TORONTO DISTRICT SCHOOL BOARD ENERGY EFFICIENCY PROJECT GHG REPORT
For the Period January 1, 2014 – June 30, 2016
December 6th, 2016
FINAL REPORT, v3.0
Prepared by: Blue Source Canada ULC (Authorized Project Contact) Suite 700, 717-7th Avenue SW Calgary, Alberta T2P 3R5 T: (403) 262-3026 F: (403) 269-3024 www.bluesourceCAN.com
TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Table of Contents List of Figures ...... iii List of Tables ...... iii List of Abbreviations ...... iv 1 Introduction ...... 1 2 Review of Project Consistency with ISO 14064-2 Principles ...... 3 2.1 Relevance ...... 3 2.2 Completeness ...... 4 2.3 Consistency ...... 4 2.4 Accuracy ...... 4 2.5 Transparency ...... 4 2.6 Conservativeness ...... 5 3 Project Description ...... 5 3.1 Project Title ...... 5 3.2 Project Purpose / Objective ...... 5 3.3 Expected Lifetime of Project ...... 5 3.4 Project Type ...... 5 3.5 Legal Land Description of Project ...... 6 3.6 Conditions Prior to Project Initiation ...... 6 3.7 Description of how GHG Reductions are achieved ...... 6 3.8 Project Technologies ...... 7 3.8.1 Building Automation System (BAS) and mechanical retrofits: ...... 7 3.8.2 Lighting retrofits ...... 7 3.8.3 Roofing Retrofits ...... 8 3.9 Assertion of GHG Emission Reductions ...... 8 3.10 Identification of Risks to Project ...... 9 3.11 Roles and Responsibilities ...... 9 3.12 Project Eligibility...... 9 3.13 Environmental Impact Assessments and Stakeholder Consultations ...... 10 3.14 Project History ...... 10
Prepared by Blue Source Canada i TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
4 Selection and Justification of the Baseline Scenario ...... 11 5 Inventory of Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) for the Project and Baseline Conditions ...... 15 5.1 Project Condition ...... 15 5.2 Baseline Condition ...... 20 5.3 Comparison of Project and Baseline SSRs ...... 26 5.4 Quantification and Calculation of GHG Emissions and Reductions ...... 29 6 Data Quantification and Adjustments ...... 33 6.1 Retrofit Year ...... 33 6.2 HDD Adjustment ...... 33 6.3 Adjustments for Area ...... 34 6.4 Adjustment for the Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Side Management Program ...... 35 6.5 Sample Calculations ...... 36 6.6 Data Sources ...... 39 6.7 GHG Assertion ...... 39 7 Data Management, Monitoring and Control ...... 40 7.1 Quantification and Monitoring ...... 40 7.2 QA/QC Procedures ...... 43 7.3 Data Management and QA/QC at Blue Source ...... 43 7.3.1 Internal Calculator QA/QC ...... 43 7.3.2 Blue Source Standards ...... 43 7.4 Record keeping practices ...... 44 7.4.1 Back-up Procedures at Blue Source ...... 44 7.4.2 Document Retention Policy at Blue Source ...... 44 8 Reporting and Verification Details ...... 45 9 Statement of Peer Review...... 46 Appendix A ...... 47 Appendix B ...... 65 Appendix C ...... 69 Appendix D ...... 76 Appendix E ...... 79 Appendix F ...... 81
Prepared by Blue Source Canada ii TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
List of Figures Figure 1: Project Element Lifecycle Diagram for Project Condition ...... 18 Figure 2: Process Flow Diagram for Project Condition ...... 19 Figure 3: Baseline Element Lifecycle Diagram ...... 24 Figure 4: Process Flow Diagram for Baseline Condition ...... 25 Figure 5: Linear regression Analysis for Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. Public School in Baseline Year 2001 ...... 34 Figure 6: GHG assertion over time ...... 40 Figure 7: Data flow from Suppliers to TDSB and to Blue Source ...... 43 Figure 8: Linear Regression for Baseline Gas Consumption with Heating Degree Days at Lord Dufferin School (2001) ...... 67 Figure 9: Ontario Electricity Peak Times ...... 70 Figure 10: Representation of Electricity Generation over One Day ...... 70
List of Tables Table 1. Lighting Retrofit Baseline Date Ranges ...... 2 Table 2: 2013 & 2014 School Sales ...... 6 Table 3 : Annual and Total GHG Emission Reductions for the TDSB Energy Efficiency Project ...... 8 Table 4: Number of Retrofits Included in TDSB Project, per Year ...... 11 Table 5: Barriers Assessment of Baseline Alternative Scenarios ...... 12 Table 6: Project Condition Sources, Sinks, and Reservoirs ...... 15 Table 7: Baseline Condition Sources, Sinks, and Reservoirs ...... 20 Table 8: Justification of SSRs ...... 26 Table 9: Quantification Procedures ...... 30 Table 10: Emission Factors for Natural Gas Combustion and Electricity Consumption (Ontario) ...... 32 Table 11: Annual Energy Savings and GHG Emission Reductions from Toronto Hydro Funded Projects .. 36 Table 12: Total GHG Emission Reductions from TDSB Energy Efficient Retrofits Discounting Emission Reductions from Toronto Hydro Funded Projects* ...... 36 Table 13: Data Monitoring and Collection ...... 41 Table 14: List of TDSB Schools that have undergone a retrofit and are included in the 2014-2016 Quantification ...... 48 Table 15: Natural Gas Consumption for the Baseline Year (2001) in Lord Dufferin High School ...... 66 Table 16: Heating Degree Days for 2014 ...... 66 Table 17: Weather Adjusted Gas Consumption for Lord Dufferin School (2014) ...... 68 Table 18: Emission Factors - Ontario Electricity Production ...... 71 Table 19: Summary of Electricity Generation in Ontario in 2014 ...... 72 Table 20: Emission Factors for Electricity Generation in Ontario in 2014 ...... 72 Table 21. Sample of schools with hourly CEMS electricity consumption data ...... 73 Table 22. On-peak and off-peak percentages for 2014 sample of schools ...... 73
Prepared by Blue Source Canada iii TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Table 23. 2014 Average on-peak and off-peak electricity consumption % by school category type ...... 75 Table 24: Facilities that Received Funding under Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Management Program in 2005 ...... 77 Table 25: Facilities that Received Funding under Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Management Program in 2006 ...... 78
List of Abbreviations BAS Building Automation System(s) Blue Source Blue Source Canada ULC
CH4 Methane
CO2 Carbon Dioxide
CO2e Carbon Dioxide-equivalent GHG Greenhouse Gas(es) GWP Global Warming Potential HDD Heating Degree Day HFC Hydrofluorocarbon(s) IPMVP International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol
N2O Nitrous Oxide PFC Perfluorocarbon(s)
SF6 Sulphur Hexafluoride SSR Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs TDSB Toronto District School Board VAV Variable Air Volume
Prepared by Blue Source Canada iv TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
1 Introduction This report provides details of the energy efficiency retrofit project undertaken by the Toronto District School Board (TDSB). The TDSB is the largest school board in Canada, having about 600 schools that serve approximately 245,000 students. The TDSB has adopted the concept of sustainable development as defined by the United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development: “meeting the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The Board acknowledges that climate change has emerged as one of the greatest challenges of the 21st Century. To respond to climate change, focus has been placed on three critical areas as an important basis for planning and decision making: mitigation, adaptation, and education. According to the TDSB climate change shall be mitigated by reducing the Board’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by amounts that exceed the Kyoto Protocol targets1.
In November 2000, the TDSB began a series of retrofit projects in its schools to replace old and inefficient lighting and mechanical control systems with new lighting and Building Automation Systems (BAS):
The BAS are computerized, intelligent control units that control and monitor the mechanical electronics and lighting in a building and therefore decrease the amount of electricity and natural gas being consumed for heating, lighting and ventilation purposes in the schools;
The lighting retrofits involved the replacement of old T12 lighting fixtures with newer, more efficient T8 lights that consume less electricity to provide the same level of lighting.
These energy savings reduce the burning of fossil fuels to produce electricity and heat, which in turn reduce GHGs released into the atmosphere.
Due to the financial barriers of installing new systems in nearly 600 schools, the retrofits are ongoing, with retrofits being completed on a number of different schools each year. Up to the end of 2012 TDSB had completed lighting and BAS retrofits in 258 of their schools. Furthermore, between January 1, 2014 and June 30, 2016 retrofits were performed on roofing and BAS upgrades in 151 additional schools. This report quantifies the greenhouse gas credits created when total emissions from the project baseline year (2001) are compared to emissions generated for period 1 January 2014 to 30 June 2016. Reductions are reported for each of the vintage years.
Below is a summary of the significant changes made to the project quantification for this reporting year in comparison to the 2013 and earlier vintage years:
1. Registration of project on the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) CleanProjects Registry
The TDSB Energy Efficiency Project was previously registered with Green Power Action’s Greening Canada Fund. Emissions reductions were quantified under this registry for the 2002 – 2013
1 TDSB (2010) http://www2.tdsb.on.ca/ppf/uploads/files/live/92/194.pdf
1 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
vintage years. For the current reporting period of 1-January-2014 to 30-June-2016 continuity of the project from previous reporting years is maintained with frequent references to previous vintage years in this report, however, the project will be registered on the CSA CleanProjects Registry as a voluntary offset project. Therefore, project characteristics from the 2013 and earlier vintage years are maintained with the exception of specific updates relevant to the 2014-2016 vintage years and any changes summarized in this section.
2. Baseline adjustment from T12 to T8 for lighting retrofits
This change was made in the 2013 project year. It is summarized in this report due to its significance and for additional clarification as it applies to the 2014-2016 vintage years.
In 2012, the US brought into effect legislation banning manufacture of T12 lighting. Canada followed suit with regulations that came into effect on January 1, 2014. In preparation for these regulatory changes manufacturers began phasing out production of T12 lighting before the legislation came into effect. As a result, T12 lighting has effectively become unavailable for purchase and T8 lighting is now the standard type of lighting available. The impact on this project is that some of TDSB’s T8 lighting retrofits are now considered ineligible for emissions savings as follows:
Projects will continue to use a T12 baseline, in order to meet the ISO 14064-2 principle of consistency, up to the point at which the theoretical T12 ballast would have reached the age of 10 years; Many lighting ballasts will last 20-30 years; however, in order to meet the ISO 14064-2 principle of conservativeness, it is assumed that the theoretical T12 ballast would reach its end-of-life at the age of 10 years, and would need replacing; The impact of the T12 phase-out (i.e. no longer business-as-usual and difficult to obtain) has been most observed in 2013 whereas in years prior to 2013 the option of installing T12 lighting systems would have still been available. Therefore, it is assumed that if the TDSB had to replace lighting systems after January 1, 2013, as a result of ballasts reaching their end-of-life, they would not have the choice of continuing to use T12 technology and would have to upgrade to T8 ballasts.
Therefore, the schools that will be impacted by the new T8 baseline are described as follows:
Table 1. Lighting Retrofit Baseline Date Ranges Vintage Date range for retrofits with T8 Date range for retrofits with T12 Year Baseline Baseline Before January 1, 2003 and between 2014 January 1, 2003 - December 31, 2004 January 1, 2005 - December 31, 2012 Before January 1, 2003 and between 2015 January 1, 2003 - December 31, 2005 January 1, 2006 - December 31, 2012 Before January 1, 2003 and between 2016 January 1, 2003 - December 31, 2006 January 1, 2007 - December 31, 2012
2 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Any schools where T8 lighting retrofits were performed in 2013 or later would not be included as the technology is now considered the industry standard.
3. Use of both off-peak and on-peak emissions intensity factors
For vintage 2012 and previous reporting periods, the grid emissions intensity factor used to calculate TDSB’s emissions from electricity consumption came from the difference between baseload (off-peak) and peak power generation, known as the marginal power generation. This marginal grid intensity factor was applied to the electricity consumption of the schools included in the quantification.
However, as Ontario has phased out electricity from coal there is now less variation in emissions intensity between off-peak and on-peak generation. In addition, TDSB now has available hourly CEMS data for their schools making it possible to quantify emissions during off-peak hours.
To meet the ISO 14064-2 principle of accuracy, the quantification of electricity consumption for the period covered in this report between 1-January-2014 to 30-June-2016 was therefore separated into off-peak and on-peak and the corresponding grid intensity factor was applied. Further information on the calculations for on-peak and off-peak grid intensity and the electricity consumption is provided in Appendix C.
With these significant changes the total emissions reductions for the 1-January-2014 to 30-June-2016 period for TDSB is 46,114 tonnes CO2e reductions resulting in an average of 18,445 tonnes CO2e per year for the 2.5-year period. The emissions reductions for the 2013 vintage year were 18,455 tonnes CO2e.
2 Review of Project Consistency with ISO 14064-2 Principles
2.1 Relevance The methodology used in quantifying GHG emission reductions from the project is the Alberta Offset System Quantification Protocol for Energy Efficiency Projects, (Version 1, September 2007) (‘the protocol’). The protocol was developed and approved under the Alberta Offset System, which is regulated under the province’s “Climate Change and Emissions Management Act.” The protocol was developed following the ISO 14064-2 standard as required under the Alberta Offset System protocol development process. Additionally, the protocol development process included a multi-step stakeholder review process consisting of a technical expert review, a broader stakeholder review process and a public posting period, all of which were managed by the Government of Alberta.
The protocol continues to be one of only two government-approved quantification protocols applicable to energy efficiency projects in Canada and is therefore considered to be a valid and acceptable quantification protocol to apply to the project. Furthermore, the methodological approach is consistent with the ‘Simple Retrofits’ approach based on IPMVP guidance (i.e. Whole Facility Reporting – Option C) used when availability of data is limited. 3 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) considered relevant and included for quantification under the proposed protocol are defined in Section 5 of this document, including justification for the exclusion of SSRs identified in the life cycle elements of the project and baseline condition prescribed under ISO 14064- 2. SSRs for the project condition are summarized in Table 6 and Figure 1 and Figure 2. SSRs under the baseline condition are summarized in Table 7 and Figure 3 and Figure 4.
2.2 Completeness The specific scope of this project has been limited to GHG emission reductions achieved through the reduction in use of natural gas and electricity through the implementation of energy efficiency retrofits. This includes the avoided on-site combustion of natural gas as well as the indirect GHG emissions associated with the consumption of grid electricity generated in Ontario.
Data collection, monitoring, and quantification approaches are summarized in Table 13 in this report.
