ENERGY AUDITING AND ESTIMATING GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS FOR AUSTRALIAS TOURIST ACCOMMODATION SECTOR

HOTELS, SELF-CONTAINED APARTMENT COMPLEXES, ECO-RESORTS AND CARAVAN PARKS IN QUEENSLAND

By Jan Warnken and Melanie Bradley

RESEARCH REPORT

RESEARCH REPORT SERIES The primary aim of CRC Tourisms research report series is technology transfer. The reports are targeted toward both industry and government users and tourism researchers. The content of this technical report series primarily focuses on applications, but may also advance research methodology and tourism theory. The report series titles relate to CRC Tourisms research program areas. All research reports are peer reviewed by at least two external reviewers. For further information on the report series, access the CRC website [www.crctourism.com.au]. EDITORS Prof Chris Cooper University of Queensland Prof Terry De Lacy CRC for Sustainable Tourism Prof Leo Jago CRC for Sustainable Tourism

Editor-in-Chief Chief Executive Director of Research

National Library of Australia Cataloguing in Publication Data

Warnken, Jan. Energy auditing and estimating greenhouse gas emissions for Australia's tourist accommodation sector : hotels, self-contained apartment complexes, eco-resorts and caravan parks in Queensland. Bibliography. ISBN 1 876685 82 4. 1. Tourism - Environmental aspects - Queensland. 2. Greenhouse gases Queensland. 3. Electric power consumption - Queensland. I. Bradley, Melanie. II. Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism. III. Title. 338.4791943

2002 Copyright CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd

All rights reserved. No parts of this report may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by means of electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior permission of the publisher. Any enquiries should be directed to Brad Cox, Director of Communications or Trish OConnor, Publications Manager to info@crctourism.com.au.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We greatly appreciate the help and support offered by those businesses that agreed to participate in this study. Most of all, we wish to acknowledge the kind assistance shown by staff who provided data, information and advice during the course of this project.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Over the last century tourism has arguably become humanitys most significant cultural pastime. Millions of people engage in tourism daily, in a variety of environments, in all parts of the world. The emergence of tourism as the worlds largest industry has led to calls for monitoring its environmental performance. While some efforts have been made to undertake auditing for the transport and travel sector, few studies have attempted to do so for the tourist accommodation sector. This report is based on a study that addressed the lack of energy auditing for tourist accommodation. It highlights some of the factors that need to be taken into account when calculating energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for different types of accommodation. Data for this study were collected as a series of independent energy audits for eleven (11) hotels, thirteen (13) self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs), five (5) eco-resorts, and six (6) caravan parks, all situated along the Queensland coast between the Cairns and Gold Coast regions. Efforts were made to collect figures for energy consumption from all accommodation providers. Unfortunately, complete data sets could not be obtained from each business due to varying levels of in-house auditing. However, benchmark per capita figures for electricity and total energy consumption could be calculated for most hotels and eco-resorts. With some limitations, benchmark per capita figures for electricity and total energy consumption were estimated for caravan parks, and benchmark per capita figures for electricity consumption were estimated for SCACs. Comparisons of electricity figures between the different types of accommodation revealed that on average, per capita consumption of electricity was greatest for hotels and lowest for caravan parks. Similarly, comparisons of per capita total energy consumption revealed that the mean figure for hotels was greatest, followed by the mean figures for eco-resorts and caravan parks. Based on the collection of both quantitative and qualitative data, this report will highlight limitations and opportunities for energy auditing of tourist accommodation. It will also identify three approaches and make recommendations for calculating accurate estimates of greenhouse gas emissions for the entire tourist accommodation sector.

