co2 australia green rangers

1

Brenna Tan l Choi Lai Ping l Felix Chia l Lincoln Tan l Ong Xun Xiang l Scott Tham

Green Rangers

VS

Inspired by

Seminar LearningOnline Learning

http://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=i&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&docid=Yk6VTGyvSRzTsM&tbnid=E2jLgpNV9LO-DM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http://theskyrimblog.ning.com/xn/detail/6452022:Topic:798714?xg_source=activity&ei=hzMfUrG3LIXBrAepsID4BA&psig=AFQjCNG8NHAjKzZss6HMVt_93oxIDRFEug&ust=1377862834159529

PeoplePlanetVision Profit Implementation

Analysis of current situation

2

Physical

Classroom

Current Carbon

Emissions

Reduction Carbon Neutral


CO2 Emissions of Physical Classroom

3

3 Main Sources of CO2

Transport PaperElectrical

Appliances

Professor Students


Physical Classroom: Total Carbon Footprint

Physical Classroom

CO2/KG

Lecturer 39

Students 10692

Total 10731

StudentsProfessor

4


Proposed solutions for current situation

Physical

Classroom

Current Carbon

Emissions

Reduction Carbon Neutral

Online

Lessons

Carbon

Credits

5


Who are the stakeholders?

STAKE

HOLDERS?

?

?

?

?

6


Who are the stakeholders?

STAKE

HOLDERSStudents

University B.O.D

Environment

Professor

Public

7


Which stakeholder is of top priority?

Students

University Board of Directors

Environment

Professor

Public

Criteria

Level of impact

decision has on

them

Importance of their

support and level of

authority to

influence decision

8


Recap: Proposed solutions for current situation

Online

Lessons

Carbon

Credits

Transforming a significant proportion

of our course delivery from classroom

to an online format

Buying an equivalent amount of

carbon offset credits from CO2

Australia

9

Now, let us look at the first alternative…

Online Learning

… how much CO2 it reduces

… as well as its costs and benefits to stakeholders

10


Online Lesson: Carbon Footprint

Physical

Classroom

Online

Lessons

1,535 kg of CO2

Current Carbon Emissions Reduction

10,731 kg of CO2

Note: Please refer to the appendices for calculations11


Online Lessons: Costs and Benefits to Stakeholders

Students

Costs Benefits

Less personal contact with

instructor

Lower transport and

accommodation costs

Loss of classroom dynamics Increased flexibility for students

Students to take on personal

responsibility over learning

Students can learn at own pace

Students need more access to

computers

Increased convenience

12


Costs Benefits

More server maintenance Online lessons can be reused for

subsequent semesters

Lack of accreditations such as

AACSB to endorse curriculum

Builds up NTU’s brand as an

institution offering online courses

Increased likelihood of plagiarism Greater reach

Hands-on experience or lab work

hard to simulate

Eliminates need for STARS in

NTU

Copyright costs of online lessons Avoid expenses of expanding

current campus

University B.O.D


13


University B.O.D


Environment

Cost Benefit

Computers also consume energy

and contain toxic materials

Reduce paper

More travel for technicians to

maintain servers -> higher

CO2 emissions

85% fewer CO2 emissions per

student because less travelling to

school

14


Cost Benefit

Appear less approachable to

students

Increased flexibility

Obsolescence of faculty Eliminates travel time and

expense

Ease of cheating Consistent information presented

More downtime and technical

issues to manage

Reduced need to supervise work

of students

University B.O.D


EnvironmentProfessor

15


Cost Benefit

Online lessons currently not

covered under financial aid

schemes

Better learning platform for

students with physical disabilities

Online degree courses not as

recognized as regular degrees

Offers a convenient learning

option for working adults

University B.O.D


EnvironmentProfessorPublic

16


COST > BENEFIT?

Some concerns…

Time horizon• Amount of time to implement such changes to education?

Severity of costs• Can negative outcomes like ease of cheating be better

controlled?

Durability of benefits• Will benefits like increased flexibility be short-lived?

• Will other universities join this race for online education?