2.3 Consistency The protocol used in the quantification of GHG reductions is consistent in its application of functional equivalence between the baseline and project condition. Individual sites within the TDSB are operating in a functionally equivalent condition in the project and baseline condition. The natural gas consumption in each of the project years was adjusted using a heating degree day (HDD) correction in order to normalize energy consumption with weather data to ensure functional equivalence between the baseline and project scenarios. The use of a one-year baseline ensures that the energy consumption in the baseline accounts for seasonal variations in facility operating conditions. A monitoring period that covers one full operating cycle of the building (i.e. one year for retrofits where operation is dependent on outdoor ambient temperature) is an approach that is recognized by the International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol (IPMVP) guidance of energy savings quantification. This approach is consistent with the definition of functional equivalence under the ISO 14064-2 Standard.
A comparison of SSRs under the baseline and project conditions can be found by referencing Section 5.3 in this report.
2.4 Accuracy Bias and uncertainties in quantification were limited through the use of utility meter readings (natural gas and electricity consumption) and weather data from Environment Canada. Additionally, the utility data is obtained from meters that are maintained according to Measurement Canada standards. Data collection, monitoring, and quantification approaches are summarized in Table 13 in this report. In addition, as outlined in Section 1, additional changes to the quantification method have been made for the vintage years 2014-2016 to ensure accuracy.
2.5 Transparency Data collection, monitoring, and quantification approaches are summarized in Section 7 and Table 13 of this report. This report is also accompanied by GHG calculation tools that summarize the annual emission reduction claims to support the verification of the GHG emission reduction assertion. Three separate GHG
4 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Calculators were developed for each of the vintage years in this reporting period. For this reporting period the GHG Calculators were significantly upgraded to reflect modifications and to improve transparency.
2.6 Conservativeness The approach used in this quantification was compared against a number of quantification approaches and was found to be the most conservative. Energy efficiency retrofits began in 2000; however, 2001 is the first full year for which energy consumption data exists. Taking the energy consumption in 2001 as the baseline year, when energy savings due to efficiency retrofits had already begun in 2000, ensures conservative calculations. In addition, as outlined in Section 1, additional changes to the baseline quantification method have been made for the vintage years 2014-2016 to ensure conservativeness.
3 Project Description
3.1 Project Title This project is registered under the title: Toronto District School Board (TDSB) Energy Efficiency Project (‘the project’).
3.2 Project Purpose / Objective The purpose of this project is to reduce GHG emissions associated with natural gas consumption and electricity use throughout the TDSB by implementing energy efficiency measures. This project is part of a district-wide initiative administered by the TDSB’s Energy Coordinating Committee. These energy efficiency projects include:
Building Automation System (BAS) and mechanical retrofits –the installation of equipment used to control building systems, reduce building temperature and manage mechanical loads when schools are unoccupied; Lighting retrofits –the replacement of T12 lighting fixtures with new T8 lighting fixtures thereby decreasing electricity consumption; and Roofing retrofits – the replacement of roofing with more energy efficient materials with a higher insulation value of R20 compared to a previously negligible R value, thereby reducing natural gas consumption.
3.3 Expected Lifetime of Project The TDSB’s energy efficiency retrofits are ongoing. Retrofits first began November 25, 2000. The baseline year for this project is 2001 because it is the first calendar year for which complete utility data records exist. The project start date is therefore January 1, 2002. There is no specified end date for this project, which will be completed once all schools have been upgraded.
3.4 Project Type This is an energy efficiency project.
5 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
3.5 Legal Land Description of Project This is an aggregation project of 408 facilities across the TDSB in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. However, for each vintage year some schools are removed due to missing data, anomalies in gas or electricity usage, sale, not having any retrofits prior to that year or not meeting the new baseline criteria for T8 lighting (See Section 1.0).
A number of schools were sold between the 2014-2016 years. Schools sold in 2014 would have been removed entirely from the project whereas a school sold in 2015 would be included in the 2014 vintage year but not in 2015 or 2016. The list of sold schools are as follows:
Table 2: 2013 & 2014 School Sales 2012 School Sales Sold On: 2013 School Sales Sold On: Briar Hill Junior Public 20 August 2013 Kipling Grove School 9 August 2014 School Brooks Road Public 31 December 2013 Vincent Massey Junior 27 August 2014 School School Castlebar 02 July 2013 Hardington Learning 28 August 2013 Centre Heron Park Junior Public 30 July 2013 School Pringdale Gardens Junior 13 August 2013 Public School Regent Park/Duke Junior 17 September 2013 Public School
There were no schools sold in the 2015-2016 years. Appendix A summarizes the final school count used in the 1-January-2014 to 30-June-2016 project quantification for the three types of retrofit technologies, BAS, lighting and roofing.
3.6 Conditions Prior to Project Initiation Prior to the implementation of the project, original lighting and mechanical equipment was utilized at the various TDSB facilities. The specific lighting and mechanical equipment varied depending on the facility. Previous roofing installations held a negligible insulation R value. In all other respects the schools were the same.
3.7 Description of how GHG Reductions are achieved Emission reductions are achieved through energy efficiency retrofits undertaken across TDSB facilities. Energy efficiency reduces the demand for energy at the schools, which in turn means less demand for the combustion of fossil fuels in power stations or on-site equipment (such as boilers). In this way, the energy efficiency project reduces GHG emissions from fossil fuel combustion.
6 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
3.8 Project Technologies Energy efficiency retrofits consisted of three types: 1) Building Automation Systems (BAS) and mechanical retrofits; 2) Lighting retrofits; and 3) Roofing retrofits. Retrofits were dependent on the pre-existing infrastructure that was in place at the various facilities before any energy efficiency retrofits were undertaken. For this reason, the project retrofits are described in a generic fashion in the following sections.
3.8.1 Building Automation System (BAS) and mechanical retrofits: Microprocessor based BAS were installed with standardized high performance programming, automatic monitoring and reporting and with remote communication. These systems were installed both in schools that had no previous automation system and in schools that had obsolete, inefficient pneumatic systems.
BAS systems are designed to provide complete control and monitoring for the mechanical systems at each school. As such the number of control points provided at each site depends on the number and complexity of the mechanical systems. The potential areas of improvement for the BAS were provided by the TDSB to consulting engineers tasked with performing the energy efficiency retrofits. These were not specific to any one school or system and so while consultants were encouraged to incorporate them into the specific site designs they were nonetheless required to use their own expertise to formulate the best design solution for each specific site. Potential retrofit measures included the following equipment:
Heating Plant (Primary Hot Water Heating and Steam Heating Plant); Air Handling Units (Single Zone or multi-Zone, Variable Air Volume (VAV) Air Handling Unit, VAV Boxes, VAV Boxes (Fan Powered), Packaged Roof-Top Unit, make-Up Air Handling Units, and Fan Coils); Chilled Water Plant; Exhaust Fans; Lighting Controls; Unit Ventilator; Unit Ventilator – Pneumatic Control; Domestic Hot Water – Standard or with Converter; Outdoor Air Temperature/ BAS Alarm; Urinal Flush Tank System.
3.8.2 Lighting retrofits Existing indoor lighting was retrofitted with approved energy efficient lighting sources in order to minimize energy costs and to enhance the quality of lighting in each facility. The major component of these projects involved replacing the existing interior lighting systems in each facility with T8 fluorescent technology or other approved energy-efficient lighting systems. Classrooms, corridors, common areas, etc. were redesigned in conformance with the recommended Ministry of Education Illumination guidelines.
The scope of work according to the TDSB’s Catalogue of measures for Lighting Retrofits included:
7 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Replacing all existing T12 lamps with T8 lamps (T8 lamps are of 4-foot or 2-foot lengths only). Eight foot T12 and U-tube lamps were also replaced to this standard when possible; Existing incandescent fixtures were evaluated on a case-by-case basis to determine if the retrofit was economically feasible; In order to standardize the type of fluorescent lamps and electronic ballasts at the facility level, a single manufacturer was used for each site’s retrofits; Light level readings were recorded for every retrofitted area of the school. In each room or area, the light level readings were provided to determine a representative average of the general light level in that space. The new lighting levels were recorded in as-built documents after installation was complete; Fixtures that were determined to be in good or fair condition were re-lamped and re-ballasted; Fixtures that were determined to be in poor condition were replaced.
All retrofit measures for each facility were described using the code designations supplied by the TDSB in its catalogue of standard retrofit measures.
As previously described in Section 1, due to the phase out of T12 lighting and new legislation that was introduced to require T8 lighting as a minimum energy efficiency standard the lighting baseline scenario for the 2013 quantification period and onwards has been updated to T8 light. However, this baseline scenario will be applied only to those schools which were retrofitted within a date range relative to the vintage year of the quantification (see Table 1 for details) as the standard lifetime of a lighting ballast is 10-years and only the lighting that would have reached its end-of-life after January 1, 2013 would have to be replaced with the industry standard T8 lighting. The ballasts that would not have to be replaced after January 1, 2013 would maintain a T12 baseline.
3.8.3 Roofing Retrofits Roofing replacements began in 2014 to improve the condition of school roofs and to enhance energy efficiency. This process involves using layers of felts and hot-applied asphalt. The asphalt is delivered to each school in a solid state and then it is inserted into a roofing kettle and heated until it turns into liquid form. It is then spread throughout the roof using specialized mops. The new insulation R-value of the roof replacements is R-20 as compared to the previous roofs having a negligible R-value. Schools with retrofitted roofs achieve energy consumption savings from a reduction in natural gas usage.
3.9 Assertion of GHG Emission Reductions Table 3 : Annual and Total GHG Emission Reductions for the TDSB Energy Efficiency Project
Natural Gas Electricity All Fuels Year CO2 CH4 N2O CO2 Total CH4 GWP N2O GWP (t CO2) (t CH4) (t N2O) (t CO2e) (t CO2e) 2014 13,146 0.26 25 0.25 298 2,524 15,750
2015 15,145 0.30 25 0.28 298 2,365 17,600
8 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
2016 (Jan – 11,949 0.24 252 0.22 298 744 12,764 Jun)
The total GHG emission reductions attributable to the TDSB Energy Efficiency Project for the period 1
January 2014 – 30 June 2016 are 46,114 metric tonnes of CO2 equivalent.
3.10 Identification of Risks to Project There are no material risks that have been identified for this project that would impact the quantification of GHG emissions. The energy retrofits completed by the TDSB result in a permanent GHG emission reduction since the displacement of the fossil fuels cannot be reversed. This project type does not involve biological or geological sequestration-related risks.
3.11 Roles and Responsibilities Project Developer Toronto District School Board 15 Oakburn Crescent Contact Information Maurice Buonastella Toronto, ON Energy & Building Automation Systems M2N 2T5 Coordinator Canada Phone: 416-395-4555 Fax: 416-395-2224 Web: www.tdsb.on.ca Email: [email protected] Authorized Project Blue Source Canada ULC Suite 700 Contact Tooraj Moulai, P.Eng. 717 - 7th Avenue SW Senior Engineer, Carbon Services Calgary, AB Phone: 403-262-3026 x 259 T2P 0Z3 Fax: 403-269-3024 Canada Email: [email protected] Web: www.bluesourcecan.com Verifier Stantec Consulting Ltd. Stantec Consulting Ltd. Daniel Hegg 400 – 655 Tyee Road Lead Verifier / Discipline Lead Victoria, BC V9A 6X5 Phone: (250) 217-9729 Email: [email protected] Web: www.stantec.com
3.12 Project Eligibility The GHG emission reduction assertion was quantified using a quantification methodology considered to be industry best practice guidance (Alberta Quantification Protocol for Energy Efficiency Projects, version
2 The Global Warming Potentials (GWP’s) for CH4 and N2O were updated to reflect the 2007 GWP’s published by the International Panel on Climate Change based on the requirement from Environment Canada for projects in 2013 and onwards. CH4 GWP is now 25 and N2O GWP is now 298.
9 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
1, September 2007). However, not all of the project eligibility criteria in the protocol are applicable to the TDSB project, since offsets from this project are not being created for compliance use in Alberta.
Specifically, the project start date requirement (on, or after January 1, 2002) and location requirement (in Alberta) are not applicable for TDSB since these offsets are being created for voluntary purposes from an Ontario-based offset project. As such, although the protocol is used as a source of best practice guidance for quantifying GHG emission reductions, the project eligibility criteria are instead defined by the registry on which the offsets are to be listed (CSA CleanProjects Registry) or otherwise defined by the ISO 14064- 2 standards. The following characteristics of the CleanProjects Registry the project ensure it meets the required eligibility criteria:
The quantification protocol referenced was developed in accordance to ISO 14064-2 standard; The GHG assertion will be verified by an independent third-party prior to project registration; The facility operations are not subject to any regulations requiring the implementation of energy retrofits or prohibiting the use of incandescent light bulbs in the province of Ontario; Guidelines for roofing stipulate a minimum R-20 insulation value, however, these guidelines are not enforced and there are no consequences for building operators to implement uninsulated roofing systems. The project is not currently subject to any climate change or emissions management legislation either in the province of Ontario or Federally in Canada; Potential GHG emission reductions generated by this project are not listed on any other GHG reduction registry in Canada or internationally; and This project has not participated under any other climate change incentive programs and has not received any public funds related to such initiatives except for funding from the Toronto Hydro- Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Side Management Program (THESL). The reductions realized from this funding are discounted from the total assertion. More information is available on this in Section 6.4
3.13 Environmental Impact Assessments and Stakeholder Consultations Neither an environmental impact assessment nor stakeholder consultations were required for this project. However, initiatives undertaken by the TDSB to reduce energy consumption such as the lighting, BAS/mechanical and roofing retrofits described in this GHG Report are reported by the Board to stakeholders and the public in its Go Green Report.3 This ensures the relevance, accuracy, conservativeness, consistency, and transparency of the project.
3.14 Project History The TDSB’s energy efficiency retrofits began November 25, 2000 and are ongoing. For the purpose of quantifying GHG emission reductions under this GHG Report, electricity and natural gas utility data from 2001 are used to establish baseline energy use for the 408 buildings that underwent retrofits. The T8 Lighting retrofits that are included in this reporting period occurred before 2012. The BAS/mechanical retrofits occurred during 2002 – 2015 and the roofing retrofits occurred between the years 2013 – 2015.
3 TDSB (2010) http://www.tdsb.on.ca/Portals/0/AboutUs/Innovation/docs/FINAL%20Go%20Green%20WEB%20-%202.pdf
10 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
The project start date is set to January 1, 2002. Recording of energy usage data, in the form of utility bills, is done monthly. Table 4 below includes a comparison of the number and type of retrofits included in the quantification for the 2014 – 2016 vintage years.