CONTENTS
1. Introduction ..........................................................................1 1.1 Tourist accommodation and the need for energy management..................................................................1 1.2 Energy auditing: a tool for energy management.............2 1.3 Factors affecting energy consumption ............................4 1.3.1 Factors internal to tourist accommodation...........4 1.3.2 Factors external to tourist accommodation ..........6 1.4 Energy auditing for tourist accommodation....................7 1.5 Per capita measures for energy auditing .......................10 1.6 Research gaps in auditing energy consumption for the tourist accommodation sector ................................11 2. Focus and Aims of Study ...................................................12 3. Methods ........................................................................14 3.1 Study scoping...............................................................14 3.1.1 Spatial scope .....................................................14 3.1.2 Subject scope ....................................................14 3.1.3 Temporal scope .................................................16 3.2 Business sampling and affiliation ..................................17 3.3 Data collection .............................................................18 3.3.1 Qualitative data .................................................19 3.3.2 Quantitative data...............................................19 3.4 Data analysis ................................................................22 3.4.1 Level A auditing environmental performance of individual businesses .....................................23 3.4.2 Level B auditing environmental performance comparisons between businesses ......................25 4. Results and Discussion .......................................................26 4.1 Level A auditing environmental performance of individual businesses ...........................31 4.1.1 Examination of in-house environmental auditing and the potential for conducting independent environmental auditing (Aim 1) .........................31 4.1.2 Discussion: in-house auditing and the potential for independent auditing (Aim 1) ......................37

ii

4.2

4.1.3 Investigation of factors affecting electricity and gas consumption (Aim 2)............................39 4.1.4 Discussion: factors affecting electricity and gas consumption (Aim 2) .........................................41 Level B Auditing environmental performance comparisons between businesses .................................44 4.2.1 Calculating and comparing benchmark figures for energy consumption within and between accommodation types (Aim 3&4).......................44 4.2.2 Discussion: energy consumption comparisons hotels and eco-resorts (Aim 4) ...........................46 4.2.3 Benchmark figures for self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs) (Aim 3)...............47 4.2.4 Discussion: benchmark figures for SCACs ..........49

5. Conclusions and Recommendations .................................50 5.1 Level C auditing calculating energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for industry sectors..............51 5.1.1 Calculating greenhouse gas emissions produced by the tourist accommodation sector (Aim 5) ....51 5.2 Recommendations for calculating accurate estimates of greenhouse gas emissions ........................................56 5.2.1 Energy consumption figures should be collected over several years................................57 5.2.2 Sampling from accommodation sector should include a wide cross-section of businesses.........57 5.2.3 Accommodation categories should be narrowly defined..............................................................57 5.2.4 Figures for energy consumption should be information in the public domain ......................58 5.2.5 Standardised auditing spreadsheets should be developed for different types of accommodation ................................................58 5.3 Final conclusions ..........................................................60 REFERENCES ...............................................................................61

iii

APPENDICES 1: Technical details and descriptive information for hotels .........65 2: Technical details and descriptive information for self-contained apartment complexes .....................................70 3: Technical details and descriptive information for eco resorts ..74 4: Technical details and descriptive information for caravan parks ....................................................................................76 AUTHORS ...................................................................................77 LIST OF TABLES 1: Independent energy auditing for tourist accommodation ......................................................................9 2: Sources of data collection for eco-resorts ..............................22 3: Results of the data collection process ....................................27 4: Electricity consumption data ..................................................29 5: Gas consumption data ..........................................................30 6: The extent of in-house energy auditing .................................31 7: Regression results factors affecting electricity and gas consumption ...................................................................40 8: Benchmark energy figures for hotels and eco-resorts.............44 9: Benchmark figures for self-contained apartment complexes .............................................................................47 10: Results summary for self-contained apartment complexes .............................................................................48 LIST OF FIGURES 1: Conceptual Model levels of environmental auditing for tourist accommodation ......................................................4 2: SCACs the different payment arrangements for electricity purchase and payment...........................................21 3: Electricity consumption data ..................................................45 4: Gas consumption data ..........................................................45

iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ABS Australian Bureau of Statistics a/c air conditioning AGO Australian Greenhouse Office ANOVA Analysis of Variance apts apartments bed/bedrm bedroom c/fans ceiling fans CP common property CRC Tourism Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism EAA Ecotourism Association of Australia elec electric/electricity EPA Environmental Protection Agency GC Gold Coast GCP Greenhouse Challenge Program GN guest nights IH & RA International Hotel and Restaurant Association IHEI International Hotels Environment Initiative ISO International Organization for Standardization LCA Life Cycle Analysis occup occupancy Raind raindays RH 3 relative humidity at 3pm RN room nights SC Sunshine Coast SCACs self-contained apartment complexes TCA Tourism Council Australia Temp temperature UK CEED United Kingdom Centre for Economic and Environmental Development UN unit nights UNEP United Nations Environment Program WTO World Tourism Organization WTTC World Travel and Tourism Council

vi

1.

