MurdochUniversity Environmental Report 2003

MurdochUniversity Environment Committee

ENVIRONMENT REPORT 2003

Executive Summary

During 2003, the Environment Committee and the four environmental subcommittees have continued to be involved in developing strategies for the University’s environmental management, as well as the development of environmental policies for MurdochUniversity. The environmental policies have acted as guidance documents to develop strategies and plans for reducing the University’s environmental impact.

The prime areas of environmental management for the Environment Committee and the subcommittees include:

  • Energy,
  • Waste,
  • Water,
  • Built Environment, and
  • Natural Environment.

Work in the areas of Energy, Waste and Water are progressing steadily, while the Built Environment and the Natural Environment both need further work to reach a similar status. Where possible, this report has generated values for a number of commonly used key performance indicators for both the campuses by drawing on data from University sources and data sourced externally.

The University has signed up to the Greenhouse Challenge and is using it as a framework to guide its energy conservation and greenhouse gas abatement activities, which include:

  • An energy efficient lighting roll out across the University;
  • The employment of an Energy Manager
  • Plant and machinery improvements; and
  • Additional benefits from the installation of a new chilled water air conditioning system.

With regard to waste management, the Resource Recovery Strategy (RRS), launched in July 2003, has initiated:

  • An audit of the waste generated by both campuses;
  • An awareness campaign and educational information to improved the University’s recycling levels; and
  • The construction of a composting facility at the Murdoch campus for food preparation waste.

Improvements in mains water use since 2002 and groundwater abstraction during 2003 are both positive signs of the University’s progress towards better water management. While an Integrated Water Strategy (IWS) is being developed to improve the University’s long term water management.

Additional focus will be directed towards the Built Environment and the Natural Environment during 2004 to advance these areas of the University’s environmental management.

MurdochUniversity, like many Australian and international institutions and organisations, seeks to become more economically, socially and environmentally sustainable. The environment provides the foundation for social and economic systems to operate. Where a tertiary educational institution can maintain a correct balance between the economic, social and environmental dimensions, then it can be claimed that such an institution should be considered sustainable. Although MurdochUniversity has yet to achieve sustainability from the perspective of environmental impact, it is making a concerted effort to achieve that objective.

PART ONE – Introduction

This year the Environmental Committee has continued its involvement in further environmental awareness activities on campus, while focusing on the review process of activities conducted by the four subcommittees on Energy, Waste, the Built Environment and the Natural Environment.

The environmental management of the University’s campuses is coordinated by the Office of Facilities Management (OFM) in close association with the Environmental Committee and the environmental subcommittees. Additionally, useful input has been received from academic and general staff, students and their representatives, consultants and other stakeholders.

The Environmental Committee and the subcommittees have developed environmental policies, relevant to the situation and function of the University and its development. The environmental policies include the:

  • Biodiversity Policy;
  • Energy Conservation and Supply Policy;
  • Environmental DesignBuilding Policy;
  • Resource Recovery Policy;
  • Water Conservation and Waste Water Reuse Policy;
  • Water Sensitive Stormwater Policy; and the
  • Environmental Policy.

Note: All of which are available on the internet at: <

The environmental policies will form the foundation for the development of a comprehensive Environmental Management System for all three MurdochUniversity campuses. The University’s Environmental Management System will include:

  • Policies as guidance documents;
  • Associated strategies or action plans for reducing the University’s environmental impacts; and
  • Systems for monitoring, reviewing and reporting that track the outcomes of the University’s environmental initiatives and indicate the University’s overall environmental performance.

PART TWO – Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and Benchmarking

Where possible environmental performance indicators are used in this report to provide quantitative comparative environmental information. The areas of focus for environmental KPIs and any existing KPIs used in this report are indicated in Table 1 below.

Table1. Category, Description and Units for KPIs used in Report

Category of KPI / Description of KPI / Units
University Population / Gross Floor Area (GFA) per EFTSU* / m2 / EFTSU
Greenhouse Gas Production / Annual Greenhouse gas equivalents per unit GFA / kgCO2e / m2
Annual Greenhouse gas equivalents per EFTSU* / kgCO2e / EFTSU
Energy Use / Annual Electricity use per unit GFA / GJ / m2
Annual Electricity use per EFTSU* / GJ / EFTSU
Annual Electricity cost per unit GFA / $ / m2
Annual Electricity cost per EFTSU* / $ / EFTSU
Annual Gas use per unit GFA / GJ / m2
Annual Gas use per EFTSU* / GJ / EFTSU
Annual Gas cost per unit GFA / $ / m2
Annual Gas cost per EFTSU* / $ / EFTSU
Waste Generation / Annual Cost per unit GFA / $ / m2
Annual Cost per EFTSU* / $ / EFTSU
Water & Wastewater Flows / Annual Water use per unit GFA / kL / m2
Annual Water use per EFTSU* / kL / EFTSU
Annual Total water services cost per unit GFA / $ / m2
Condition of Biodiversity / KPIs yet to be determined / ---
Built Environment Efficiency / KPIs yet to be determined / ----