Table 4: Number of Retrofits Included in TDSB Project, per Year
Year Number of Lighting Number of BAS/ Number of Roofing Retrofits Included in the mechanical Retrofits Retrofits Included in the Project Included in the Project Project 2016 102 251 8 2015 119 200 6 2014 127 161 N/A 2013 187 160 N/A % increase btw -45.5% 56.9% N/A 2013 and 2016
The drop in the number of lighting retrofits included in the quantification between 2013 and the 1- January-2014 to 30-June-2016 reporting period is due to the requirement to use T8 lighting as the baseline for any schools where the lighting would have reached its 10-year end-of-life after January 1, 2013 and would require replacing at that point. These schools were excluded as they would have had to replace the ballasts with T8 types. The number of BAS mechanical retrofits increased for the 2015 and 2016 vintage years and this is due to an increase in the number of schools where these retrofits were performed with a large number of these retrofits beginning in 2014.
4 Selection and Justification of the Baseline Scenario Three possible baselines were identified in the development of this GHG offset project. These include:
Status quo (i.e. keeping the original inefficient mechanical, roofing and lighting systems in place); Retrofit of either the existing mechanical, roofing or the lighting systems; The project scenario (i.e. retrofit of both the mechanical, roofing and lighting systems).
The approach used to select and justify the relevant baseline scenario for this offset project consisted of two components: identification of barriers facing each alternative and an assessment of the expected costs to implement and operate each alternative. This analysis includes project specific information related to the decision making at TDSB.
The relevant barriers affecting each of these scenarios are summarized in Table 5 below:
11 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Table 5: Barriers Assessment of Baseline Alternative Scenarios
Baseline Scenario Alternatives Relevant Barriers
Alternative 1: Status quo. Keep Financial/Economic: None. There are no upfront capital costs. Electrical the original inefficient and natural gas utility costs are unchanged from previous year operating mechanical, and lighting budgets. systems in place. Replace the Operational: None. The mechanical and lighting systems in place are well out of date roofing systems with understood and meet the operational requirements of the facilities; the conventional uninsulated systems would continue to operate without special training requirements. roofing. New conventional type of roofs that do not include insulation would function the same as the previously installed roofs. Environmental/Social: Low. Some pressure from parents, staff and pupils may be experienced to upgrade lighting and mechanical systems for environmental/social reasons. Guidelines for building roofing systems stipulate a minimum R-20 insulation value, however, these guidelines are not enforced and there are no consequences for building operators to implement uninsulated roofing systems. Alternative 2: Retrofit one of the Financial/Economic: Medium. Some upfront capital costs depending on three forms of the existing extent of the energy efficiency program and the retrofits completed. Cost mechanical, lighting and of insulated roofing is higher than conventional roofing systems. insulated roofing systems. Operational: Medium. BAS retrofits and insulated roofing may require special training for building operators to use, monitor and maintain effectively. T8 lighting has become a minimum standard. However, lighting ballasts that have not reached their 10-year end-of-life after January 1, 2013 (point at which T8 lighting is considered to be minimum standard) would not have to be replaced yet. Environmental/Social: Low. Capital used for retrofits is diverted from other core educational requirements and may be resisted by some parents and/or staff. Alternative 3: The project Financial/Economic: High: Upfront capital costs associated with retrofits. scenario Additional costs to hire third party energy efficiency experts to evaluate energy efficiency opportunities and to complete retrofits. Operational: High: BAS retrofits and insulated roofing retrofits may require special training for building operators to use, monitor, and maintain effectively. T8 lighting is a minimum standard as of 2013 as T12 lighting has been phased out. Environmental/Social: Low. Capital used for retrofits is diverted from other core educational requirements and may be resisted by some parents and/or staff.
Based on the above barriers assessment, the most likely baseline scenario would be the continued use of the existing BAS/mechanical and lighting systems as well as the replacement of the out-of-date roofing with conventional uninsulated roofing systems since this scenario has the fewest barriers to implementation, with the added condition for this year’s quantification that any lighting systems reaching their 10-year end-of-life after January 1, 2013 and had to be replaced would have required replacement with T8 lighting which is now a minimum standard as T12’s have been phased out. By comparison, the project condition faces significant financial barriers and skills/operational barriers. The comprehensive
12 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
nature of the TDSB energy efficiency retrofit program to review all school buildings with respect to energy efficiency performance exceeds business as usual.
Using the above barriers analysis, the baseline scenario was selected. This represents the conditions most likely to occur in the absence of the project. In other words, had the TDSB not implemented energy efficiency retrofits at a district level, the existing BAS/mechanical and lighting equipment would have continued to be used and replacement of roofing systems with conventional uninsulated roofing would have continued. As such the consumption of natural gas and electricity would have likely stayed at a level consistent with the energy consumption in the baseline year. For this project, 2001 is the first full year for which individual facility energy consumption data was available district-wide.
Using the energy consumption data from 2001 as the baseline is a conservative approach for several reasons:
Had the project not been undertaken, electricity demand would have been expected to increase each year. Various computers labs, electrically-driven air conditioning units, and other electrical equipment have been added to the schools since the baseline year, which would increase electricity consumption correspondingly. The total area of all buildings in the TDSB has increased as portable classrooms have been added to several schools beginning in 2005. Increasing the area of all facilities in the project results in higher energy use and lower claimed GHG savings4. Operating hours of the schools have increased over time, especially during evenings, weekends, and summer time. As the City of Toronto has grown, demand for community usage of school facilities has increased. Energy efficiency retrofits began in 2000; however, 2001 is the first full year for which energy consumption data exists. Taking the energy consumption in 2001 as the baseline year when some energy efficiency retrofits had already been undertaken, underestimates baseline energy use and is therefore conservative.
An alternative to using 2001 as the baseline year would have been to use the energy consumption of the facility for the year prior to the completion of the energy efficiency retrofits. However, using 2001 as the baseline year for energy use in the TDSB was deemed as a more accurate approach than taking the year prior to any efficiency retrofit for the following reasons:
The exact date of completion for retrofits is documented; however, the completion date indicates the point where retrofits were formally acknowledged by the TDSB and do not represent the actual completion of retrofits. If the year prior to any energy efficiency retrofits was used as the baseline, energy savings would be realized during the baseline year leading to an inaccurate determination of energy savings for each project year. In addition, because retrofits are ongoing, energy savings began while the retrofits were underway. Given that the completion date does not provide any indication of
4 Note that the floor space of portable units is not included in the total floor space recorded for each school, but the energy consumption of those portable units (electricity) is included in the totals, which results in an overly conservative GHG reduction estimate.
13 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
when retrofits began, using the year prior to any efficiency retrofits as the baseline could underestimate the baseline emissions; BAS/mechanical and lighting retrofits are not done concurrently. This presents difficulties when establishing a baseline for electricity and gas consumption. For example, in some cases BAS/mechanical retrofits affect not only natural gas consumption but also electricity consumption. If there is not a full year to establish this new baseline before lighting retrofits are done, then baseline electricity consumption cannot be accurately determined.
14 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
5 Inventory of Sources, Sinks and Reservoirs (SSRs) for the Project and Baseline Conditions
5.1 Project Condition SSRs were identified for the project by reviewing the relevant process flow diagrams, consulting with relevant industry stakeholders (through the Alberta Offset System Quantification Protocol Development Process) and reviewing available good practice guidance. This iterative process confirmed that the SSRs in the process flow diagrams included below cover the full scope of eligible project activities under the protocol.
The project condition is defined including the relevant SSRs and processes as shown in Table 6 and Figure 1 and Figure 2 below.
Table 6: Project Condition Sources, Sinks, and Reservoirs
3. Controlled, 1. SSR 2. Description Related or Affected Upstream SS’s during Project Operation Each of the fuels used throughout the project will need to sourced and processed. This will allow for the calculation of the greenhouse gas emissions from the various processes P1Fuel Extraction and Processing involved in the production, refinement and storage of the fuels. The total volumes of fuel Related for each of the SS’s are considered under this SS. Volumes and types of fuels are the important characteristics to be tracked. Each of the fuels used throughout the project will need to be transported to the site. This may include shipments by tanker or by pipeline, resulting in the emissions of greenhouse P2 Fuel Delivery gases. It is reasonable to exclude fuel sourced by taking equipment to an existing Related commercial fueling station as the fuel used to take the equipment to the sites is captured under other SS’s and there is no other delivery. The material inputs to the unit process need to be transported, developed and/or P3 Development and Processing of processed prior to the unit process. This may require any number of mechanical, chemical Related Unit Material Inputs or biological processes. All relevant characteristics of the material inputs would need to be tracked to prove functional equivalence with the baseline scenario. Electricity may be required for operating the Project Unit. This power may be sourced either from internal generation, connected facilities or the local electricity grid. Metering P10 Electricity Usage of electricity may be netted in terms of the power going to and from the grid. Quantity Related and source of power are the important characteristics to be tracked as they directly relate to the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 15 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
3. Controlled, 1. SSR 2. Description Related or Affected Onsite SS’s During Project Operation The generation of heat and power may be for the project site. This generation could require P4 Generation of Heat and Power the combustion of fossil fuels precipitating greenhouse gas emissions. Volumes and types Controlled of fuels are the important characteristics to be tracked. Mechanical or other processes may be required to transfer the heat and power to a P5 Heat Transfer or Power usable form at the project site. All relevant characteristics of the heat transfer or power Controlled Conversion conversion would need to be tracked including volumes and types of fuels are the important characteristics to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and P6a Unit Operation: maintenance of the biological processes within the unit at the project site. All relevant Controlled Biological Processes characteristics of the biological processes would need to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and P6b Unit Operation: Chemical maintenance of the chemical processes within the unit at the project site. All relevant Controlled Processes characteristics of the chemical processes would need to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and P6c Unit Operation: Mechanical maintenance of the mechanical processes within the unit at the project site. All relevant Controlled Processes characteristics of the mechanical processes would need to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and P7 Facility Operation maintenance of the overall facility. This may include running vehicles and facilities at the Controlled project site. Quantities and types for each of the energy inputs would be tracked. Electricity may be generated to meet internal project demand or for export from the P8 Electricity Generation project site. The generation of this electricity may yield incremental greenhouse gas Controlled emissions. Quantities and types for each of the energy inputs would be tracked. Downstream SS’s during Project Operation The material inputs to the unit process need to be transported, developed and/or P9 Development and Processing of processed subsequent to the unit process. This may require any number of mechanical, Related Unit Material Outputs chemical or biological processes. All relevant characteristics of the material outputs would need to be tracked to prove functional equivalence with the baseline scenario. Other The site of the facility may need to be developed. This could include civil infrastructure such as access to electricity, gas and water supply, as well as sewer etc. This may also P11 Development of Site include clearing, grading, building access roads, etc. There will also need to be some Related building of structures for the facility such as storage areas, storm water drainage, offices, vent stacks, firefighting water storage lagoons, etc., as well as structures to enclose,
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 16 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
3. Controlled, 1. SSR 2. Description Related or Affected support and house the equipment. Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels and electricity used to power equipment required to develop the site such as graders, backhoes, trenching machines, etc. Equipment may need to be built either on-site or off-site. This includes all of the components of the storage, handling, processing, combustion, air quality control, system control and safety systems. These may be sourced as pre-made standard equipment or P12 Building Equipment Related custom built to specification. Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels and electricity used to power equipment for the extraction of the raw materials, processing, fabricating and assembly Equipment built off-site and the materials to build equipment on-site, will all need to be P13 Transportation of Equipment delivered to the site. Transportation may be completed by truck, barge and/or train. Related P14 Construction on Site Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels to power the equipment delivering the equipment to the site. The process of construction at the site will require a variety of heavy equipment, smaller P15 Testing of Equipment power tools, cranes and generators. The operation of this equipment will have associated Related greenhouse gas emission from the use of fossil fuels and electricity Once the facility is no longer operational, the site may need to be decommissioned. This may involve the disassembly of the equipment, demolition of on-site structures, disposal of some materials, environmental restoration, re-grading, planting or seeding, and P16 Site Decommissioning Related transportation of materials off-site. Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels and electricity used to power equipment required to decommission the site.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 17 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Figure 1: Project Element Lifecycle Diagram for Project Condition
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 18 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Figure 2: Process Flow Diagram for Project Condition
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 19 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
5.2 Baseline Condition The baseline condition selected and justified in Section 3, includes building energy consumption. To calculate the GHG emissions under the baseline scenario a historic benchmark approach is used. This method uses metered natural gas and electricity consumption from the pre-project condition to.
The baseline condition is defined including the relevant SSRs and processes as shown in Table 7 and Figure 3 and Figure 4, below.