INTRODUCTION
1.1 Tourist Accommodation and the Need for Energy Management

Global warming is arguably one of the most serious environmental problems confronting our planet. The tourism industry is a major contributor to this problem as it consumes large amounts of energy. The contribution made by the travel sector is widely acknowledged (Mathieson and Wall, 1982; WTTC et al., 1995; UK CEED, 1998; Gssling, 2000) and efforts have been directed at reducing energyrelated environmental impacts, particularly from air travel (Janic, 1999). However, another component of the tourism industry that uses considerable energy is the accommodation sector (IHEI, 1993; IHA et al., 1995; TCA and CRC Tourism, 1998). If this sector is to improve its environmental performance and operate in a more sustainable manner, it must implement effective energy management strategies. The need for effective energy management strategies has been recognised by organisations, documents and agreements both internal and external to the accommodation sector. Key documents include Agenda 21, from the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework on Climate Change. International organisations that have encouraged energy management initiatives include the International Hotel Association, the International Hotels Environment Initiative and the World Travel and Tourism Council. At a domestic level, major organisations that have promoted energy management include the Australian Greenhouse Office (1999) and Tourism Council Australia (TCA and CRC Tourism, 1998). Effective energy management should not only incorporate ways to decrease energy consumption and improve energy efficiency, but also methods for measuring and monitoring energy consumption over time. Measuring and monitoring of energy consumption is possible using energy auditing. Indeed, energy auditing is regarded as a key tool for improving the environmental performance of tourism enterprises (Goodall, 1995).

1.2

Energy auditing: a tool for energy management

From environmental management literature (for example Buckley, 1991; Ding and Pigram, 1995; Goodall, 1995; Birkin, 1996; Diamantis and Westlake, 1997) it is possible to distinguish four major levels at which energy auditing can be undertaken: 1. Level A audits focus on the environmental performance of individual businesses. They measure levels of energy consumption and resultant greenhouse gas emissions, in order to assess the effectiveness of environmental management systems and the impact of business operations in each case. 2. Level B audits draw environmental performance comparisons between similar and/or different types of businesses within the same industry sector. These comparisons are based upon information collected at Level A. 3. Level C audits calculate overall energy use and greenhouse gas output for entire industry sectors, and draw environmental performance comparisons between different sectors. 4. Level D audits focus on individual products produced by businesses. They use a methodology known as Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) to identify and evaluate the energy used by a product from cradle to grave. LCAs consider extraction and processing of raw materials; manufacturing, transportation and distribution of a product; product use and maintenance, as well as final disposal (Bhm and Walz, 1996) Figure 1 provides a conceptual framework for this report that is based on the first three levels of energy auditing. Level D auditing is not addressed because its data requirements were beyond the scope of this study. Figure 1 shows that environmental performance at Levels A and B subsequently determines the environmental performance of the accommodation sector at Level C. In turn, this environmental performance is reflected in sector-wide biospheric impacts, such as greenhouse gas emissions.

Incorporated within this figure are a number of variables that can directly influence levels of energy consumption and environmental performance. With Level A auditing, important variables include building size and location, services and facilities provided, occupancy levels and climatic factors such as temperature. At Level B, where the performances of different businesses are compared, significant variables include type of operation, for example hotels versus ecoresorts; and type-specific management systems, for instance, ecoaccreditation schemes. For Level C auditing, which deals with entire industry sectors, important variables include industry-related regulations such as licenses, legislative standards and quality assurance schemes. While each of these variables are listed for one level only, their influence can extend beyond that particular aspect of energy auditing. For example, variables such as services and facilities can directly influence energy consumption and energy auditing outcomes at Levels B and C, and climatic factors can affect energy performance at all three levels. Consideration of these variables is useful for understanding why particular levels and patterns of energy consumption occur. Indeed, previous studies have considered some of these factors when conducting energy audits for tourist accommodation (UK CEED, 1998; Deng and Burnett, 2000). Results from these studies will be detailed in the section that follows.

