Overall Rating | Silver |
---|---|
Overall Score | 55.33 |
Liaison | Rachael Rost-Allen |
Submission Date | Feb. 15, 2022 |
Johnson County Community College
OP-1: Emissions Inventory and Disclosure
Status | Score | Responsible Party |
---|---|---|
1.56 / 3.00 |
Michael
Rea Project Manager Center for Sustainability |
"---"
indicates that no data was submitted for this field
Part 1. Greenhouse gas emissions inventory
Yes
A copy of the most recent GHG emissions inventory:
A brief description of the methodology and/or tool used to complete the GHG emissions inventory:
We use the Clean Air, Cool Planet GHG Reporting Tool.
The overview is available here: http://reporting.secondnature.org/institution/detail!1513##1513
Details are available here: http://reporting.secondnature.org/ghg/ghg-public!3878
The annual progress evaluation for year starting 2015 is available here: http://reporting.secondnature.org/ape/ape-public!130
The overview is available here: http://reporting.secondnature.org/institution/detail!1513##1513
Details are available here: http://reporting.secondnature.org/ghg/ghg-public!3878
The annual progress evaluation for year starting 2015 is available here: http://reporting.secondnature.org/ape/ape-public!130
Has the GHG emissions inventory been validated internally by personnel who are independent of the GHG accounting and reporting process and/or verified by an independent, external third party?:
No
A brief description of the GHG inventory verification process:
---
Documentation to support the GHG inventory verification process:
---
Scope 1 GHG emissions
Weight in MTCO2e | |
Stationary combustion | 468.06 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Other sources (mobile combustion, process emissions, fugitive emissions) | 166.57 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Total gross Scope 1 GHG emissions, performance year:
634.63
Metric tons of CO2 equivalent
Scope 2 GHG emissions
Weight in MTCO2e | |
Imported electricity | 13,038 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Imported thermal energy | 0 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Total gross Scope 2 GHG emissions, performance year:
13,038
Metric tons of CO2 equivalent
GHG emissions from biomass combustion
0
Metric tons of CO2 equivalent
Scope 3 GHG emissions
Yes or No | Weight in MTCO2e | |
Business travel | Yes | 146.44 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Commuting | Yes | 2,030.80 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Purchased goods and services | No | --- |
Capital goods | No | --- |
Fuel- and energy-related activities not included in Scope 1 or Scope 2 | --- | --- |
Waste generated in operations | Yes | 111.80 Metric tons of CO2 equivalent |
Other sources | --- | --- |
Total Scope 3 GHG emissions, performance year:
2,289.04
Metric tons of CO2 equivalent
A brief description of how the institution accounted for its Scope 3 emissions:
Business travel is calculated based on our air travel miles purchased though our procurement department. Waste generated is calculated by our waste hauler billings with weights. Commuting is based on our traffic study and analysis of the zipcodes of where our populations commute from in relation to our campus.
Part 2. Air pollutant emissions inventory
No
Annual weight of emissions for::
Weight of Emissions | |
Nitrogen oxides (NOx) | --- |
Sulfur oxides (SOx) | --- |
Carbon monoxide (CO) | --- |
Particulate matter (PM) | --- |
Ozone (O3) | --- |
Lead (Pb) | --- |
Hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) | --- |
Ozone-depleting compounds (ODCs) | --- |
Other standard categories of air emissions identified in permits and/or regulations | --- |
Do the air pollutant emissions figures provided include the following sources?:
Yes or No | |
Major stationary sources | --- |
Area sources | --- |
Mobile sources | --- |
Commuting | --- |
Off-site electricity production | --- |
None
A brief description of the methodology(ies) the institution used to complete its air emissions inventory:
---
Optional Fields
---
Gross Scope 2 GHG emissions from imported thermal energy (location-based) :
---
Website URL where information about the institution’s emissions inventories is available:
Additional documentation to support the submission:
---
Data source(s) and notes about the submission:
Utility information was gathered from the various associated billings. Travel and commuting information was gathered from procurement department regarding travel and a Traffic study and survey allows use to calculate commuting along with our FTE’s for Students, staff and faculty.
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution or simply email your inquiry to stars@aashe.org.