Table 7: Baseline Condition Sources, Sinks, and Reservoirs
3. Controlled, Related or 1. SSR 2. Description Affected Upstream SS’s during Baseline Operation Each of the fuels used throughout the unit process will need to sourced and processed. This will allow for the calculation of the greenhouse gas emissions from the various Related B1 Fuel Extraction and Processing processes involved in the production, refinement and storage of the fuels. The total volumes of fuel for each of the SS’s are considered under this SS. Volumes and types of fuels are the important characteristics to be tracked. Each of the fuels used throughout the unit process will need to be transported to the site. This may include shipments by tanker or by pipeline, resulting in the emissions of Related B2 Fuel Delivery greenhouse gases. It is reasonable to exclude fuel sourced by taking equipment to an existing commercial fueling station as the fuel used to take the equipment to the sites is captured under other SS’s and there is no other delivery The material inputs to the unit process need to be transported, developed and/or B3 Development and Processing processed prior to the unit process. This may require any number of mechanical, Related of Unit Material Inputs chemical or biological processes. All relevant characteristics of the material inputs would need to be tracked to prove functional equivalence with the project scenario. Electricity may be required for operating the Project Unit. This power may be sourced either from internal generation, connected facilities or the local electricity grid. Metering Related B10 Electricity Usage of electricity may be netted in terms of the power going to and from the grid. Quantity and source of power are the important characteristics to be tracked as they directly relate to the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions. Onsite SS’s During Baseline Operation
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 20 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
3. Controlled, Related or 1. SSR 2. Description Affected Each of the fuels used throughout the on-site component of the project will need to sourced and processed. This will allow for the calculation of the greenhouse gas B1 Fuel Extraction and Processing Related emissions from the various processes involved in the production, refinement and storage of the fuels. The total volumes of fuel for each of the on-site SS’s are considered under this SS. Volumes and types of fuels are the important characteristics to be tracked. Electricity will be used in the project condition. This power may be sourced either from internal generation, connected facilities or the local electricity grid. Metering of B2 Electricity Usage Related electricity may be netted in terms of the power going to and from the grid. Quantity and source of power are the important characteristics to be tracked as they directly relate to the quantity of greenhouse gas emissions. Onsite SS’s during Baseline Operation
The generation of heat and power may be required for facility operation. This generation B4 Generation of Heat and Power could require the combustion of fossil fuels precipitating greenhouse gas emissions. Controlled Volumes and types of fuels are the important characteristics to be tracked. Mechanical or other processes may be required to transfer the heat and power to a B5 Heat Transfer or Power usable form at the site. All relevant characteristics of the heat transfer or power Controlled Conversion conversion would need to be tracked including volumes and types of fuels are the important characteristics to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and B6a Unit Operation: Biological maintenance of the biological processes within the unit at the site. All relevant Controlled Processes characteristics of the biological processes would need to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and B6b Unit Operation: Chemical maintenance of the chemical processes within the unit at the site. All relevant Controlled Processes characteristics of the chemical processes would need to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and B6c Unit Operation: Mechanical maintenance of the mechanical processes within the unit at the site. All relevant Controlled Processes characteristics of the mechanical processes would need to be tracked. Greenhouse gas emissions may occur that are associated with the operation and B7 Facility Operation maintenance of the overall facility. This may include running vehicles and facilities at the Controlled site. Quantities and types for each of the energy inputs would be tracked. Electricity may be generated to meet internal demand or for export from the site. The B8 Electricity Generation generation of this electricity may yield incremental greenhouse gas emissions. Quantities Controlled and types for each of the energy inputs would be tracked.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 21 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
3. Controlled, Related or 1. SSR 2. Description Affected Downstream SS’s during Baseline Operation
The material inputs to the unit process need to be transported, developed and/or B9 Development and Processing processed subsequent to the unit process. This may require any number of mechanical, Related of Unit Material Outputs chemical or biological processes. All relevant characteristics of the material outputs would need to be tracked to prove functional equivalence with the project scenario. Other
The site of the facility may need to be developed. This could include civil infrastructure such as access to electricity, gas and water supply, as well as sewer etc. This may also include clearing, grading, building access roads, etc. There will also need to be some building of structures for the facility such as storage areas, storm water drainage, offices, B11 Development of Site Related vent stacks, firefighting water storage lagoons, etc., as well as structures to enclose, support and house the equipment. Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels and electricity used to power equipment required to develop the site such as graders, backhoes, trenching machines, etc. Equipment may need to be built either on-site or off-site. This includes all of the components of the storage, handling, processing, combustion, air quality control, system control and safety systems. These may be sourced as pre-made standard equipment or B12 Building Equipment Related custom built to specification. Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels and electricity used to power equipment for the extraction of the raw materials, processing, fabricating and assembly. Equipment built off-site and the materials to build equipment on-site, will all need to be delivered to the site. Transportation may be completed by truck, barge and/or train. B13 Transportation of Equipment Related Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels to power the equipment delivering the equipment to the site. The process of construction at the site will require a variety of heavy equipment, smaller B14 Construction on Site power tools, cranes and generators. The operation of this equipment will have Related associated greenhouse gas emission from the use of fossil fuels and electricity. Equipment may need to be tested to ensure that it is operational. This may result in running the equipment using test anaerobic digestion fuels or fossil fuels in order to B15 Testing of Equipment Related ensure that the equipment runs properly. These activities will result in greenhouse gas emissions associated with the combustion of fossil fuels and the use of electricity. Once the facility is no longer operational, the site may need to be decommissioned. This B16 Site Decommissioning Related may involve the disassembly of the equipment, demolition of on-site structures, disposal
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 22 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
3. Controlled, Related or 1. SSR 2. Description Affected of some materials, environmental restoration, re-grading, planting or seeding, and transportation of materials off-site. Greenhouse gas emissions would be primarily attributed to the use of fossil fuels and electricity used to power equipment required to decommission the site.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 23 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Figure 3: Baseline Element Lifecycle Diagram
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 24 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Figure 4: Process Flow Diagram for Baseline Condition
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 25 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
5.3 Comparison of Project and Baseline SSRs Table 8: Justification of SSRs
2. 4. Include or 2. Project 1. Identified SS’s Baseline Exclude from 5. Justification for Exclusion (C, R, A) (C, R, A) Quantification Upstream SS’s GHG emissions associated with fuel extraction and processing were excluded based on the fact that these emission factors were developed exclusively for projects in Alberta and may not be applicable to Ontario- P1 Fuel Extraction and based projects. Relevant emission factors for fuel extraction and N/A Related Exclude Processing processing were not available for Ontario. Furthermore, the exclusion of this SSR is conservative given that a greater quantity of natural gas, and hence emissions associated with fuel extraction and processing, is consumed in the baseline condition.
GHG emissions associated with fuel extraction and processing were excluded based on the fact that these emission factors were developed exclusively for projects in Alberta and may not be applicable to Ontario- B1 Fuel Extraction and based projects. Relevant emission factors for fuel extraction and Related N/A Exclude Processing processing were not available for Ontario. Furthermore, the exclusion of this SSR is conservative given that a greater quantity of natural gas, and hence emissions associated with fuel extraction and processing, is consumed in the baseline condition.
P2/B2 Fuel Delivery Related Related Exclude Excluded as the emissions from transportation are greater under the baseline condition. P3/B3 Manufacture of Related Related Exclude Excluded as by definition, they must be functionally equivalent to allow Equipment for the application of the protocol
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 26 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
2. 4. Include or 2. Project 1. Identified SS’s Baseline Exclude from 5. Justification for Exclusion (C, R, A) (C, R, A) Quantification The difference in emissions from the baseline and the project period P10/B10 Electricity are mainly due to implemented Energy Conservation Measures by the Related Related Include Usage TDSB. The project includes retrofits to lighting and/or mechanical control systems, which specifically lower electricity use, as well as natural gas Onsite SS’s
The difference in emissions from the baseline to the project period is mainly due to implemented Energy Conservation Measures by the P4/B4 Generation of Controlled Controlled Include Heat and Power TDSB. The project includes retrofits to lighting and/or mechanical control systems, which specifically lower electricity and natural gas use
P5/B5 Heat Transfer or Controlled Controlled Exclude The project does not include any heat transfer or power conversion Power Conversion P6a/B6a Unit Controlled Controlled Exclude The project and baseline conditions do not include any biological Operation: processes Biological Processes P6b/B6b Unit Controlled Controlled Exclude The project and baseline conditions do not include any chemical Operation: processes Chemical Processes Mechanical processes associated with the unit operation (SS P6c/B6c) P6c/B6c Unit Controlled Controlled Exclude are not included in the quantification as less maintenance is likely Operation: Mechanical Processes required for the new systems.
Excluded as the facility operation is defined to cover the elements of P7/B7 Facility Controlled Controlled Exclude operations at the site that are not impacted by the implementation of Operation the project and as such the baseline and project conditions are functionally equivalent. P8/B8 Electricity Controlled Controlled Exclude There is no onsite power or electricity generation for the project or Generation baseline conditions Downstream SS’s
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 27 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
2. 4. Include or 2. Project 1. Identified SS’s Baseline Exclude from 5. Justification for Exclusion (C, R, A) (C, R, A) Quantification P9/B9 Development Related Related Exclude Excluded as by definition, they must be functionally equivalent to allow and Processing of Unit for the application of the protocol Material Outputs Other
Emissions from site development are not material given the long P11 Development of N/A Related Exclude project life, and the minimal site development required to install the Site lighting fixtures and BAS units. B11 Development of Emissions from site development are not material for the baseline Related N/A Exclude Site condition given the minimal site development required. P12 Building Emissions from building equipment are not material given the long N/A Related Exclude Equipment project life, and the minimal building equipment required. B12 Building Emissions from building equipment are not material for the baseline Related N/A Exclude Equipment condition given the minimal building equipment required. P13 Transportation of Emissions from transportation of equipment are not material given the N/A Related Exclude Equipment long project life, and the minimal transportation of equipment required. Emissions from transportation of equipment are not material for the B13 Transportation of Related N/A Exclude baseline condition given the minimal transportation of equipment Equipment required. Emissions from construction on site are not material given the long P14 Construction on N/A Related Exclude project life, and the minimal construction on site required to install the Site lighting fixtures and BAS units.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 28 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
5.4 Quantification and Calculation of GHG Emissions and Reductions Quantification of the reductions, removals and reversals of relevant SSRs for each of the three greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, and N2O) is completed according to the protocol using the methodologies outlined in Table 9, below. These calculation methodologies serve to complete the following three equations for calculating the emission reductions from the comparison of the baseline and project conditions.
Emission Reduction = Emissions Baseline – Emissions Project
Emissions Baseline = Emissions Gen Heat and Power + Emissions Electricity Usage
Emissions Project = Emissions Gen Heat and Power + Emissions Electricity Usage
Where the following SSRs have been quantified as applicable to the project:
Emissions Baseline = sum of the emissions under the baseline condition.
Emissions Gen Heat and Power = emissions under SS B4 Generation of Heat and Power
Emissions Electricity Usage= emissions under SS B10 Electricity Usage
Emissions Project =sum of the emissions under the project condition.
Emissions Gen Heat and Power= emissions under SS P4 Generation of Heat and Power
Emissions Electricity Usage= emissions under SS P10 Electricity Usage
The following SSRs were not applicable to this project and as such were not quantified:
Emissions Fuel Extraction / Processing = emissions under SS P1/B1 Fuel Extraction and Processing
Emissions Transfer / Conversion = emissions under SS P5/B5 Heat Transfer or Power Conversion
Emissions Unit Operation = emissions under SS P6c/B6c Unit Operation: Mechanical Processes
Emissions Electricity Generation = emissions under SS P8/B8 Electricity Generation
For justifications of exclusion from quantification see Table 8.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 29 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Table 9: Quantification Procedures
1. Project/ 2. Parameter / 4. Measured 7. Justify measurement or 3. Unit 5. Method 6. Frequency Baseline SS Variable / Estimated estimation and frequency Project SS’s Emissions Electricity Usage = ∑ (Elec.Usage. * EF Elec.) Quantity being calculated separately as natural gas and electricity Emissions Electricity Usage t CO2e N/A N/A N/A consumption data are collected separately for the buildings Continuous metering that is Provides reasonable estimate of the P10 Electricity Electricity collected once a parameter, in accordance with the Usage Consumption/ Elec. kWh Measured Direct metering month in the protocol Con. form of a
monthly utility bill Emissions Factor for t CO2e From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as Electricity per kWh, Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting Consumption / EF or MWh documents. on Canada's emissions inventory. Elec. Con. Emissions Gen Heat and Power=∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG CO2); ∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG CH4* 25); ∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG N20* 298) Continuous metering that is collected once a Provides reasonable estimate of the Volume of Natural L, m3 or Measured Direct metering month in the parameter, in accordance with the Gas / Vol NG other form of a protocol monthly utility P4 Generation of bill Heat and Power CO2 Emissions Factor Kg CO2 From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as for Natural Gas per L, m3 Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting Combustion / EF NG or other documents. on Canada's emissions inventory. CO2 CH4 Emissions Factor kg CH4 From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as for Natural Gas per L, m3 Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting Combustion / EF NG or other documents. on Canada's emissions inventory. CH4
30 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
1. Project/ 2. Parameter / 4. Measured 7. Justify measurement or 3. Unit 5. Method 6. Frequency Baseline SS Variable / Estimated estimation and frequency N20 Emissions Factor kg N2O From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as for Natural Gas per L, m3 Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting Combustion/ EF NG or other documents. on Canada's emissions inventory. N2O Baseline SS’s Emissions Electricity Usage = ∑ (Elec.Usage. * EF Elec.) Quantity being calculated separately as natural gas and electricity Emissions Electricity Usage t CO2e N/A N/A N/A consumption data are collected separately for the buildings
Meter readings from Historical baseline electricity B10 Electricity Electricity baseline year are consumption data is the most Usage Consumption/ Elec. kWh Measured compared with project N/A accurate and conservative method for Con. electricity meter determining greenhouse gas readings reductions due to the project Emissions Factor for t CO2e From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as Electricity per kWh, Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting Consumption / EF or MWh documents. on Canada's emissions inventory. Elec. Con.
Emissions Gen Heat and Power=∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG CO2); ∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG CH4* 25); ∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG N20* 298) Historical baseline natural gas Meter readings from consumption data is the most B4 Generation of baseline year are accurate and conservative method for Volume of natural L, m3 or Heat and Power Measured compared with project N/A determining greenhouse gas gas / Vol NG other natural gas meter reductions due to the project. This readings value is adjusted to take into account outdoor temperature variations. kg CO2 From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as CO2 Emissions Factor per L, m3 Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting for NG / EF NG CO2 or other documents. on Canada's emissions inventory.
kg CH4 From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as CH4 Emissions Factor per L, m3 Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting for NG / EF NG CH4 or other documents. on Canada's emissions inventory.
31 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
1. Project/ 2. Parameter / 4. Measured 7. Justify measurement or 3. Unit 5. Method 6. Frequency Baseline SS Variable / Estimated estimation and frequency kg N2O From Environment Reference values adjusted annually as N2O Emissions Factor per L, m3 Estimated Canada reference Annual part of Environment Canada reporting for NG / EF NG N2O or other documents. on Canada's emissions inventory.
Table 10: Emission Factors for Natural Gas Combustion and Electricity Consumption (Ontario)
Natural Gas5
1.879 (2014) 3 Emissions Factor (CO2) kg CO2 per m 1.888 (2015-2016) 3 Emissions Factor (CH4) 0.000037 kg CH4 per m 3 Emissions Factor (N2O) 0.000035 kg N2O per m 2014 Electricity6
On-Peak Emission Factor 0.321057 kg CO2e per kWh
Off-Peak Emission Factor 0.052141 kg CO2e per kWh 2015 Electricity
On-Peak Emission Factor 0.283343 kg CO2e per kWh
Off-Peak Emission Factor 0.058143 kg CO2e per kWh 2016 Electricity
On-Peak Emission Factor 0.243365 kg CO2e per kWh
Off-Peak Emission Factor 0.044200 kg CO2e per kWh
5 Values for Natural Gas Combustion and Electricity Consumption Emission Factors are taken from the National Inventory Report (2014-2015-2016), Part 2, Annex 6-8, Tables A6-1,A6-2, A8-1 and A8- 2 pages 193-194 and 183-184, (Environment Canada, 1990-2012-13-14)
6 Emission factors for electricity represent the On-Peak (marginal) and Off-Peak carbon dioxide emission rate for the Ontario IESO electricity market. Hourly generation data from each electricity generating station attached to the Ontario grid was analyzed for 2014, 2015 and 2016. The contribution of generation from each fuel source during the peak times were averaged over the year to arrive at emission factors for electricity generated in the margin between peak and baseload times and for off-peak times. Appendix C provides more detail on the calculation approach for the electricity emission factors.