* EFTSU – Equivalent Full Time Student Unit

Environmental Indicators allow benchmarking against past trends and where possible against other campuses or businesses. As environmental monitoring and sustainability assessment are further explored, additional KPIs will be utilised in future reporting systems to convey specific information that assists the determination of the University’s sustainability. Data and KPIs in this report have been sourced mostly Tertiary Education Facilities Management Association (tefma) benchmark reports, and MurdochUniversity data from both utilities metering figures and student enrolment figures.

Some fundamental statistics for MurdochUniversity’s Rockingham and Murdoch campuses are given in Table 2.

Table 2. Some fundamental statistics for MurdochUniversity’s campuses

Campus Gross Floor Area / Effective Fulltime Student Units / Gross Floor Area per EFTSU
Campus & Year / m2 / EFTSU / m2 / EFTSU
Murdoch 2002 / 124,779 / 8,077 / 15.4
Murdoch 2001 / 104,544 / 7,772 / 13.5
Murdoch 2000 / 104,111 / 6,704 / 15.5
Rockingham 2002 / 9,058 / 491 / 18.4
Rockingham 2001 / 9,058 / 395 / 22.9
Rockingham 2000 / 9,058 / 363 / 25.0

* EFTSU – Equivalent Full Time Student Unit Source: Policy & Planning (Murdoch) & tefma data

Energy

Condition

The campuses both purchase energy from the major suppliers of electricity and gas servicing the Perth Metropolitan Area. A small amount of renewable energy is generated on campus for research, teaching and display purposes, with the buildings at Environmental Technology Centre (ETC) providing the best example on campus of an integration system with renewable energy generation systems and low energy use design within the built environment.

The University has recently joined the Federal Government’s Greenhouse Challenge Programme. Although the Greenhouse Challenge Programme has a wider focus than just energy usage, it is reported under the Energy section this year, because most of the associated reform activities have related to energy use.

Based on an independent consultants Greenhouse Challenge site assessment for the Murdoch and the Rockingham campuses for 2001/2002, the value for key environmental indicators of greenhouse impact were determined (Table 3).

Table 3. Key environmental indicators of greenhouse impact for both MurdochUniversity campuses

Production of
Greenhouse gas equivalents per annum / Greenhouse gas
equivalents per
m2 per annum / Greenhouse gas
equivalents per
EFTSU* per
annum
Campus / tonnes CO2e / kgCO2e / m2 / kgCO2e / EFTSU
Murdoch / 23,000 /  207 /  2600
Rockingham /  1,335 /  240 /  2900

* EFTSU – Equivalent Full Time Student Unit

These figures were reported as being comparable with emissions from other tertiary institutions in the Greenhouse Challenge programme. However, MurdochUniversity has further to go until it becomes a leadership institution with regard to greenhouse gas abatement.

Electricity usage has decreased at both campuses, with associated improvements in usage and cost per EFTSU and square metre. See Table 4.

Table 4. Electricity consumption for both MurdochUniversity campuses

Annual Electricity Usage / Annual Electricity Usage per m2 / Annual Electricity Usage per EFTSU* / Annual Total Electricity Cost / Annual Electricity Usage per m2 / Annual Electricity Usage per EFTSU*
Campus & Year / GJ / GJ / m2 / GJ / EFTSU / $ / $ / m2 / $ / EFTSU
Murdoch 2002 / 68,376 / 0.55 / 8.47 / 1,776,065 / 14.23 / 219.89
Murdoch 2001 / 68,140 / 0.65 / 8.77 / 1,766,666 / 16.90 / 227.31
Murdoch 2000 / 71,904 / 0.69 / 10.73 / 1,698,526 / 16.31 / 253.36
Rockingham 2002 / 3,902 / 0.43 / 7.95 / 129,968 / 14.35 / 264.70
Rockingham 2001 / 4,234 / 0.47 / 10.72 / 154,987 / 17.11 / 392.37
Rockingham 2000 / 4,440 / 0.49 / 12.23 / 142,988 / 15.79 / 393.91

* EFTSU – Equivalent Full Time Student UnitSource: Policy & Planning (Murdoch), OFM (Murdoch) and tefma data

In Table 5 a noticeable drop in the annual cost of gas in 2002 is evident. This relates to a change in contractual arrangements that subsequently produced financial savings. The increase in student numbers has had an influence on the figures for usage per EFTSU at both campuses. Additionally, the increase in Gross Floor Area (GFA) is a factor in the decline of annual gas usage per unit area floor area for the South Street campus (Table 5 below).