17

Now, let us look at the second alternative…

Carbon Credits

… how much CO2 it reduces

… as well as its costs and benefits to stakeholders

18


Carbon Credits: Buying carbon offset credits

Buy price Sell price

19


Carbon Credits: Spot ACCU

Qty No of

people

No of

lessons

Hr Electricity

cm/ KW

Electricity

used/ kwh

Co2/ Kg Assumptions

Lecturer during lessons

Computer-

300w

1 1 39 3 0.3 35.1 18.06246 3h lesson

Paper for

activities

200 0 0 0 0 0 3.57 200 pieces

Lecturer during preparation

Air-con 1 1 13 2 1 26 13.3796

Lights 1 1 12 20 0.06 1.44 0.741024

Total co2/kg: 35.8

20


Electricity used/ kwh Co2/ Kg Assumptions

Students during lessons

Computer-300w 0.3 18.06246 10 students per class use laptop during class

Paper for activities 0 3.57 20pieces/student

Lights-65w 0.3 722.4984 fluorescent tube, 10 light sources with 4 tubes

each

Air-con-8kW 8 963.3312 3 hours

Commuting Train/km Bus/km

Public transport 43680 43680 7650 120 public transport, average 28km,half bus,

half train

Private transport 310 28 private transport, average 24km

Carbon Credits: Spot ACCU

Total co2/kg: 35.753084 + 9667.46206 = 9703kg/21347lbs

Total cost: 21347 x $21.50 = 458 961 AUD 548591 SGD

21


Carbon Credits: Costs and Benefits to Stakeholders

Students

Costs Benefits

Potentially have to pay more Fulfils willingness to be

environment friendly

Forms a false perception of being

green

Raised awareness towards

importance of sustainable growth

22


Costs Benefits

High cost of buying carbon offset

credits (SGD 548591)

Green reputation (publicity)

Difficult to assess true value of

carbon credits

Able to justify their high energy

consumption

University B.O.D


23


University B.O.D


Environment

Cost Benefit

Long term solution is needed There is now a way to remediate

the effects

Useless for credits if carbon

emissions do not reduce at all

24


Cost Benefit

Sceptical about the effectiveness

of a small scale project in NTU

Support green enterprise

University B.O.D



25


Carbon Credits: Comparison

Cost Benefits

Potentially have to pay more Fulfils willingness to be environment friendly

Forms a false perception of being green Raised awareness towards importance of

sustainable growth

High cost of buying carbon offset credits (SGD

548591)

Green reputation

Difficult to assess true value of carbon credits Able to justify their high energy consumption

Long term solution is needed There is now a way to remediate the effects

Useless for credits if carbon emissions do not

reduce at all

Support green enterprise

Sceptical about the effectiveness of a small scale

project in NTU

COST > BENEFIT

26


COST > BENEFIT?

Some considerations…

Time• Long term or short term effects?

Severity of costs• Any irreversible effects?

Tangibility of benefits• Raised awareness because of us?

• Did public support green enterprises because of us?

Are benefits directly associated to the buying of carbon credits?

27

What is the most suitable solution?

Must both options be mutually exclusive?

28

I suggest……

A hybrid of both options

O

P

T

I

O

N

29


Hybrid Option: Basic Concept

• Case Study Presentation and Discussion

• ½ of total semester sessions

• 2 Presentations per session

• Lecture on tools and concepts

• Discussion board used to clarify concepts

• ½ of total semester sessions

Buying Carbon Credits/

Seminar Style

Online Classroom30


Hybrid Option: Costs and Benefits to Stakeholders

Students

Costs Benefits

More case studies to prepare per

week

More opportunities/cases per

week to apply concepts

Loss of instant clarification from

Professor

Inculcate independent learning

Travel expense is spent attending

value added classes

Better time management

31


Costs Benefits

Reduce learning and development

cost

Well rounded education

experience provided in Asia

Stronger monitoring on Professor’s

quality of teachings

Persuasive quantitative data to

show improvement in student’s

learning

University B.O.D


32


University B.O.D


Environment

Cost Benefit

Reduction in paper consumption

may be less than 50%

33


Cost Benefit

More effort to prepare lessons for

hybrid options

Consistency in teaching concepts

to students

University B.O.D


EnvironmentProfessor

34


Cost Benefit

More affordable education if

concept is implemented

throughout the school

University seen as innovative as

more application skills focused

University B.O.D



35


Hybrid Option: Comparison

Cost Benefits

More case studies to prepare per week More opportunities/cases per week to

apply concepts

Loss of instant clarification from

Professor

Inculcate independent learning

Reduce learning and development

cost

Travel expense is spent attending

value added classes

Reduction in paper consumption may

be less than 50%

Better time management

More effort to prepare lessons for

hybrid options

Well rounded education experience

provided in Asia

36


Hybrid Option: Comparison

Cost Benefits

Stronger monitoring on Professor’s

quality of teachings

Persuasive quantitative data to show

improvement in student’s learning

Consistency in teaching concepts to

students

More affordable education if concept is

implemented throughout the school

University seen as innovative as more

application skills focused

BENEFIT > COST

37


Executive Summary

Is it not ironic that a module on sustainable enterprises is

actually causing harm to the environment? This presentation

seeks to achieve a carbon neutral status for the AB0401 module.