Figure 1: Conceptual Model levels of environmental auditing for tourist accommodation LEVEL A Individual Businesses Building (size, location, Environmental age, condition) management system Technical standards Climatic variables Size of business Occupancy levels Facilities & services Type of tourists Special events LEVEL B Business Type Type of operation Type-specific management systems LEVEL C Accommodation Sector Industry-related regulations Environmental performance (energy consumption) Biospheric impacts (e.g. greenhouse gas emissions)

1.3 1.3.1

Factors affecting energy consumption Factors internal to tourist accommodation

Internal factors that may influence environmental performance include year of building construction; accommodation star rating; occupancy levels; total floor area; number of guest rooms; services and facilities provided; and temperature control systems. Deng and Burnett (2000) have considered some of these factors in an energy performance study of hotel buildings in Hong Kong. However they found that factors such as hotel class, occupancy level, total floor area, hotel age, number of guest rooms and number of restaurants, did not correlate with levels of total energy use per unit of gross floor area.

Deng and Burnett (2000) reasoned that these results may have been due to limited sample size (n = 16), or because it is difficult to form obvious correlations using the considered factors. In addition, they provided three reasons why occupancy levels did not appear to directly influence hotel energy use. Firstly, hotel restaurants, which are large consumers of energy, are open to the general public as well as in-house guests. Secondly, unoccupied rooms are often airconditioned to prevent odour build-up and discomfort. Thirdly, a hotel building can actually be divided into two parts, guest floors and nonguest floors. Indeed, Deng and Burnett (2000) have suggested that if energy performance is evaluated separately for each part, a relationship will possibly be observed between occupancy levels and energy use on the guest floors. On the other hand, the United Kingdom Centre for Economic and Environmental Development (UK CEED), in its study of environmental impacts produced by tourist accommodation in St Lucia (UK CEED, 1998), concluded that factors such as number of guest rooms and the provision of extra facilities and services, were positively related to total levels of energy consumption. However, this conclusion is based upon direct observation and inference from quantitative and qualitative data. The UK CEED (1998) study did not involve any statistical analyses. UK CEED (1998) also considered other internal factors when reviewing the environmental performance of tourist accommodation in St Lucia. UK CEED (1998) suggested that larger resorts are in an advantageous position to improve environmental performance because they often have well developed management systems, greater technical expertise, greater financial resources and more opportunity to achieve economies of scale in comparison with smaller resorts. The attitudes and commitment demonstrated by staff and employees towards environmental management, and the environmental awareness of guests, were also identified as significant factors that could affect levels of resource consumption. In addition, style, layout and orientation of buildings are other factors that should be considered when assessing environmental performance. In fact the Australian Greenhouse Office (1999), in its report on greenhouse gas emissions from the commercial building sector, has acknowledged that building shell performance largely dictates heating,

cooling and illumination requirements. This report also states that on average, space cooling, ventilation and lighting account for 71% of greenhouse gas emissions within the commercial building sector. 1.3.2 Factors external to tourist accommodation

