Water Journal : Water Journal November 2012-1
carbon footprint refereed paper technical features 72 NOVEMBER 2012 water businesses face dealing with escalating project and ongoing operating costs, increased focus on environmental impact, regulatory policy changes, and rising stakeholder expectations. In this case, the ENA process quantifies and monetises the relevant key environmental, social and economic project factors across the asset life cycle to inform profitable and sustainable decision-making. It allows a wide range of project options to be compared and then identifies the most robust outcomes over a wide range of possible future conditions. Methodology The development of the CCMS involved the following key stages of work: 1. Project Inception – Preparation of Stakeholder Engagement plan including identification of the Project Reference Group (PRG), which consisted of key internal and external stakeholders. 2. Development of Carbon Footprint for GCC Corporate and its Community – Calculation of carbon footprint covering Scope 1, Scope 2 and selected Scope 3 emissions and sinks and Business As Usual emissions forecast to 2025. 3. Identification and Assessment of GHG abatement opportunities – Framing Workshop with the PRG to set the objective and risk framework for the assessment. The project risk framework covers the health and safety, environment, financial, reputation, business impact, legal/compliance and stakeholders. A total of 248 opportunities were identified during a series of workshops with key focus groups. This included the Framing Workshop, as well as discipline workshops (involving subject matter experts from GCC and WorleyParsons), as well as opportunities identified from different channels via Council (e.g . internal newsletter or emails from the community). After preliminary screening (considering political and social acceptance, technology status, compatibility with GCC operation etc), 36 opportunities across energy efficiency, renewable energy, greenhouse gas sinks, demand management and fuel switching were carried forward (Table 1). Detailed analysis and risk assessment was performed using the EcoNomicsTM Assessment methodology. The planning horizon for the assessment was 30 years. The assessment considered the following components: • Financial - Capital cost - Operating cost - Revenue (labour saving, sale of by-product and government funding such as renewable energy certificates, energy saving certificates and feed-in-tariffs) • Non-financial - GHG emissions - T he total economic value of water - Marine environment - Terrestrial environment For each of these parameters, a base case value (representing the current best estimate of the value of the parameter) and a range of low to high possible values were determined, based on relevant, available data, in consultation with GCC. Low estimates were chosen to reflect the likely absolute minimum of the ranges; high values reflected the possible uppermost values over the life cycle. It is highly probable that all environmental assets will steadily increase in value over time, given the increasing scarcity of these resources worldwide and the increasing demand for natural resources as the population continues to grow. The sensitivity analysis provides confidence in the assessment results across a wide range of possible future scenarios. A social discount rate of 3.5%, which is the published UK Treasury rate for social discounting, was adopted as the base case value for the economic NPV analysis. Values of key financial parameters including electricity, fuel and carbon were provided by GCC. Estimated values of the total economic value of water, land footprint and marine impact were based on published research and adjusted to the local context. Given the high-level nature of the study and the limited availability of information, estimates were not refined to the actual impact. A marginal abatement cost curve was also developed using the WSAA Cost of Carbon Abatement tool. The cost curve was used to compare the financial merits and risks of opportunities. 4. Development of CCMS – The output from the ENA was used to develop the optimal portfolio of projects to prepare the CCMS trajectories under pre-defined constraints (e.g . financial, environmental, technology). The PRG, GCC Councillors and Senior Management Group were engaged in a series of workshops to develop and review the CCMS. Carbon Footprint and Forecast The GCC Carbon Inventory Report was prepared to present GCC’s and the wider LGA/Community’s carbon footprints in 2009–2010, and forecast of Business as Usual emissions to 2025. Total GHG emissions in the base year (2009–2010) were calculated to be 78,760 tonnes CO2-e . This includes Scope 1, Scope 2 and selected Scope 3 emissions (e.g. street-lighting, solid waste collection and bio-solids haulage by sub-contracts etc). The Sankey Diagram (Figure 1) summarises all relevant emissions for GCC corporate in 2009-2010. GCC’s GHG emissions are forecast to be 84,099 tonnes CO2-e in 2025. This estimate is based on planned infrastructure changes and population growth, and assumes GCC’s business structure remains unchanged. Figure 1. Gosford City Council 2009/10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Sankey Diagram (t CO2-e).
Water Journal December 2012
Water Journal September 2012-1