resources, prioritize actions and communicate eectively. This is also a core requirement of the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) Z2010 Sustainable Management of Events standard. Such a document should include: •	 Public vision and commitment statement •	 Scope denition of commitment and responsibilities •	 Roles and responsibilities of stakeholders •	 Assignment of leadership and resources •	 Identication of major sustainability issues •	 Demonstration of compliance with applicable legal requirements •	 Objectives and key performance indicators •	 Reporting and communication procedure Sign-o from UBC A&R leadership and key stakeholders will help ensure that it will be fully implemented and supported. This LCA study and tool is a rst among University Athletic departments in North America (if not internationally). UBC A&R has a unique opportunity to contribute not only to UBCs sustainability vision but also to show leadership among other event organizers.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  65 6. References 1. Bare, J., Hofstetter, P., Pennington, D., & de Haes, H. (2000). Midpoints versus endpoints: The sacrices and benets. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 5(6), 319–326. 2. BC Ministry of Environment. (2011). Methodology for Reporting B.C. Public Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Victoria, Canada. 3. Berger, M., & Finkbeiner, M. (2010). Water Footprinting: How to Address Water Use in Life Cycle Assessment? Sustainability, 2(4), 919–944. 4. British Columbia: Climate Action for the 21st Century. Retrieved from http://www.livesmartbc.ca/government/plan.html on January 21, 2012. 5. Dolf, M., Vigneault, A., Storey, S., Sianchuk, R., Teehan, P., & Zhang, S. (2010). UBC Athletics & Recreation Sustainability Project: Measuring the Climate Change Potential Impacts of a UBC Thunderbirds Men’s Basketball Game. Vancouver, BC: UBC Centre for Sport and Sustainability. 6. Éco-prol d’un terrain de football: Analyse environnementale comparative de terrains de football en gazon naturel ou gazon synthétique (2008). Cabinet Pierre Robin. 7. ecoinvent LCA Database v2.2. Swiss Centre For Life Cycle Inventories. www.ecoinvent.org 8. Exploring and Exemplifying Sustainability: UBCs Sustainability Academic Strategy 2009. 9. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). AQUASTAT - FAO’s Information System on Water and Agriculture. Retrieved April 16, 2012, from http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/dbase/index.stm 10. 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. 11. Jones, C. (2008). Assessing the impact of a major sporting event: the role of environmental accounting. Tourism Economics, 14(2), 343-360. 12. Finnveden, G., Hauschild, M. Z., Ekvall, T., Guinée, J., Heijungs, R., Hellweg, S., Koehler, A., et al. (2009). Recent developments in Life Cycle Assessment. Journal of Environmental Management, 91(1), 1-21. 13. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (n.d.). AQUASTAT - FAO’s Information System on Water and Agriculture. Retrieved April 16, 2012, from http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/dbase/index.stm 14. Jolliet, O., Margni, M., Charles, R., Humbert, S., Payet, J., Rebitzer, G., & Rosenbaum, R. (2003). IMPACT 2002+: A new life cycle impact assessment methodology. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 8(6), 324-330. 15. Humbert S, Margni, M. & Jolliet, O. (2011). IMPACT 2002+ User Guide: Draft for version 2.2. Quantis, Lausanne, Switzerland. Available at: sebastien.humbert@quantis-intl.com. 16. ISO. (2006). ISO 14044:2006 Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Requirements and guidelines (First.). Geneva, Switzerland: ISO. 17. Lautier, A., Rosenbaum, R. K., Margni, M., Bare, J., Roy, P.-O., & Deschênes, L. (2010). Development of normalization factors for Canada and the United States and comparison with European factors. Science of the Total Environment, 409(1), 33–42. 18. Mallen, C., Stevens, J., Adams, L., & McRoberts, S. (2010). The Assessment of the Environmental Performance of an International Multi-Sport Event. European Sport Management Quarterly, 10(1), 97. 19. Minx, J. C., Wiedmann, T., Wood, R., Peters, G. P., Lenzen, M., Owen, A., Scott, K., et al. (2009). Input-Output Analysis and Carbon Footprinting: An Overview of Publications. Economic Systems Research, 21(3), 187.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 66 20. Shaw, M., Mitchell, R., & Dorling, D. (2000). Time for a smoke? One cigarette reduces your life by 11 minutes. BMJ : British Medical Journal, 320(7226), 53. 