Climatic variables are external factors that are likely to influence the environmental performance of tourist accommodation enterprises. Deng and Burnett (2000), in their study of hotel buildings in Hong Kong, found that energy use patterns followed seasonal variations in outdoor air temperature. They reasoned this was because use of air conditioning dominates total energy consumption and the operation of air conditioning is related to climate. In addition, an in-house environmental audit conducted by the Hyatt Regency Sanctuary Cove on the Gold Coast, found that a decrease in site energy consumption in 1999 was related to a decrease in mean wet bulb temperature (Crookston, pers. comm., 8/2/2001). Other external factors that may influence energy consumption include government policy, legislation and regulations at federal, state and local levels. In particular, the National Greenhouse Strategy and microeconomic reforms within the energy industry are likely to be important factors. The National Greenhouse Strategy is the federal governments response to global warming. It provides a framework for addressing sources and sinks of greenhouse gases in all sectors of the economy (Commonwealth of Australia, 1997). This framework applies to the tourist accommodation sector because its consumption of energy contributes to greenhouse gas emissions. Indeed, many hotels are taking part in the Greenhouse Challenge Program, undertaking voluntary actions that will promote reductions in energy use. Microeconomic reforms in the energy sector are also expected to address the issue of global warming (Commonwealth of Australia, 1997). These reforms relate to energy market deregulation, where a change has occurred from a franchise market arrangement to a contestable market arrangement. This change has seen the distribution and sale of electricity effectively separated, with an objective of delivering lower electricity prices to the community (NECA, 2001).

It is anticipated these microeconomic reforms will promote efficient competition in electricity supply, encouraging the use of cogeneration and renewable energy sources, as well as providing incentives for investments in energy efficiency (Commonwealth of Australia, 1997). However, Diesendorf (1996) has argued that the net effect of electricity industry restructuring will be to increase electricity use and greenhouse gas emissions. He believes consumers will focus on obtaining the cheapest per unit price for electricity, rather than on reducing their total electricity bill, and utilities will be primarily concerned with selling electricity rather than encouraging energy efficiency and the uptake of renewable energy sources. Indeed, one Australian hotel engineer has already observed that energy market deregulation seems to have acted as a disincentive for energy conservation. This engineer found that hotels located in New South Wales and Victoria, where deregulation is relatively advanced, paid less for energy and were less likely to use this input efficiently, compared with hotels located in other Australian states (Knox, pers. comm., 14/2/2001). 1.4 Energy auditing for tourist accommodation

Accommodation is a sector within the tourism industry for which it is relatively easy to identify and quantify the resource units consumed by tourists. Potentially, this sector could undertake effective energy auditing at all four levels described in section 1.2. Indeed, since 1993, general guidelines for Level A auditing have been widely available (IHEI, 1993; Kirk, 1993; IHA et al., 1995; TCA and CRC Tourism, 1998), and energy audits have been undertaken by accommodation providers in order to realise both environmental and commercial benefits. These latter benefits include cost savings from more efficient resource use and an improved corporate image, which can lead to significant marketing advantages (Goodall, 1995). However, results from most in-house audits are not widely published. Those that are, usually present data for single case studies only and quite often, they simply refer to savings achieved through the implementation of new environmental management strategies (IH&RA and UNEP, 1995; Anon., 1999; Short, 1999).

There are a small number of independent energy audits that have been published (see Table 1), yet few researchers have attempted audits on a large scale. Studies published to date have also produced a fragmented data collection, measuring energy consumption in a range of units. These units include yearly averaged kWh per guest night (UK CEED, 1998), yearly averaged kWh/m2 floor area (Deng and Burnett, 2000) and kg of crude oil per day per tourist (Gssling, 2000). These measurement discrepancies are understandable, given there are no standard methods or procedures for measuring specific resource inputs. Only general guidelines for environmental auditing have been developed, for example, the ISO 14000 series (Bhat, 1998). Yet without standardised measures it is difficult to conduct Level B auditing and draw meaningful comparisons between the performance of similar or different types of accommodation. It is also difficult to effectively compare the performance of accommodation located at different destinations. In addition, Level C auditing, which involves assessing impacts produced by entire industry sectors, is considerably hindered if resource use is not measured in alike units for all enterprises. Furthermore, some independent auditing studies have measured variables in units that tend to divorce resource consumption and waste production from human consumers. An example is yearly averaged kWh/m2 floor area, for electricity consumption (Deng and Burnett, 2000). Units like this can be difficult to conceptualise and could seem irrelevant from the perspective of tourists and accommodation providers alike.