32 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
6 Data Quantification and Adjustments
6.1 Retrofit Year Since the project start date is January 1, 2002, all retrofits must occur after this date. The TDSB GHG Calendar contains all schools owned by TDSB and must first be filtered to contain only those schools having undergone a retrofit after the project start date.
The schools were filtered based on the following criteria:
1. A list of 258 schools were identified to have lighting and BAS retrofits performed before 2012. Additionally, between 2013 and 2016 there were 76 schools with BAS retrofits performed and 309 schools with roofing retrofits (136 of the roofing retrofit schools are part of the initial 258 schools identified). 2. Lighting retrofits were filtered based upon the indication of a lighting program code. As the code indicates the budget year, and NOT the project completion, all sites with a retrofit indication were included in the quantification. - i.e. Retrofit Code “01E” indicates a budgetary year of 2001. The actual project completion is at a later date7. 3. Lighting retrofits were also filtered by completion date in order to exclude those retrofits that occurred after January 1, 2003 and up to ten years prior to the vintage year (e.g. ten years prior to vintage 2016 would be December 31, 2006). This is based on the standard 10-year life expectancy of a lighting ballast and due to the reduced availability of T12 lighting since 2013. 4. Building automation system retrofits were filtered to remove the Retrofit code “Ex” and “Y2K” - “Ex” indicates the BAS were pre-existing systems not attributed to any energy programs; - “Y2K” indicates the “Year 2000 BAS Upgrade Program”: BAS upgrades to prevent the “Y2K Millennium Bug”.
6.2 HDD Adjustment Using historical weather data8 and a base temperature of 18oC, a heating degree day9 correction was made to normalize natural gas consumption with weather data allowing for a like-for-like comparison between the baseline and project years. Refer to Appendix B for a sample calculation for correcting gas consumption for Heating Degree Days.
Linear regression analysis is a commonly used technique for HDD corrections. Under this method of analysis, it is assumed that the natural gas consumption of a heated building is proportional to the number of heating degree days over that period. To weather-normalize the data, a year’s worth of monthly degree
7 Email:RE: TDSB Energy Efficiency Offset Project – Data Request. Maurice Buonastella sent on: 02/07/2013
8 Environment Canada (2016), http://climate.weather.gc.ca/historical_data/search_historic_data_e.html
9 Heating degree days (HDD) can be used to normalize the energy consumption of buildings with central heating.
33 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016 days (x-axis) are plotted against monthly natural gas consumption (m3) (y-axis). The "regression line" is the line of best fit through the points in the scatter chart.
For each school, multiplying the number of monthly HDDs in the project year (i.e. 825.9 HDDs for January 2014) by the slope of the regression line for the 2001 baseline and adding the y-intercept from the 2001 baseline gives the corrected volume of baseline gas consumed for that month. Figure 5 below gives an example of the 2001 baseline regression line used to correct baseline gas consumption at Lord Dufferin Jr. and Sr. Public School. The regression line used in the analysis had an R2 value very close to 1.0 indicating that there was generally a very good correlation between weather and energy consumption data.
Figure 5: Linear regression Analysis for Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. Public School in Baseline Year 2001
35,000 y = 40.574x - 573.4 30,000 R² = 0.97 25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000 Gas Gas Consumption(m3) 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 -5,000 Heating Degree Days
6.3 Adjustments for Area Changes in total floor space could be corrected by normalizing energy savings on a per unit area basis. However, since electricity consumption is only metered in aggregate for each facility, it is not possible to disaggregate the portion of the electricity usage that is consumed by portables. Therefore, increasing floor space was accounted for in a conservative way by assuming a constant floor space at each TDSB facility, despite the addition of portable units at various schools. This approach is conservative as there were portables added since 2001 (the baseline year). Given that floor space has increased over the project crediting period, greater electricity savings per square meter of floor space have actually been achieved than have been quantified under this GHG reduction project as the incremental electricity consumption from the portables was included in the project condition, but not the baseline condition.
This approach is consistent with the ‘Simple Retrofits’ approach under the Draft Guide on Alberta Environment’s GHG Quantification Protocol for Energy Efficiency Projects10. The ‘Simple Retrofits’
10 Alberta Environment (2010) Draft Guide on Alberta’s Greenhouse Gas Quantification Protocol for Energy Efficiency Projects, Climate Change Central Guidance Document Workshops, Edmonton Alberta, March 30, 2010.
34 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016 approach is based on IPMVP guidance (i.e. Whole Facility Reporting – Option C) and is used when availability of data is limited. This yields a more conservative quantity of GHG emission reductions than if more accurate and detailed monitoring had been done.
Functional Equivalence - The baseline scenario and project deliver the same type and level of product or service (i.e. they are functionally equivalent). The BAS/mechanical, lighting and roofing retrofits that occurred under the project scenario did not cause the facilities to function in a different manner. In the case of this energy efficiency retrofit project, there are three areas to consider when evaluating functional equivalence:
Lighting levels – Luminary specifications for the TDSB are established for various room types. The TDSB’s specifications are based on the Ministry of Education’s Recommended Illuminances. The light levels are target values with some variations expected, however the luminary specifications are the same in both the project and baseline condition. Energy savings do not stem from decreased luminary output in the project condition; Fresh air requirements – Fresh air requirements were not altered in the project condition such that energy savings resulted from decreasing the quantity of fresh air entering the school facilities.
If the space CO2 concentration increases above the desired set point, the outdoor air damper is modulated as required to increase the quantity of fresh air delivered to the space; Temperature guidelines – Unique TDSB temperature guidelines exist for various room types within a facility. For example, the temperature for a gymnasium is cooler than for a classroom or an office. The TDSB temperature guidelines remained unchanged in the post-retrofit condition. Energy savings do not stem from decreasing temperature during facility operating hours in the project condition.
6.4 Adjustment for the Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Side Management Program The TDSB energy efficiency project included funding for lighting retrofits from the Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s (THESL) Conservation and Demand Side Management (CDM) Program. As the environmental reductions achieved from this program are not solely attributed to TDSB, the emission reductions realized from this funding must be discounted from the total assertion.
31 schools between 2005 and 2006 were retrofitted with T8 lighting. Furthermore, in 2016 the TDSB applied for Toronto Hydro incentives for an additional 16 schools. To determine the portion of energy savings during the period 1-January-2014 to 30-June-2016 attributed to this program, first the list of 31 schools (found in Table 24 & Table 25 of Appendix D) must be compared with the final list of schools included in the lighting retrofit program in Appendix A. This comparison was made for all three vintage years 2014-2016. For the 2016 vintage year the additional 16 schools were added to the list for a total of 47 schools.
35 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
The table below summarizes the number of schools involved in THESL’s CDM program that were included in each vintage year and the associated energy savings. The total emissions savings from the program declined from 2014-2016 as the number of schools involved reduced from 27 to 13 and the grid intensity factor dropped as the Ontario government phased out coal generated electricity.
Table 11: Annual Energy Savings and GHG Emission Reductions from Toronto Hydro Funded Projects Total Number Total Energy Emission Factor Total Emission of Year Savings for Electricity Reductions Schools (kWh) (t CO2e /kWh) (t CO2e) Involved 2013 25 2,370,800 0.0004113 975 2014 24 2,230,800 0.0003210 716 2015 21 2,104,800 0.0002833 596 2016 10 1,315,600 0.0002433 320
The emission reduction breakdown is as follows:
Table 12: Total GHG Emission Reductions from TDSB Energy Efficient Retrofits Discounting Emission Reductions from Toronto Hydro Funded Projects* Natural Gas Electricity Total
Year CO2 CH4 N2O (t CO2e) (t CO2e) (t CO2e) (t CO2e) (t CO2e) Emission Reductions Before Toronto Hydro Discount 13,146 6.00 74.00 3,240 16,466 Toronto Hydro Discount 2014 0 0 0 716 15,750 Emission Reductions After Toronto Hydro Discount 13,146 6.00 74.00 2,524 15,750 Emission Reductions Before Toronto Hydro Discount 15,145 7.00 83.00 2,961 18,196 Toronto Hydro Discount 2015 0 0 0 596 17,600 Emission Reductions After Toronto Hydro Discount 15,145 7.00 83.00 2,365 17,600 Emission Reductions Before Toronto Hydro Discount 11,949 6.00 65.00 1,064 13,084 Toronto Hydro Discount 2016 0 0 0 320 12,764 Emission Reductions After Toronto Hydro Discount 11,949 6.00 65.00 744 12,764 *Totals may not add exactly due to rounding
6.5 Sample Calculations Sample calculations will be presented for the project year 2014 for Lord Dufferin Jr. and Sr. Public School. This corresponds to the linear regression plot presented in Figure 5 which corrects gas consumption for
36 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016 weather between the project and baseline years. The year baseline emissions are calculated is 2001. Building energy consumption in the TDSB buildings is made up from a combination of electricity and natural gas consumption. Therefore, the total energy consumed in baseline scenario is the sum of annual electricity usage and annual natural gas consumed in 2001. The calculation of GHG emissions for the baseline year is as follows:
Emissions Baseline = Emissions Gen Heat and Power + Emissions Electricity Usage
Emissions Electricity Usage = Quantity of Electricity consumed during On-Peak hours (kWh) x GHG
marginal grid emission factor for electricity in Ontario (kg CO2e / kWh) + Quantity of Electricity consumed during Off-Peak hours (kWh) x GHG Off-Peak emission factor for
electricity in Ontario (kg CO2e / kWh)
= 366,993 kWh x 0.3210 (kg CO2e / kWh) / 1000 kg/tonne +
666,909 kWh x 0.0521 (kg CO2e / kWh) / 1000 kg/tonne
= 152.55 tonnes CO2e
Gas consumption at the school is highly dependent upon the weather. To compare the gas consumption from the 2014 project year to the 2001 baseline year, the monthly baseline data is normalized with respect to Heating Degree Days (HDD). The corrected baseline gas consumption is then the slope of the linear regression line (shown in Figure 5 for Lord Dufferin Jr & Sr PS) multiplied by the HDD for each of the 2014 months. The sample calculation for October as a heating month is as follows:
Weather Adjusted Gas Consumption Baseline_October =
HDDproject_October * Slope of Baseline Year Linear Regression + y-intercept of Baseline Year Linear Regression
3 Weather Adjusted Gas Consumption Baseline_October = 224.3 HDD * 40.574 m /HDD – 573.4 = 8,527.3 m3
The previous equation is used for each month and the total adjusted gas consumption for the baseline year is found by summing each of the adjusted months.
Weather Adjusted Gas Consumption Baseline Year =
[HDDProject * Slope of Baseline Year Linear Regression + y-intercept of Baseline Year Linear Regression]
So for Lord Dufferin Jr & Sr PS, the total adjusted baseline gas consumption for the vintage 2014 calculation is: 3 Weather Adjusted Gas Consumption Baseline Year = 159,591 m
37 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Emissions = Quantity of natural gas consumed in the baseline scenario (m3) x Gen Heat and Power 3 emission factors for CO2, CH4 and N2O for combustion of natural gas (tonnes/m ) x GWP of CH4
and N20
= ∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG CO2); (Vol. NG * EF NG CH4*25) ;( Vol. NG * EF NG N20*298) 3 3 3 = ∑ (159,591 m * 0.001879 CO2); (159,591 m * 0.000000037CH4*25); (159,591 m
* 0.000000035 N20*298)
= 301.68 tonnes CO2e
Emissions Baseline = Electricity Usage (tonnes CO2e) + Natural Gas Consumption (tonnes CO2e)
= 152.55 + 301.68 tonnes CO2e
= 454.23 tonnes of CO2e
Emissions Project = Emissions Gen Heat and Power + Emissions Electricity Usage
The year for which the project emissions are being calculated is 2014. Building energy consumption in the TDSB buildings is made up from a combination of electricity and natural gas consumption. Therefore, the total project energy consumption is the sum of annual electricity consumed and annual natural gas consumed in 2014. For Lord Dufferin Jr. and Sr. PS the calculation of GHG emissions for the project year of 2014 is as follows:
Emissions Electricity Usage = Quantity of Electricity consumed during On-Peak hours in the project
scenario (kWh) x GHG marginal grid emission factor for electricity in Ontario (kg CO2e / kWh) + Quantity of Electricity consumed during Off-Peak hours (kWh) x GHG Off-Peak emission factor for
electricity in Ontario (kg CO2e / kWh)
= 269,802 kWh x 0.3210 (kg CO2e / kWh) / 1000 kg/tonne +
490,291 kWh x 0.0521 (kg CO2e / kWh) / 1000 kg/tonne
= 112.15 tonnes CO2e
3 Emissions Gen Heat and Power = Quantity of natural gas consumed in the project scenario (m ) x emission 3 factors for CO2, CH4 and N2O for combustion of natural gas (tonnes/m ) x GWP of CH4 and N20
=∑ (Vol. NG * EF NG CO2); (Vol. NG * EF NG CH4*25); (Vol. NG * EF NG N20*298 3 3 3 =∑ (76,643 m *0.001879CO2); (76,643 m * 0.000000037CH4 * 25); (76,643 m *
0.000000035N2O * 298)
=144.88 tonnes CO2e
Emissions Project = Electricity Usage (tonnes CO2e) + Natural Gas Consumption (tonnes CO2e)
= 112.15 + 144.88 tonnes CO2e
= 257.03 tonnes of CO2e
38 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Emission Reduction = Emissions Baseline – Emissions Project
Emission Reduction= 454.23 tonnes CO2e – 257.03 tonnes CO2e
= 197.19 tonnes CO2e
6.6 Data Sources Using a projected baseline quantification approach, the following data sources required for the calculation methodology outlined in the Protocol:
Quantity of Electricity and Natural Gas Consumed: The quantity of electricity and natural gas consumed are quantified using m3 of natural gas and kWh of electricity that are both metered directly in the project and baseline. The metered natural gas and electricity consumption is based on electric utility bills and the gas consumption is corrected for variations in outdoor ambient temperature. In addition, hourly CEMS data from a sample of 52 schools were used to determine the typical percentage of off-peak and on-peak electricity consumption. Representative samples of schools were selected based on the type of school (i.e. Elementary, Secondary and Other) and an average on-peak and off-peak consumption percentage was calculated. These averages were then applied to all included schools within each category.