21. Tuchschmid, M. & Halder, M. (2010). mobitool – Grundlagenbericht: Hintergrund, Methodik & Emissionsfaktoren. www.mobitool. ch. 22. University of British Columbia Vancouver Campus Climate Action Plan 2010-2015. Retrieved from http://www.sustain.ubc.ca/ climate-action on January 15, 2012. 23. University of British Columbia Fall 2010 Transportation Status Report. Retrieved from http://trek.ubc.ca/les/2011/04/TSR_ Fall2010_03Aprl11.pdf on December 15, 2011. 24. UBC Waste Action Plan Discussion Paper. Retrieved from http://www.sustain.ubc.ca/campus-waste on January 21,2012. 25. UBC Food Services Sustainability Initiatives. Retrieved from http://www.food.ubc.ca/sustainability on January 25, 2012. 26. UBC Sustainability Coordinators Program. Retrieved from http://sustain.ubc.ca/sustainability-coordinators on January 25, 2012. 27. UBC Water Action Plan: Discussion Paper (updated 2011). Retrieved from http://www.sustain.ubc.ca/campus-water on January 31, 2012. 28. WBCSD (World Business Council for Sustainable Development) and WRI (World resources Institute). (2004). Greenhouse gas protocol: A corporate accounting and reporting standard. Washington, DC: WRI.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  67 An overview of the IMPACT 2002+ LCA Method with the addition of water withdrawal. Adapted from Joliet et al. (2003), as updated by Humbert et al. (2011) [14, 15]. Legend - Damage Categories CO2–eq: Carbon dioxide equivalents DALY: Disability adjusted life years PDF•m2•yr:	Potential	disappeared	fraction	of	species	per	square	meter	per	year MJ Prim: Megajoules of primary energy L: Liters of water MIDPOINT CATEGORIES (14) INVENTORY (hundreds) DAMAGE CATEGORIES (5) Human toxicity Respiratory eects Ionizing radiation Ozone layer depletion Photochemical oxidation NO x Water (non-turbined) Water (turbined) Irrigation water Dam water Climate change CO2 N20 CH4 Aquatic ecotoxicity Terrestrial ecotoxicity Acidication Eutrophication Terrestrial acid./nutri. Land occupation Phosphates Mineral extraction Non-renewable energyCrude oil Iron ore Human Health (DALY) Ecosystem Quality (PDF • m2 • yr) Resources (MJ Prim) Water (L) Climate Change (CO2–eq) E.g. APPENDIX I  IMPACT 2002+ LCA METHODL C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 68 Midpoint and Damage Categories The term ‘midpoint’ refers to an intermediate point of impact that occurs somewhere between the measured activities and the resulting potential damage or ‘endpoint’, an example of a midpoint would be land use change. An ‘endpoint’ or ‘damage’ category refers to the step of representing these midpoint categories to one or more groupings representing potential quality changes to the environment. The damage category therefore is a quantied representation of this quality change. According to the ecoinvent report Implementation of Life Cycle Impact Assessment Methods (2009), “... a damage indicator result is always a simplied model of a very complex reality, giving only a coarse approximation of the result.” IMPACT 2002+ Damage Categories CLIMATE CHANGE The climate change category uses the IPCCs (International Panel on climate change) 100-year ratings of the Global Warming Potential (GWP) of various substances (IPCC, 2007). Substances known to contribute to climate change are adjusted based on an identied Global Warming Potential, expressed in kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2) equivalents. Because the uptake and emission of CO2 from biological sources can often lead to misinterpretations of results, this biogenic CO2 is usually omitted from consideration when evaluating Global Warming Potentials. This follows the recommendation of the Publicly Available Standard (PAS) 2050 product carbon footprinting guidance in not considering either the uptake or emission of CO2 from biological systems. In order to account for the eect from its degradation to CO2, the GWP from methane of fossil origin is adjusted to 27.75 kg CO2–eq/kg CH4, and the one of methane from biogenic and unspecied origin to 25 kg CO2–eq/kg CH4. HUMAN HEALTH Human Health impact can be caused by the release of substances that eect humans through acute toxicity, cancer-based toxicity, respiratory eects, and increases in UV radiation among others. An evaluation of the overall impact of a system on human health has been made following the human health endpoint in the IMPACT 2002+ method (Jolliet et al., 2003), in which substances are evaluated based on their ability to cause each of a