To do so, we first calculate the current carbon footprint of

AB0401, and weigh it against alternatives such as having an

online delivery structure, and buying carbon credits from CO2

Australia.

To be even more comprehensive, this presentation also takes

into account the interests of different stakeholders ranging

students to the general public.

Ultimately, our recommendation is that, for AB0401 to be carbon

neutral, while not sacrificing the quality of the lessons, a hybrid

structure of classroom and online delivery should be adopted.

The resulting carbon emissions would be less than that of a pure

classroom-style lesson, and that can be offset with carbon

credits by CO2 Australia. 38

Thank You!

39

Lecturer During Lessons

QuantityNo. of

lessonsNo. of Hours

Electricity consumption

/KW

Electricity used/KWH

CO2/KG Assumptions

Computer 1 39 3 0.3 35.1 18

Paper 200 1 - - - 3 200 pieces of paper used for

in-class activities

Lecturer Preparation

Computer 1 13 2 0.3 7.8 4

Air-Con 1 13 2 1 26 13 2 hours of preparation time per

lesson

Lights 1 13 2 0.06 1.7 1

Total 39

Note:

KWH to CO2 : 0.5146 KG of CO2 /KWH (EMA.sg)

Paper to CO2 : 1.623 KG of CO2 /100pc (StewartMarion.com) Professor

Appendix 1:

Physical Classroom: Lecturer’s Carbon Footprint

40

Students During Lessons

QuantityNo. of

StudentsNo. of

lessonsNo. of Hours

Electricity consumption/

KW


CO2/KG Assumptions

Computer 1 10 39 3 0.3 351 180 10 students per class

use laptop during

seminar

Lights 40 - 39 3 - 3042 1565 40 florescent tubes

used for lighting

Air-Con 2 - 39 3 8 1872 963 2 air conditioners per

class

Paper 10 148 - - - - 24 10 pieces of paper per

student per class

Note:


Paper to CO2 : 1.623 KG of CO2 /100pc (StewartMarion.com)

Students

Appendix 2:

Physical Classroom: Students’ Carbon Footprint

41

Students Commute

QuantityNo. of

StudentsNo. of

LessonsTotal BusMileage

Total Train Mileage

Total Car Mileage

CO2/KGAssumptions

Public

Transport

2 120 13 43680 43680 - 7650 120 public transport,

average 28km/trip,

half bus, half train

Private

Transport

2 28 13 - - 11232 310 28 private transport,

average 24km/trip

Total 10692

Note:

Commute Conversion : Carbonfootprint.comStudents

Appendix 2:

Physical Classroom: Students’ Carbon Footprint

42


Appendix 3:

Online Lessons: Lecturer’s Carbon Footprint

Professor

Note:


Paper to CO2 : 0.0163457 KG of CO2 /100pc

(StewartMarion.com)

Lecturer Preparation

QuantityNo. of

lessonsNo. of Hours

Electricity consumption

/KW


CO2/KG Assumptions

Computer 1 13 4 0.3 15.60 8.03Preparation is done online (paperless)

Air-con 1 13 4 1 52 26.76

Lights 1 13 4 0.06 3.12 1.61Incandescent light

Camera Recorder 1 13 2 0.01 0.26 0.134

Total 70.98 36.53

43


Appendix 4:

Online Lessons : Students’ Carbon Footprint

Students During Lessons

QuantityNo. of

StudentsNo. of

lessonsNo. of Hours

Electricity consumption/

KW


CO2/KG Assumptions

Computer 1 148 13 3 0.3 1731.6 891.1

Electric fan 1 148 13 3 0.075 432.9 222.8No air conLights 1 148 13 3 0.06 346.3 178.2 Incandescent

Paper 10 148 13 - - - 314.5

Total 1606.6

Note:


Paper to CO2 : 0.0163457 KG of CO2 /100pc

(StewartMarion.com)Students

44

co2 australia green rangers

Education