Heating Degree Days: The HDD for each month for the vintage years 2014-2016 for Toronto are taken from the Government of Canada Weather Office online database at:
http://climate.weather.gc.ca/historical_data/search_historic_data_e.html
6.7 GHG Assertion The following figure illustrates the GHG emission reductions from January 1, 2002 up to the 2016 vintage year (only 6-months were quantified for 2016 in this reporting period). The trend of reductions achieved generally increases during the first six years of program operation as more schools are being retrofit. The trend levels off after 2008 as fewer schools are added each year. The drop in emission reductions observed from 2010 to 2012 is due to the reduced marginal grid intensity factor. The significant drop in emission reductions in 2013 is due to the change in the lighting baseline from T12 to T8 and the application of two separate grid emission factors for on-peak and off-peak electricity consumption. For the 2014-2016 years there were more retrofits added to the project including BAS/mechanical and roofing retrofits, however, this was counter-balanced with a declining grid intensity factor. The overall result for the 2014-2016 years was a slight increase in reductions from the previous 2013 year. The 2016 reductions account for only the first six months of the year explaining the sudden drop in reductions from 2015 to 2016.
39 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000 Emission Emission Reductions,CO2e t 5,000
0 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 Year
Figure 6: GHG assertion over time
7 Data Management, Monitoring and Control
7.1 Quantification and Monitoring
Table 13, below, provides a summary for the data quality management procedures for the TDSB energy efficiency project. The data sources for energy usage are each facility’s monthly natural gas and electricity utility bills. This data is managed at a central location by the TDSB’s Utility Administration.
The use of utility data is considered under the Quantification Protocol for Energy Efficiency Projects, (Version 1, September 2007) to be accurate in the determination of savings as this data defines payment made for the consumption of energy according to utility meters that meet Measurement Canada requirements.
40 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
Table 13: Data Monitoring and Collection
Description Estimation, Data and modeling, Data Recording Data Sources/ Monitoring justification SSR measurement Uncertainty Other details parameter (electronic unit Origin frequency of or calculation or paper) monitoring approaches method Uncertainty is Measured This is the Conservatively low as utility directly by most estimated as Continuous meters are B10 KWh of utility meters Electronic accurate electricity Utility monitoring, maintained Electricity electricity and data and hard kWh method of consumption is invoices monthly according to Usage consumed reconciled copy measuring assumed to be reporting Measurement from utility this static in the Canada invoices parameter. baseline. requirements. Uncertainty is Measured This is the low as utility directly by most B4 Continuous meters are Natural gas Volume of utility meters Electronic accurate Generation Utility monitoring, maintained consumption is natural gas and data and hard m3 method of of Heat invoices monthly according to adjusted for consumed reconciled copy measuring and Power reporting Measurement HDDs. from utility this Canada invoices parameter. requirements. Incremental Uncertainty is electricity Measured This is the low as utility consumption directly by most Continuous meters are due to P10 kWh of utility meters Electronic accurate Utility monitoring, maintained installation of Electricity electricity and data and hard kWh method of invoices monthly according to new loads in the Usage consumed reconciled copy measuring reporting Measurement project from utility this Canada condition is invoices parameter. requirements. accounted for in measurements,
41 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
which is conservative. Uncertainty is Measured This is the low as utility directly by most P4 Continuous meters are Natural gas Volume of utility meters Electronic accurate Generation Utility monitoring, maintained consumption is natural gas and data and hard m3 method of of Heat invoices monthly according to adjusted for consumed reconciled copy measuring and Power reporting Measurement HDDs. from utility this Canada invoices parameter. requirements.
42 Prepared by Blue Source Canada TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
7.2 QA/QC Procedures Recorded energy data is based on invoice information which is entered to TDSB’s password protected online database accessible only at TDSB’s utilities offices. The invoice information is entered by utility data clerks and two energy data analyst audit the data. Any anomalies in the energy data detected by the energy data analysts are investigated and corrected with updated data accordingly.
A Data Flow Chart has been included below as Figure 7 to illustrate the flow of information within TDSB and to Blue Source.
Figure 7: Data flow from Suppliers to TDSB and to Blue Source
Document Contolled by Documents Controlled Documents Controlled Third Parties by TDSB by Blue Source
•Natural Gas Invoices •TDSB Utility •TDSB's 2001-2016 •Electricity Invoices Administration Electricity and Gas •Weather Information (central location) Consumption Spreadsheets •Emission Coefficients •TDSB Offset Calculator Spreadsheets
7.3 Data Management and QA/QC at Blue Source
7.3.1 Internal Calculator QA/QC There is a number of QA/QC checks built into this year’s GHG quantification calculator:
1. Automatic School Identification by Code: After manual removal of schools not identified as one of the retrofitted schools, TDSB schools are automatically filtered by BAS and LTG code and roofing date specifications and listed as “Included” or “Excluded” with a brief descriptor; 2. Automatic Filtration of unwanted data: The calculator automatically checks whether gas or electricity usage in the project condition is higher than that witnessed in the 2001 baseline year. It also removes schools with no baseline or project year data, or missing values (identified as zeros). 3. 2013 vs. 2014-2016 List of Included Schools: Finally, a baseline check is performed. This compares the list of schools included in the BAS and LTG retrofits from the 2013 quantification year, to those included in the 2014-2016 years. This comparison identified slight name changes, school closures, sales or leases and commented on any other reasons for the differences.
7.3.2 Blue Source Standards Blue Source Canada holds itself to the highest professional and ethical standards. Staff all has experience in working on GHG projects and/or training in the use of ISO14064-2. Junior staff members are mentored closely until their level of competence is deemed sufficient for them to work more independently. This
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 43 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016 experience and training helps to ensure that errors and omissions are minimized and that project documentation is compiled in accordance with the principles of relevance, completeness, consistency, accuracy, transparency and conservativeness.
Blue Source Canada operates a rigorous internal QA/QC process that is built around the principle of senior review (i.e. calculations and reports are checked by experienced staff members prior to being released). The quantification calculator, for example, will be checked for:
Transcription errors/omissions Correctly functioning links/formulas in spreadsheets Correct and transparent referencing of data sources Justification of assumptions Use of, and compliance with, most up-to-date versions of protocols, technical guidance, etc.
In addition, the Project Report is also senior-reviewed for errors, omissions, clarity, etc.
Any issues with any of the project documentation – including the calculator – are recorded using Blue Source’s in-house QA/QC tracking sheet and, as necessary, comments are embedded into the reviewed version of the documents and/or calculator. These must then be corrected before any documents are sent to the third-party verifier.
Staff sign an “Attestation of Quality Assurance and Quality Control” to document that the QA/QC process was followed.
7.4 Record keeping practices Record keeping practices for the project consist of:
Electronic recording of values of logged primary parameters for each measurement interval; Printing of monthly back-up hard copies of all logged data; Written logs of operations and maintenance of the project system including notation of all shut- downs, start-ups and process adjustments; Retention of copies of logs and all logged data for a period of 7 years; and Keeping all records available for review by a verification body
7.4.1 Back-up Procedures at Blue Source Electronic data is backed up by Blue Source’s IT service provider, calitso.com. A copy of this back-up procedure is provided in Appendix E.
7.4.2 Document Retention Policy at Blue Source Blue Source operates a documentation retention policy, which all staff must abide by as a condition of their employment. A copy of this document retention policy is provided as Appendix F.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 44 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
8 Reporting and Verification Details This report has been prepared in accordance with ISO 14064-2.
The verifier, Stantec Inc., is an independent third-party. Contact details for the verifier have been included in Section 3.11 of this report.
An acceptable verification standard (e.g. ISO14064-3) has been used and the verifier was vetted to ensure technical competence with this project type. The verifier was engaged to provide a reasonable level of assurance.
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 45 TDSB Energy Efficiency Project FINAL Report, v3.0 – December 6th 2016
9 Statement of Peer Review This offset project report was prepared by Tooraj Moulai, Senior Engineer, Blue Source Canada and peer reviewed by Aleena Dewji, Senior Carbon Analyst, Blue Source Canada. Although care has been taken in preparing this document, it cannot be guaranteed to be free of errors or omissions.
Prepared by: Peer reviewed by:
Tooraj Moulai Aleena Dewji
06/12/2016 06/12/2016
Prepared by Blue Source Canada 46
Appendix A List of Schools Included in the 2014-2016 Vintage Years Quantification
47
Table 14: List of TDSB Schools that have undergone a retrofit and are included in the 2014-2016 Quantification
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
A.Y. Jackson Secondary School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Adam Beck Junior Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Agincourt CI No No No No No No Yes No
Agnes Macphail PS No No No No No No Yes No
Albert Campbell CI No No No No No No No No
Alexander Muir/Gladstone / The Grove CS No No No No No No No No
Alexander Stirling PS No No No No No No No No
Alexmuir Junior Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Allenby Junior Public School No No No No No No No No
Alliance Centre No No No No No Yes No No
Ancaster Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Anson Park Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Avondale Secondary Alternative School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Banting & Best Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Baycrest Public School No No No No No No No No Bayview MS/Avondale PS/Avondale Elem No No No No No No No No Alt Beaumonde Heights Junior MS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Bendale Bus & Tech Institute No No No No No No Yes No
Bennington Heights ES No No No Yes No No Yes No
Bessborough Drive ES No Yes No No No No No No
Beverley Heights Middle School No No No No No No No No
48
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Beverley R PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
Birch Cliff Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Birchmount Park CI No No No No No No No No
Blacksmith Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Blake Street Junior PS No No No No No Yes No No
Bloor Collegiate Institute No No No No No No No No
Bloordale MS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Bloorlea Middle School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Blythwood Junior Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Bowmore Road Jr & Sr PS No No No No No No Yes No
Braeburn Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Brian Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Briarcrest Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes No No
Brimwood Boulevard Jr. PS No No No Yes No No Yes No
Broadacres Junior School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Broadlands Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Brock Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Brockton Learning Centre / C&S Area B No No No No No No No No
Brookhaven Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Brookside PS No No No No No No No No
Brookview Middle School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Burnhamthorpe CI No No No No No No No No
C.W. Jefferys CI No No No No No No Yes No
Calico Public School No No No No No No No No
Cameron Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
49
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Carleton Village J&S Sports & Wellness No No No No No No No No
Cedarbrae Collegiate Institute No No No No No No Yes No
Cedarbrook Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Cedarvale Community School No No No No No No No No
Centennial Road Jr. PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Central Commerce CI No No No No No No No No
Central Etobicoke High School No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Central Technical School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Central Toronto Academy No No No No No No No No
Chalkfarm Public School No No No No No No No No
Charles E Webster Public School No No No No No No No No
Charles G Fraser Jr PS (West End Creche) Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Charles H Best MS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Charlottetown Jr. PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Chartland Jr PS / Delphi Secondary Alt S Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Cherokee Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Chester Elementary School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Chief Dan George Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Chine Drive Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Church Street Jr PS/Native Learning Ctr No Yes No Yes No No No No
Churchill Public School No No No No No No No No
City Adult Learning Centre No No No No No No No No
Claireville Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Clairlea Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Clinton Street Junior PS No No No No No No No No
50
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Contact Alternative School Yes No No No No No No No
Cordella Junior PS No No No No No No No No
Cornell Jr. Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Corvette Jr PS No No No No No No No No
Crescent Town ES No No No No No No No No
Cresthaven Public School Yes No No No No No No No
Cummer LINC No No No No No No No No
Cummer Valley Middle School No No No No No No No No
Dallington Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Danforth C. & Tech. Institute No No No No No No No No
Danforth Gardens Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
David & Mary Thomson CI No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
David Hornell Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
David Lewis Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Daystrom Public School No No No No No No No No
Deer Park Jr. & Sr. PS No No No No No No No No
Denlow Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Derrydown Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Dewson Street Junior PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Diefenbaker Elementary School No No No No No No No No
Dixon Grove Junior MS No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Don Mills Collegiate Institute No No No No No No Yes No
Donview Middle Health & Wellness Acad. No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Donwood Park Jr. Public S. No No No No No No Yes No
Downsview Public School Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
51
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Downtown Alternative Sch. Jr. Yes No Yes No No No No No
Dr Marion Hilliard Sr PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Dr. Norman Bethune CI Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Drewry SS No No No No No No Yes No
Driftwood Public School No No No No No No No No
Dublin Heights E & MS No No No No No No No No
Duke Of Connaught Jr & Sr PS No No No No No No No No
Dundas JPS / First Nations Jr & Sr No No No No No No No No
Dunlace Public School No No No No No No No No
Earl Grey Senior Public School No No No No No No No No
Earl Haig Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Earl Haig Secondary School No No No No No No Yes No
East York Alternative SS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
East York Collegiate Institute No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Eastern Ave Centre Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Eastview Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Eatonville Junior School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Elia Middle School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Elizabeth Simcoe Jr. PS No No No No No No Yes No
Elkhorn Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Ellesmere-Statton PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Elmbank JR-MS Academy Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Elmlea Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Emily Carr Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Ernest Public School No Yes No Yes No No No No
52
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Essex Jr. & Sr. PS Yes No Yes No No No No No
Étienne Brûlé Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Etobicoke Collegiate Institute No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Etobicoke School of the Arts No No No No No No Yes No
Fairbank Public School No No No No No No No No
Fairglen Jr. Public School No Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Fairmeadow Centre Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Fairmount Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Fenside Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Fern Avenue Jr. & Sr. PS No No No No No No Yes No
Finch Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Firgrove Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Fisherville Sr PS//NW Year Round Alt Ctr No No No No No No Yes No
Fleming Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Forest Hill CI No No No No No No No No
Forest Hill Jr. & Sr. PS No No No No No No No No
Forest Manor Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Forest Valley Outdoor Ed. Ctr Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Frank Oke Secondary School No No No No No No Yes No
Frankland Community Junior PS No No No No No No No No
Galloway Road Public School No No No No No No No No
Garden Avenue Junior PS No No No Yes No No Yes No
Gateway Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
General Crerar Public School No No No No No No Yes No
General Mercer Jr. PS No No No No No No No No
53
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
George Anderson Public School No No No No No No No No
George B. Little Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
George Peck Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
George R. Gauld Junior School No No No No No No No No
George S. Henry Academy Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
George Syme Community School No No No Yes No No Yes No
George Webster ES Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Georges Vanier SS No No No No No No No No
Glamorgan Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Glen Ames Sr PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Gordon A. Brown Middle School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Gracedale Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Greenholme JR-MS No No No No No No Yes No