1.5

Per capita measures for energy auditing

A straightforward method for standardising audit data and relating resource use directly to tourists is to measure energy consumption in per capita terms. Per capita measures have been successfully employed by the UK CEED, in its assessment of the environmental impacts produced by tourism in the Seychelles and St Lucia (UK CEED, 1994; UK CEED, 1998). UK CEED has demonstrated that energy consumption can be measured as yearly averaged kWh/guest night. Per capita measures are particularly useful for Level C auditing (see Figure 1). These measures can be summed across space and time and integrated across similar or different types of accommodation. They permit the calculation of cumulative impacts and can be used to estimate and to understand the implications of energy use by an entire industry sector (Goodall, 1995). For example, visitor statistics collated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS, 1997), can be used in conjunction with per capita measures to calculate energy consumed by a particular tourism sector at a given location over a given period of time. Sector-wide calculations of energy consumption are valuable for addressing greenhouse gas emissions and global warming. Indeed, the Australian government needs to identify industry sectors that are major emitters of greenhouse gases, so that it can encourage or enforce the adoption of measures that will reduce these emissions. This action is necessary if Australia is to meet the emission target it has been set as a signatory to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change (Grubb et al., 1999). Per capita measures also facilitate Level B auditing, allowing environmental performance comparisons to be drawn between similar or different styles of accommodation. These comparisons can reveal if different technical standards or different management schemes have a real effect on environmental performance. In turn, this can enable identification of industry weaknesses and strengths, and highlight examples of worst and best practice. Environmental performance comparisons between different businesses are likely to become increasingly important with a current growth in the environmental consciousness of tourists (Wight, 1993). Some are

10

expressing a desire to be guided towards products and services that cause least harm to the environment (Lawrence et al., 1997). Indeed, the ecotourism industry has grown rapidly over the last fifteen years (Lawrence et al., 1997) in response to emerging green consumerism (Forsyth, 1997). Many businesses are now utilising the eco- prefix in order to project an image that their enterprise is environmentally sustainable (Wight, 1993). However, given the lack of independent Level A auditing for ecotourism accommodation, it is uncertain whether well-meaning terms like eco- actually translate into constructive action. In addition, no attempts have been made to undertake Level B auditing, where the environmental performance of ecotourism accommodation is compared with the environmental performance of mainstream accommodation. This means there is little evidence to suggest that ecotourism operations have better environmental performance records relative to their mainstream counterparts. 1.6 Research gaps in auditing energy consumption for the tourist accommodation sector

To date, independent energy audits have focused on hotels. This is evident in Table 1, which reviews independent studies that have been conducted for tourist accommodation. While it is important to address the environmental impact of hotels, given they constitute a significant component of tourist accommodation in Australia, there are equally important accommodation types whose environmental impacts need to be addressed. For example, in coastal areas of Queensland, self-contained apartment complexes make up a large proportion of tourist accommodation (ABS, 1997), however there have been few attempts to monitor their post-construction environmental impacts. Furthermore, little attempt has been made to assess the energy-related impacts that arise from other accommodation types such as eco-resorts and caravan parks. In addition, Table 1 reveals that environmental performance comparisons within or between different types of accommodation are rare. However, such comparisons are important for investigating the relative effectiveness of different management structures and philosophies, for example, ecotourism versus mainstream tourism. These comparisons can provide some indication as to whether ecotourism enterprises are operating in an environmentally sound manner and justifying their use of the eco label.
11

2.

FOCUS AND AIMS OF STUDY

This report is based on a study that addressed the research gaps identified above. Specifically, the study dealt with the lack of independent auditing conducted at levels A and B. It also identified issues associated with effective sector-wide level C auditing. A series of environmental audits were conducted for tourist accommodation businesses located in the Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast and Cairns regions. These businesses could all be categorised as belonging to one of four accommodation types. These types were namely hotels, self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs), ecoresorts and caravan parks. The study sought to establish benchmark levels for energy consumption and it attempted to measure this variable in per capita terms for all participating businesses, in order to standardise the measurements. More specifically, the aims were: 1. To examine the extent to which accommodation providers conduct in-house environmental audits; and the potential for conducting independent environmental audits. 2. To investigate factors that may influence electricity and gas consumption by tourist accommodation in coastal Queensland. 3. To calculate benchmark figures for per capita electricity and total energy consumption, for four types of accommodation hotels, self-contained apartment complexes, eco-resorts and caravan parks. 4. To compare energy consumption figures within and between accommodation types. 5. To highlight issues associated with calculating accurate estimates of greenhouse gas emissions produced by the tourist accommodation sector.