Table 5. Gas consumption for both MurdochUniversity campuses

Annual Gas Usage / Annual Gas Usage per m2 / Annual Gas Usage per EFTSU* / Annual Total Gas Cost / Annual Gas Usage per m2 / Annual Gas
Usage per EFTSU*
Campus & Year / GJ / GJ / m2 / GJ / EFTSU / $ / $ / m2 / $ / EFTSU
Murdoch 2002 / 22,574 / 0.18 / 2.79 / 180,394 / 1.45 / 22.33
Murdoch 2001 / 24,972 / 0.24 / 3.21 / 305,832 / 2.93 / 39.35
Murdoch 2000 / 23,660 / 0.23 / 3.53 / 267,354 / 2.57 / 39.88
Rockingham 2002 / 1,920 / 0.21 / 3.91 / 23,708 / 2.62 / 48.29
Rockingham 2001 / 2,225 / 0.25 / 5.63 / 25,597 / 2.83 / 64.80
Rockingham 2000 / 1,695 / 0.19 / 4.67 / 20,483 / 2.26 / 56.43

* EFTSU – Equivalent Full Time Student UnitSource: Policy & Planning (Murdoch), OFM (Murdoch) and tefma data

Pressure

As a peak organisation within the wider community and as a member of the Greenhouse Challenge Programme, the University will need to keep its energy usage and greenhouse gas abatement endeavours regularly reviewed. Given the continued expansion of the University, energy consumption increases will need to be monitored and managed.

Awareness among staff and students about the effect of an individual’s energy usage will be an issue that requires ongoing focus. Currently costs are not borne directly by the groups of users that consume energy, and if those user groups do not benefit from savings, appropriate management of energy use can suffer inconsistent results.

Additionally, implementation of energy efficient technologies and design usually incurs increased capital outlay and often involves payback periods that extend longer than regular capital works. This creates a perceived tension between catering for the core business requirements of the institution and implementation of energy efficient systems. Hence, identification of mechanisms for resourcing both types of activities while avoiding disharmony between immediate requirements and the long term sustainability of the University will be a continuing challenge.

Response

The University is using the Greenhouse Challenge Programme as a framework to guide energy conservation and greenhouse gas reduction activities for both its campuses, examples of which are outlined below.

The University is conducting a number of audits of energy and water usage, and waste generation, utilising both in-house expertise and external consultants to gain data for benchmarking performance over time and for comparing MurdochUniversity with other similar organisations and institutions.

The recent employment of an Energy Manager will affect changes in a number of areas associated with energy across the University. A staff and student energy use awareness campaign will be a key output of the position. While identification, planning, analysis, management and monitoring of new energy initiatives will be another major focus for this position.

In 2004, OFM will be implementing and managing the expansion of the chilled-water air-conditioning system, which will extend reliable centralised air conditioning services across more of the South Street campus. An additional benefit of this new system is more energy efficient air conditioning for the campus. Space heating and cooling is a major energy consumer for organisations such as the University. Hence, improvements to these systems have a large impact on reducing energy requirements.

After a successful piloting programme of a more efficient light system in a section of the PhysicalSciencesBuilding, a general role out of energy efficient lighting will occur across campus over the next 2 years. This adoption of more efficient technology and practices will:

  • Produce cost savings due to energy savings of 8.4 kWh per square metre per year (1.4 year payback on outlays);
  • Reduce maintenance hours on the improved lighting systems (25% reduction);
  • Produce an improved quality of light output (colour and consistency); and
  • Achieve Greenhouse emissions reductions of over one hundred tonnes of CO2 and over half a tonne of both NO2 and SO2 per annum.

Source: Energy Working Group (Murdoch), from “Lighting Retrofit Project” report

Additionally, ongoing energy savings delivered through the appropriate replacement, upgrading and maintenance of plant and machinery will become increasingly integrated into the regular activities of the staff at the University.

Waste

Condition

The City of Melville are contracted to collect general waste, recyclable materials and some liquid waste from the Murdoch South Street campus.

During 2003 the Rockingham campus has changed its waste and recycling collection provider to SITA Australia.