Greenland Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Greenwood Secondary School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Grenoble Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Grey Owl Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Guildwood Jr PS No No No No No No Yes No
H A Halbert Jr PS No No No No No No Yes No
Haney Centre No No No No No No No No
Harbord Collegiate Institute No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Harrison Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No Heather Heights JPS/Ben No Yes No Yes No No Yes No HeppnerVMAcademy Henry Hudson Sr. Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
54
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Henry Kelsey Sr. Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Heritage Park Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Heydon Park SS (New) No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Highbrook Learning Centre Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Highcastle Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Highfield Junior School Yes No No No No No No No
Highland Creek Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Highland Heights Jr. PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Highland Middle School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Highview Public School Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes No
Hillcrest Jr. PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Hillmount Public School No No No Yes No No No No
Hillside Outdoor Education Ctr No No No No No No No No
Hilltop Middle School No No No No No No No No
Hodgson Sr. PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Hollywood Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Humber Summit Middle School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Humbercrest Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Humberside CI No No No No No No No No
Humewood Community School No No No No No No Yes No
Hunter's Glen Jr. Public S. No No No Yes No No Yes No
Huron Street Junior PS Yes No Yes No No No No No
Indian Road Crescent Jr. PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Inglenook Community HS Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
Inglewood Heights Jr PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
55
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
J.B. Tyrrell Sr. Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
J.G. Workman Public School No No No No No No No No
J.R. Wilcox Community School No No No No No No No No
Jack Miner Sr. Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Jackman Avenue Junior PS Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
Jarvis Collegiate Institute No No No No No No No No
Jesse Ketchum Jr. & Sr. PS No No No No No No No No
John D. Parker Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
John English JMS Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
John G. Althouse MS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
John G. Diefenbaker PS No No No No No No No No
John McCrae Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
John Ross Robertson Jr. PS No No No No No No No No
John Wanless Junior PS Yes No Yes No No No No No
Joseph Howe Senior PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Joyce Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Karen Kain School of the Arts No No No No No No No No
Keele Street PS No No No No No No No No
Kennedy Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Kensington Community Sch. Jr. No No No No No No No No
Kenton Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
King Edward Jr. & Sr. PS No No No No No No No No
Kingslake Public School No No No No No No No No
Kingsview Village JS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Kipling Collegiate Institute No No No No No No No No
56
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Knob Hill Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Lakeshore Collegiate Institute No No No No No No Yes No
Lamberton Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
Lambton Kingsway JR MS Yes No Yes No No No No No
L'Amoreaux CI No No No No No No Yes No
Lanor Junior Middle School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Lawrence Park CI No No No No No No No No
Leaside High School No No No No No No Yes No
Ledbury Park E & MS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Lescon Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Leslieville Junior PS No No No No No No No No
Lester B. Pearson CI Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Lester B. Pearson PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Lillian Public School No No No No No No No No
Lord Dufferin Jr. & Sr. PS Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Lord Roberts Junior PS No No No Yes No No Yes No
Lucy Maud Montgomery PS No No No No No No Yes No
Lynngate Junior Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Lynnwood Heights Junior PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Macklin Public School No No No No No No No No
Malvern Collegiate Institute No No No No No No No No
Malvern Junior Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Maple Leaf Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Maplewood High School Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
Market Lane Jr. & Sr. PS Yes No Yes No No No No No
57
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Martingrove CI No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Mary Shadd Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Maryvale Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Mason Road Junior PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Maurice Cody Jr. Public School No Yes No Yes No No No No
McCulloch Centre Yes No Yes No No No No No
McGriskin Centre Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
McKee Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
McMurrich Junior Public School No No No No No No No No
Meadowvale Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Milliken Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Millwood Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
Mimico Adult Centre Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Monarch Park Collegiate Inst. No No No No No No No No
Montrose Junior Public School Yes No No No No No No No
Morrish Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Morse Junior Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
Muirhead Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Nelson A. Boylen CI Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Nelson Mandela Park P.S No No No No No No No No
Newtonbrook Secondary School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Norman Cook Junior PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Norman Ingram Public School No No No No No No No No
Norseman Junior Middle School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
North Agincourt Junior PS No No No No No No Yes No
58
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
North Kipling Junior MS No No No No No No No No
Northern Secondary School No No No No No No Yes Yes
Northview Heights SS No No No No No No Yes No
Oak Park Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Oakburn Centre No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Oakdale Park Middle School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Oakwood Collegiate Institute No No No Yes No No Yes No
Ogden Junior Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Old Orchard Jr. PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Orde Street Public School No No No No No No No No
Oriole Park Junior PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Ossington/Old Orchard Jr. PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Owen Public School Yes No No No No No No No
Palmerston Junior PS No No No No No No No No
Park Lane Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Park Lawn Junior MS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Parkdale Collegiate Institute No No No No No No No No
Parkfield Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Parkside Elementary School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Pauline Junior Public School No No No No No No No No
Peckham Centre No No No No No No No No
Pelmo Park Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Percy Williams Junior PS No No No No No No No No
Perth Avenue Junior PS No No No No No No No No
Pierre Laporte Middle School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
59
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Pineway Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Pleasant Public School No No No No No No No No
Poplar Road Junior PS No No No Yes No No Yes No
Port Royal PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Princess Margaret Junior PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Queen Alexandra Senior PS No No No No No No No No
R.H. King Academy No No No Yes No No Yes No
R.J. Lang Elementary E. & M.S. Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Regal Road Junior PS Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No No
Rene Gordon Health & Wellness Academy No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Richview Collegiate Institute Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
Rivercrest Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Riverdale Collegiate Institute No Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes
Robert Service Senior PS No No No No No No No No
Rockford Public School No No No No No No No No
Roden PS / Equinox Holistic Alt School No No No No No No Yes No
Rolph Road ES No No No No No No No No
Rose Avenue Jr. Public School Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
Rosedale Hts Sch of the Arts No No No No No No No No
Rosedale Jr. Public School No No No No No No No No
Rosethorn Junior School Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Rouge Valley Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Roywood Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Runnymede Collegiate Institute No No No Yes No No Yes No
Runnymede Jr. & Sr. PS Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
60
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Samuel Hearne Middle School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
SATEC @ W.A. Porter CI No No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Scarlett Heights Entr. Acad. No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
School of Experiential Ed. Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Second Street Junior MS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Secord Elementary School Yes No Yes No No No No No
Selwyn ES Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Seneca School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Seventh Street Junior School No No No No No No No No
Sheldon Centre for Outdoor Education No No No No No No No No
Sheppard PS / Africentric Alt School No No No No No No No No
Shirley Street Jr. PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
Shoreham Public Sports & Wellness Acad. No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Silver Springs Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Silvercreek No No No No No No No No
Silverthorn CI Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Silverthorn CS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Sir Ernest Macmillan Sr. PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Sir John A. Macdonald CI No Yes No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Sir Oliver Mowat CI No No No No No No Yes No
Sir Robert L. Borden BTI No No No No No No Yes No
Sir Samuel B. Steele Jr. PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Sir Wilfrid Laurier CI No No No No No No Yes No
Sir William Osler High School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Smithfield Middle School Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
61
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Sprucecourt Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No
St Andrew's Jr PS/ASE No No No No No No No No
St. Andrew's JHS No No No No No No Yes No
St. Margaret's Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Stanley Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Stilecroft Public School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Summit Heights PS No No No Yes No No No No
Sunny View Jr. & Sr. PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Sunnylea Junior School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Swansea Jr. & Sr. PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Tam O'Shanter Junior PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Terraview Heights/Parkview Alt/CSS LC2 No No No No No No No No
Terry Fox Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
The Elms Junior Middle School Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Thistletown CI No No No Yes No No Yes No
Thorncliffe Park ES No No No No No No No No
Timberbank Junior PS No No No No No No No No
Tippett Road Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Tom Longboat Junior PS Yes No Yes No No No No No
Topcliff Public School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Tumpane Public School No No No No No No No No
Valleyfield Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Vaughan Road Academy No No No No No No No No
Victoria Park Collegiate Institute No No No Yes No No Yes No
Victoria Park Elementary S. Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
62
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Victoria Village Public School No No No No No No Yes No
Warden Avenue PS No No No No No No Yes No
Wedgewood Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Wellesworth Junior School Yes No Yes No No Yes Yes No
West Education Office Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes No
West Glen Junior School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
West Hill Collegiate Institute No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
West Humber Junior MS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
West Preparatory Junior PS No No No No No No No No
West Rouge Junior PS Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
Western Tech. & Comm. School No No No No No No No No
Westmount Junior School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Weston Collegiate Institute No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Weston Memorial Jr PS No No No No No No Yes No
Westview Centennial SS No No No Yes Yes No Yes Yes
Westway Junior School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Wexford Collegiate School for the Arts No No No No No No Yes No
Wilkinson Junior PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
William Burgess ES No Yes No Yes No No No No
William G Davis Jr PS No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
William Lyon Mackenzie CI No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
William Tredway Junior PS No No No Yes No No No No
Williamson Road Junior PS Yes No Yes No No Yes No No
Willow Park Junior PS No No No No No No Yes No
Willowdale Middle School Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes No
63
2014 2014 2015 2015 2015 2016 2016 2016 School Lighting BAS Lighting BAS Roofing Lighting BAS Roofing Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit Retrofit
Wilmington Elementary School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Winchester Jr. & Sr. PS No No No No No No No No
Winona Drive Senior PS No No No No No No No No
Withrow Avenue Jr. PS No No No No No No No No
Woburn Collegiate Institute No Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Woburn Junior Public School No No No Yes No No Yes No
Woodbine Middle School/NEYRAC No No No No No No No No
York Humber High School Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No
York Memorial CI No No No No No No No No
York Mills CI No No No No No No Yes No
Yorkdale Secondary School Yes Yes No Yes No No Yes No
Yorkview Public School No Yes No Yes No No No No
Zion Heights Middle School No Yes No Yes No No Yes No Total Number of Schools Included per 127 161 119 200 6 102 251 8 Retrofit Program
64
Appendix B Sample Calculation for Natural Gas, Adjusted to Account for Heating Degree Days
65
The following sample calculation outlines how the volume of natural gas was adjusted to account for Heating Degree Days using Lord Dufferin School in project year 2014 as the example.
Table 15: Natural Gas Consumption for the Baseline Year (2001) in Lord Dufferin High School
Month Natural gas consumption (m3) January 28,850 February 24,751 March 23,867 April 12,376 May 4,697 June 1,272 July 392 August 42 September 2,311 October 7,299 November 10,188 December 15,854 Total 131,899
In order to normalize natural gas consumption with weather data allowing for a like-for-like comparison between the baseline and project years, a heating degree day correction was made using historical weather data11 and a base temperature of 18oC. See page 22 for a more detailed discussion on heating degree day adjustments.
Table 16: Heating Degree Days for 2014
Month Heating degree days (2014) January 825.9 February 737.1 March 690.6 April 356.9 May 132.1 June 14.1
11 Environment Canada (2014), http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climateData/menu_e.html?timeframe=2&Prov=ON&StationID=9999&Year=200 4&month=3&Day=29
66
Month Heating degree days (2014) July 4.0 August 8.8 September 69.7 October 224.3 November 482.1 December 557.3
Heating degree days for each baseline month were then plotted against the gas consumption for the baseline year. Figure 8 on the next page shows the regression used to correct for baseline gas consumption in the 2014 year for the Lord Dufferin School.
35,000 y = 40.574x - 573.4 30,000 R² = 0.97 25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000 Gas Gas Consumption(m3) 0 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 -5,000 Heating Degree Days
Figure 8: Linear Regression for Baseline Gas Consumption with Heating Degree Days at Lord Dufferin School (2001)
Based on Figure 8, the slope is 40.574 m3/HDD and the y-intercept is -573.4 m3. For each month, the corrected baseline natural gas consumption (adjusted for heating degree days) = (40.574 m3/HDD x 2014- monthly HDD) – 573.4 m3
Table 17 shows the weather adjusted baseline gas consumption at Lord Dufferin School during 2014.
67
Table 17: Weather Adjusted Gas Consumption for Lord Dufferin School (2014)
Example: Lord Dufferin baseline Lord Dufferin Adjusted Heating Degree Days - Heating Degree Days - gas Consumption baseline gas Parameter Baseline (2001) Project (2014) (2001) Consumption (2001)
Notation HDDB HDDP Vgas VGasAdj Units oC*day oC*day m3 m3 Source Environment Canada Environment Canada n/a n/a Electronic (see website in Source Type notes) Electronic (see website in notes) n/a n/a Input Method Reference LookUp Reference LookUp Reference Reference TAB: Ref_Report_GHG_Calen TAB: Reference TAB: HDD -2001 TAB: HDD-2014 dar 1 Ref_Report_GHG_Calendar 1
Equation n/a n/a n/a n/a January 684.9 825.9 28,850.0 32,936.8 February 587.6 737.1 24,751.0 29,333.8 March 566.6 690.6 23,867.0 27,447.1 April 293.8 356.9 12,376.0 13,907.5 May 111.5 132.1 4,697.0 4,786.4 June 29.8 14.1 1,272.0 - 1.3 Month July 9.3 4.0 392.0 - 411.1 August - 8.8 42.0 - 216.4 September 73.6 69.7 2,311.0 2,254.6 October 232.5 224.3 7,299.0 8,527.4 November 325.8 482.1 10,188.0 18,987.4 December 505.0 557.3 15,854.0 22,038.6 TOTAL 3,420.4 4,090.1 131,899.0 159,590.9
68
Appendix C Calculation of the Electricity Generation Emission Factors for the Ontario Grid in 2014-2016
69
Electricity is a necessary commodity for the functioning of a modern society. While electricity is generated around the clock, the highest demand for electricity occurs during the daylight hours when people are active. In Ontario the peak demand hours are published by the Ontario Energy Board, which tend to vary by season and by day of the week. The on-peak and off-peak chart is shown in Figure 9 below.
Figure 9: Ontario Electricity Peak Times
Electricity brought online during peak times has to be “dispatchable” meaning that it can be switched on and ramped up to follow the rising demand. Large generating stations like coal and nuclear are not well suited to throttling, so most of the peak electricity demand is met with natural gas turbines or hydro power in Ontario. In this report the contribution of electricity generated in the “margin” between the peak generation and the baseload generation, as shown in Figure 10 is of interest since schools operate during both the on-peak and off-peak electricity demand hours.