variety of damages to human health. ECOSYSTEM QUALITY Ecosystem Quality can be impaired by the release of substances that cause acidication, eutrophication, toxicity to wildlife, land occupation, and a variety of other types of impact. An evaluation of the overall impact of a system on ecosystem quality has been made following the ecosystem quality endpoint IMPACT 2002+ method (Jolliet et al., 2003), in which substances are evaluated based on their ability to cause each of a variety of damages to wildlife species. RESOURCES Resource depletion is caused when non-renewable resources are used, or when renewable resources are used at a rate greater than they can be renewed. Individual materials can be assigned a level of importance based on their abundance and diculty to obtain. An evaluation of the overall impact of a system on resource depletion has been performed following the resources endpoint in the IMPACT 2002+ method (Jolliet et al., 2003), which combines non-renewable primary energy use and mineral extraction. Non- renewable primary energy use accounts for the consumption of fossil and nuclear resources and excludes sources of renewable energy at all stages of the life cycle and in all upstream processes. Mineral extraction is an estimate of the increased amount of energy that will be required to obtain additional incremental amounts of substances from the earth due to removal of resources inventoried for each system (based on the Eco-indicator 99 LCA method). Non-renewable primary energy use accounts for the consumption of fossil and nuclear resources but excludes sources of renewable energy at all stages of the life cycle and in all upstream processes (however, non-renewable energy needed to produce renewable energy is considered). This metric is expressed in megajoules (MJ) of primary energy. WATER WITHDRAWAL The water footprint is the total volume of freshwater that is used directly and indirectly by a product, service, community, or organization. The Water Footprint consists of three components: Blue water (surface water), Green water (evaporated water), and Grey water (polluted water). Both ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ water withdrawal are included. Direct withdrawal refers to the operational water use, e.g. tap water for eld irrigation. Indirect withdrawal refers to the water used by the supply chain to produce the product or service, e.g. water required to produce the food purchased.L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2  69 APPENDIX II  QUANTIS SUITE 2.0 QUANTIS SUITE 2.0 OVERVIEW 1. Create/select a project 2. Add the details of the project 3. Set up the product system by creating and embedding “elements” (as seen in the main section below). These elements will contain all ows, activity data and EFs. 4. Add input-output “ows” (e.g. materials) to the elements by dragging them from the pre-dened menu items on the bottom left of the screen. 5. Assign environmental factors (EF’s) to your ows. Clicking on the grey ‘EF’ button takes you to the ecoinvent database (rst pic). Here you can lter through the 4,000 EFs and also compare impacts by selecting two or more at the same time. Double clicking assigns the EF and it will then appear on under the ow (second pic).L C A S T U D Y  / /  U B C  A & R  T H U N D E R B I R D S  2 0 11 - 2 0 1 2 70 6. Enter the activity data. The example below shows spectator car travel. Data can be entered directly into the “Quantity” eld or, as is the case here, parameters can be used to set up a “Formula”. In all cases the “Units” must match up with that required by the EF (e.g. passenger kilometers - pkm). Note that data can be added at either the element or ow level. 7. The “Analysis” tab shows the impacts through an interactive graphical interface. 8. A custom database of environmental factors can also be created. 9. The “Report” section can export results to excel Appendix IV - QUANTIS SUITE 2.0 (continued)

Cite

Citation Scheme:

    

Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
United States 74 1
Russia 14 0
Canada 9 3
United Kingdom 5 0
Singapore 4 0
China 3 4
Switzerland 2 2
Germany 2 5
Australia 2 0
France 2 0
Denmark 1 3
City Views Downloads
Ashburn 63 0
Saint Petersburg 14 0
Unknown 10 5
Edmonton 4 0
Singapore 4 0
Vancouver 3 2
Washington 3 0
Shenzhen 3 4
Newcastle upon Tyne 2 0
Geneva 2 2
Ottawa 2 0
Wakefield 1 0
Old Bribie 1 0

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

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.42591.1-0222978/manifest

Comment

Related Items