Table 6. Waste collection cost figures for 2002

Cost / Cost per unit GFA / Cost per EFTSU
Campus / $ / $ / m2 / $ / EFTSU
Murdoch 2002 / 79,460 / 0.64 / 9.84
Rockingham 2002 / 3,525 / 0.39 / 7.18

Source: Policy & Planning (Murdoch) and tefma data

During 2003 the first stages of the Resource Recovery Strategy (RRS) were implemented. Part of the RRS was conducting a campus wide waste audit to obtain a better view of the generated wastes. The Centre for Organic Waste Management (COWM) conducted the audit, identifying various waste generating sectors and providing analysis of each sector’s waste data.

Table 7. Waste composition figures for MurdochUniversity campuses

Waste Sector / Location / Recyclable / Compostable / Residue
Office Waste / South Street / 56%  11.1% / 20%  6.5% / 24%  7.0%
General Bin Waste / South Street / 22%  6.8% / 52%  9.3% / 26%  4.2%
Kitchen Waste / South Street / 5%  2.9% / 82%  2.8% / 13%  0.1%
Dining Waste / South Street / 34%  6.5% / 45%  5.5% / 21%  3.2%
Kitchen & Dining Mixed / South Street / 51%  19.5% / 35%  14.9% / 14%  5.0%
Recycling / South Street / 94%  3.9% / 2%  1.6% / 4%  2.6%
General Bin Waste / Rockingham / 50%  8.3% / 35%  9.5% / 15%  6.4%

Source: COWM (Murdoch) data

The waste stream can be sorted into paper & cardboard recycling, recyclable containers, general waste and a number of hazardous liquid wastes. The separation of paper & cardboard and recyclables are activities that have been extended with the assistance of the City of Melville.

Pressure

Future increases in the number of students at Murdoch and an increase in commercial and recreational activities on the campus increase the pressure on waste management and increase waste volumes. The cost of waste disposal is expected to increase as landfill sites are closed down and if waste volumes increase.

Response

On July 31st the Resource Recovery Strategy was launched as part of a set of initiatives with the objective of reducing the amount of recyclable and compostable materials entering landfill. The Resource Recovery Strategy along with other waste management activities will continue to be implemented over the next 2 years, with the goal of developing the required infrastructure to meet the objectives outlined in the Resource Recovery Policy for MurdochUniversity.

The strategy is comprehensive in its approach and aims to increase recycling by up to 40% with new bins, signage and educational information. New bin stations and waste collection sites across both campuses have allowed paper and cardboard waste as well as recyclable materials to be increasingly diverted from the general waste stream.

The construction of a composting facility at the Murdoch campus is progressing steadily. The compost produced by the process will provide a high quality horticultural material well suited for use in landscaping on campus.

Additionally, waste auditing activities will continue at both campuses to assess waste composition and generation, as well as any positive effects of the Resource Recovery Strategy.

With the Vice Chancellor’s endorsement of the policy regarding the preferred use of recycled paper in print production, Murdoch Print has moved to make paper with recycled content:

  • a first choice for internal projects;
  • an option for external customers; and
  • a likely option for University Readers in the 2004 academic year.

MurdochUniversity through the ETC and COWM is currently trialing an environmental technology at St John of God Hospital to process the Hospital’s catering waste. The intention is to continue housing the system at the Hospital, allowing research students to opportunity to study an operating medium scale organic waste processing technology. This outreach activity has been an opportunity for the University to share its environmental technology skills and expertise within the local precinct, allowing another local organisation to improve its sustainability.

Water

Condition

Some aspects of the University’s mains and groundwater utilisation have continued to be a management challenge. Mains water is used internally in kitchens, toilets, and laboratories, for watering animals and in a small area of garden. Additionally, mains water is used domestically in the StudentVillage, Lakeview Apartments and at St Ives Murdoch. The mains water usage and the total water services charges for both campuses for 2000, 2001and 2002 are shown in Table 8.

Table 8. Mains water consumption for 2000, 2001 and 2002

Annual Water Usage / Annual Water
Usage per m2 / Annual Water Usage per
EFTSU* / Annual
Total Water
Services Cost / Total Water
Services Costs per
Unit Used
Campus & Year / kL / kL / m2 / kL / EFTSU / $ / $ / kL
Murdoch 2002 / 177,959 / 1.43 / 22.0 / 519,356 / 2.92
Murdoch 2001 / 200,777 / 1.92 / 25.8 / 539,427 / 2.69
Rockingham 2002 / 5,362 / 0.59 / 10.9 / 33,623 / 2.74
Rockingham 2001 / 5,423 / 0.60 / 13.7 / 32,155 / 3.84

* EFTSU – Equivalent Full Time Student UnitSource: Policy & Planning (Murdoch) and tefma data