Electricity Generation [MW]
Marginal
Peak Generation Generation
Baseload Generation
Time of Day
Figure 10: Representation of Electricity Generation over One Day
70
Emissions associated with on-peak electricity consumption are determined from the electricity generated to fill the margin between peak and baseload. The difference between the two is calculated. To do this, Blue Source has obtained data from the Ontario Independent Electric System Operator (IESO) that lists the output of every generating station on an hourly basis throughout 2013. To determine the effect of each hour on the overall emission factor, a series of filters is applied to the data:
1. Does the hour occur in the summer or winter? 2. Does the hour occur during a peak time defined by the Ontario Energy Board? 3. Does the hour occur during a weekday or weekend? (weekends are off-peak)
Once the hour is determined to be on-peak or off-peak, the electricity generated during that hour is applied to the annual sum of on-peak or off-peak generation sorted by fuel type. In Ontario, electricity is generated from a mix of natural resources, each of which has its own emission factor. The list of generation types and their respective emission rates is presented in Table 18 below.
Table 18: Emission Factors - Ontario Electricity Production Emission Factor [kg Source Fuel Type CO2eq/MWh] Natural Gas 557 (Environment Canada, 2016)12 Coal 3,000 (Environment Canada, 2016) Nuclear 0 N/A Hydro 0 N/A Wind N/A - Wood Waste N/A -
In 2011, 4.1 TWh of coal-fired generation made up less than 3% of Ontario’s total generation13. In 2013, the last two large coal power plants, Lambton Generation Station and Nanticoke Generating Stations, were closed. As such, the Ontario electricity grid is getting cleaner since the coal-fired generation is being replaced with refurbished nuclear and renewable. The addition of nuclear to the baseload generation frees up hydro capacity to act as peaking generation in the margin. Natural gas turbines continue to be the dominant generation type for electricity generated in the margin.
Table 19 and Table 20 on the next page summarize the analysis of electricity generated in Ontario during 2013, sorted by fuel type:
12 Environment Canada. (2016). National Inventory Report, Part 3, Annex 13, Table A13-7 1990-2014 . Edmonton: Environment Canada.
13 http://news.ontario.ca/mei/en/2013/1/ontario-getting-out-of-coal-fired-generation.html
71
Table 19: Summary of Electricity Generation in Ontario in 2014 Average Generation Average Generation Contribution to On-Peak Hours Off-Peak Hours Marginal Generation Fuel Type [MW] [%] [MW] [%] [MW] [%] Nat_Gas 2447 13.04% 1538 9.01% 908.867 54.884% Coal 20 0.10% 11 0.06% 8.476 0.512% Nuclear 10911 58.16% 10741 62.92% 169.247 10.220% Hydro 4543 24.22% 3996 23.41% 547.042 33.034% Biomass 41 0.22% 18 0.11% 22.358 1.350% Wind 799 4.26% 766 4.49% 0.000 0.000% Total 18760 100% 17071 100% 1655.99 100%
Table 20: Emission Factors for Electricity Generation in Ontario in 2014 Emission On-Peak Grid Off-Peak Grid Marginal Grid Factor Intensity Intensity Intensity
Units [kgCO2e/MWH] [kgCO2e/MWH] [kgCO2e/MWH] [kgCO2e/MWH] Natural Gas 557 72.659 50.194 305.702 Coal 3000 3.128 1.947 15.355 Nuclear 0 - - - Hydro 0 - - - Biomass 0 - - - Wind 0 - - - Total - 75.787 52.141 321.057
Averaged over the 2014 year, the contribution by fuel type to electricity generated in the margin is roughly 55% natural gas, 33% hydro, and 0.5% coal. The average 2014 GHG intensity of marginal electricity generation in Ontario is calculated to be 321.057 kg CO2e/MWh as shown in Table 20.
Off-peak electricity generation based on an annual average is produced from approximately 9% natural gas, 63 % nuclear, 23% hydro, 0% coal and 4% wind. The average 2014 GHG intensity of off-peak electricity generation in Ontario is calculated to be 52.141 kg CO2e/MWh as shown in Table 20.
The off-peak and on-peak consumption of the schools was determined from a sample of 52 schools using hourly CEMS electricity consumption data. The schools were grouped into three categories as follows:
Elementary Secondary (includes schools typed as “Elem/Sec school”) Other (includes Admin Centre, Maint Plant, Rental Fac, Outdoor Ed Ctr and Special Pgm)
72
Based on the percentage of schools in each category random samples of schools were selected for each category as shown in Table 21.
Table 21. Sample of schools with hourly CEMS electricity consumption data School Type Number of Samples Elementary School 41 Secondary School 10 Other 1
The hourly CEMS data from these schools was analyzed to determine on-peak and off-peak consumption based on the filters described above. Table 22 shows the 2014 average on-peak and off-peak % calculations for the sample of schools. This data was then summarized into the three categories to obtain an average on-peak and off-peak % for each category as displayed in Table 23. These percentages were then applied to the baseline and project electricity consumption of each school that was included in the quantification for each vintage year. To get on-peak emissions the annual consumption for on-peak hours was multiplied by the marginal grid intensity factor. Off-peak emissions were calculated by multiplying the annual off-peak hours’ consumption by the off-peak grid intensity factor.
Table 22. On-peak and off-peak percentages for 2014 sample of schools School On-Peak % Off-Peak % School Type ALEXMUIR JR PS 37% 63% Elem School BANTING and BEST PS 35% 65% Elem School BRIARCREST JS 37% 63% Elem School BROOKHAVEN PS 31% 69% Elem School CHEROKEE PS 43% 57% Elem School CHINE DRIVE PS 31% 69% Elem School CLAIREVILLE JUNIOR SCHOOL 31% 69% Elem School DALLINGTON PS 38% 62% Elem School DAVID LEWIS PS 34% 66% Elem School DEWSON STREET JR PS 36% 64% Elem School DOWNSVIEW ES 35% 65% Elem School ELIA MS 33% 67% Elem School ELLESMERE STATTON PS 38% 62% Elem School ELMLEA JUNIOR SCHOOL 33% 67% Elem School EMILY CARR PS 33% 67% Elem School FENSIDE PS 35% 65% Elem School FLEMING PS 41% 59% Elem School FOREST MANOR PS 33% 67% Elem School GLAMORGAN JPS 33% 67% Elem School GRACEDALE PS 33% 67% Elem School
73
School On-Peak % Off-Peak % School Type HERITAGE PARK PS 39% 61% Elem School HIGHLAND HEIGHTS JR PS 33% 67% Elem School HIGHVIEW PS 34% 66% Elem School HILLCREST JR PS 35% 65% Elem School JACK MINER SR PS 33% 67% Elem School JB TYRRELL SR PS 31% 69% Elem School JG WORKMAN PS 39% 61% Elem School LEDBURY PARK E and MS 37% 63% Elem School LYNNGATE JR PS 37% 63% Elem School LYNNWOOD HEIGHTS JR PS 32% 68% Elem School MASON ROAD JR PS 37% 63% Elem School MORSE STREET PS 41% 59% Elem School PARK LAWN JMS 35% 65% Elem School PARKFIELD JS 34% 66% Elem School PARKSIDE ES 41% 59% Elem School PIERRE LAPORTE MS 38% 62% Elem School PORT ROYAL PS 40% 60% Elem School PRINCESS MARGARET JS 38% 62% Elem School RIVERCREST PS 36% 64% Elem School ROSE AVENUE PS 31% 69% Elem School SILVER SPRINGS PS 38% 62% Elem School ETIENNE BRULE JS 29% 71% Other CHARTLAND JR PS 29% 71% Sec School DAVID MARY THOMPSON CI 34% 66% Sec School DR. NORMAN BETHUNE CI 34% 66% Sec School EAST YORK CI 37% 63% Sec School GEORGE S HENRY ACADEMY 28% 72% Sec School NELSON A BOYLEN CI 28% 72% Sec School NEWTONBROOK SS 30% 70% Sec School SCHOOL OF EXPERIENTIAL EDUCATION 36% 64% Sec School SILVERTHORN CI 35% 65% Sec School WEST HILL CI 30% 70% Sec School
74
Table 23. 2014 Average on-peak and off-peak electricity consumption % by school category type School Type Average On-Peak % Average Off-Peak % Elementary School 35.50% 64.50% Secondary School 32.09% 67.91% Other 29.38% 70.62%
75
Appendix D Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Side Management Program
76
In 2005 – 2006, TDSB’s energy management program received funding from Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s (THESL) Conservation and Demand Side Management (CDM) Program. Energy savings and emissions avoided achieved by this funding must be discounted from the total annual emission reductions each year.
Table 24 and Table 25 list the projected energy savings and retrofit dates for the 31 facilities that received funding under THESL’s CDM Program.
Table 24: Facilities that Received Funding under Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Management Program in 2005
Projected Projected Operating Annual Projected Energy School Name Hours Energy Project End Date Savings (hours/year) Savings Start Date (kW) (kWh) Beverley R PS 51 2000 102,000 30-Sep-05 28-Jan-06 Essex Jr & Sr PS 62 2800 173,600 30-Sep-05 28-Jan-06 Highbrook Learning 24 2000 48,000 30-Dec-05 31-Mar-06 Ct Highfield JS 15 2000 30,000 30-Dec-05 31-Mar-06 Huron Street Jr. PS 20 2000 40,000 30-Sep-05 28-Jan-06 John D Parker JS 66 2000 132,000 20-Oct-05 17-Feb-06 John English Jr. MS 69 2800 193,200 20-Oct-05 17-Feb-06 John Wanless Jr. PS 34 2000 68,000 30-Sep-05 28-Jan-06 Lambton-Kingsway 72 2000 144,000 20-Oct-05 17-Feb-06 Jr. MS Lord Dufferin 27 2000 54,000 31-May-05 31-Aug-05 Maplewood HS 86 2800 240,800 29-Aug-05 31-Dec-05 McGriskin Ctr. 106 2800 296,800 30-Dec-05 31-Mar-06 McGriskin Warehouse Millwood JS 25 2000 50,000 21-Nov-05 21-Mar-06 Nelson Mandela Park 99 2800 277,200 20-May-05 31-Aug-05 PS Owen PS 21 2000 42,000 31-May-05 31-Aug-05 Park Lawn Jr. MS 28 2000 56,000 20-Oct-05 17-Feb-06 Parkfield JS 22 2000 44000 30-Dec-05 31-Mar-06 Richview CI 73 2800 204,208 29-Aug-05 31-Dec-05 Secord ES 49 2000 98,000 29-Aug-05 31-Dec-05 Shirley Street Jr. PS 22 2000 44,000 21-Nov-05 21-Mar-06 Sprucecourt Jr. PS 14 2000 28,000 21-Nov-05 21-Mar-06 York Humber HS 73 2800 204,400 31-May-05 31-Aug-05 Yorkdale SS 50 2800 140,000 31-May-05 31-Aug-05 TOTAL 1,108 52,400 2,710,208
77
Table 25: Facilities that Received Funding under Toronto Hydro-Electric System Limited’s Conservation and Demand Management Program in 2006 Projected Projected Operating Projected Energy Annual School Name Hours Project End Date Savings Energy (hours/year) Start Date (kW) Savings kWh Blythwood Jr. PS 14 2000 61,320 2-Jun-06 31-Aug-06 Eastern Ave. Ctr (849 13 2000 56,940 2-Jun-06 31-Aug-06 Eastern Ave.) Hardington PS 20 2000 87,600 1-Oct-06 30-Dec-06 Kenton PS 15 2000 65,700 2-Jun-06 31-Aug-06 Rosedale Jr. PS 11 2000 48,180 2-Jun-06 31-Aug-06 Seventh Street 25 2000 109,500 1-Aug-06 30-Sep-06 Silver Creek 19 2000 83,220 20-Feb-06 20-Jun-06 Tom Longboat JPS 29 2000 127,020 16-May-06 14-Aug-06
TOTAL 146 16,000 639,480
The energy savings are based on the assumption that schools operate for a maximum of 220 days/year, 8 hours/day, with some extra time for cleaning or weekend/evening use. Secondary schools typically have longer operating hours than other schools. Therefore, for elementary schools and middle schools 2000 hours/year lighting used in the energy savings calculation. For high schools and large junior high/middle schools 2800 hours/year is assumed. The annual energy savings from facilities that received this source of funding are calculated for the year the retrofit project was started and for each subsequent project year. The GHG emission reductions associated with these retrofits for each project year after the initial retrofits occurred is also provided.
78
Appendix E IT Backup Procedure for Blue Source
79
Backup Procedure Prepared For: Blue Source
Objective
To minimize interruptions to business by insuring that operation can be restored in case of
Loss of any amount of information due to accidental or malicious deletion; Failure of one or more computers or components such as a hard disk drive; or A disaster resulting in loss of the entire infrastructure, or loss of access to it.
Backup Procedure
1. Backup Rotation
There are 4 external drives in rotation – 2 x Weekly drives and 2 x Monthly drives. 3 out of 4 drives are stored off site at any time Monthly drive is on site every first Monday of every month
2. Retention
2 weeks of continues data change, Email and Server system state is stored on 2 Weekly Drives Data can be restored as far as 2 months back from 2 Monthly drives
3. Backup Schedule
Data backup Full back-up is scheduled to run every Friday at 11:59PM Incremental backup is scheduled to run from Monday to Thursday at 11:55PM Exchange e-mail data base Scheduled to run from Monday to Friday at 5AM System State Scheduled to run from Monday to Friday at 5AM
Off-site storage
Drives are stored off site
80
Backup Procedure Prepared For: Blue Source
Appendix F Document Retention Policy for Blue Source
81
Last Revision: January 8, 2013
Document Retention Policy, version 1.3.
1. All documents relevant to Offset Projects will be kept, in at least electronic format, and where possible, in hardcopy format, for
a. At least 10 years beyond the last year in which credits are created (e.g. a project that creates credits between 2000-2008 will have all records kept until at least 2018), or
b. As required by the Offset Project Program
whichever period is longer.
2. Hard copy documents will be kept in project folders in our Blue Source head office location, which is currently Suite 700, 717 – 7th Av SW, Calgary, AB, T2P 0Z3. All electronic documents will be saved to the appropriate project folder on the Calgary Server (“S:\ drive”).
3. The S:\ drive will be backed up in accordance with Blue Source’s IT Backup Procedure, which may change from time to time.
4. Blue Source’s preference is to keep all documents in electronic form, wherever possible.
5. All employees will comply with this policy as a condition of their employment.
Yvan Champagne
President, Blue Source Canada ULC