12

From the outset it must be emphasised that this study was largely exploratory. Indeed, it formed the first independent audit that has sought to benchmark resource consumption figures for different types of tourist accommodation at three major tourism destinations in Queensland. As such, it was largely concerned with investigating environmental auditing, data collection and data analysis techniques. It sought to detail opportunities and problems associated with the auditing of tourist accommodation, and to determine effective and appropriate methods for measuring energy consumption.

13

3.

METHODS
The study consisted of four phases: 1. Study Scoping 2. Business Sampling And Affiliation 3. Data Collection 4. Data Analysis 3.1 3.1.1 Study scoping Spatial scope

The spatial scope encompassed the Gold Coast, Sunshine Coast and Cairns regions. This scope was chosen for two main reasons. Firstly, these regions are highly popular holiday destinations. They have been and still are subject to intensive development in the area of tourist accommodation. Indeed, 73% of holiday flats, units and houses in Queensland, are located in these areas (ABS, 1997). Furthermore, the Wet Tropics and south-east Queensland are considered to be major areas of ecotourism establishment (Dowling and Charters, 2000). The second reason for choosing these regions was associated with the rapid growth of their local resident populations. Rapid population growth means that significant pressure is being placed on water and energy supplies and waste disposal systems. It suggests that monitoring of resource use and sound environmental management is vital, if the needs of both locals and tourists are to be adequately met and if the environmental assets of these regions are to be protected. 3.1.2 Subject scope

The subject scope comprised three major independent variables: accommodation type

14

 climatic factors monthly occupancy figures and three dependent variables: electricity consumption gas consumption total energy consumption The accommodation types were hotels, self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs), eco-resorts and caravan parks. Hotels and SCACs were chosen because they constitute a major component of mainstream tourist accommodation, accounting for a major proportion of the bed capacities at the Gold Coast, the Sunshine Coast and Cairns (ABS, 1997). Eco-resorts were selected to allow for environmental performance comparisons between eco-labelled accommodation and mainstream accommodation, and to investigate whether their use of the eco- label was supported by sound environmental performance. Caravan parks were studied in order to benchmark the environmental performance of budget accommodation. The climatic factors were mean monthly temperature and mean monthly relative humidity readings at 3pm. They were chosen because it was thought that monthly fluctuations in energy consumption could be attributable to changes in these climatic variables. Monthly occupancy figures were considered in order to investigate the extent to which the presence of guests influences total monthly resource consumption. They were measured in terms of guest nights, room nights, unit nights, site nights or cabin nights. Site nights and cabin nights were recorded at caravan parks and these were amalgamated to produce a quasi room nights occupancy figure. A positive relationship between occupancy and energy use would imply that base load energy demand does not constitute a large proportion of total energy consumption, or that it can be controlled

15

in line with the number of guests. On the other hand, if no relationship exists or if there is a negative relationship, this would tend to suggest a high level of base load energy consumption, regardless of the number of guests. It may indicate limited scope for controlling total energy use and this would impede effective environmental management. Despite the narrow focus on accommodation type, climatic factors and occupancy levels, it is recognised that other factors may influence levels of energy consumption. Indeed a number of factors that could have a direct influence were listed in Figure 1 and many were discussed in section 1.3. However, some of these factors cannot be easily defined, clearly categorised or readily measured. On the other hand, accommodation type, total monthly occupancy levels and climatic readings are definable and/or easily quantified, which allows them to be used in statistical analyses. Electricity, gas and total energy were selected as the dependent variables because they are vital inputs for the effective functioning of tourist accommodation. Furthermore, they constitute a major proportion of the operating budgets of accommodation providers (Aulbach, 1988). It must be mentioned that the term total energy was not used in a strict sense, it simply referred to the sum of average figures for electricity and gas consumption. The narrow use of this term was deemed acceptable because other energy types were rarely utilised by the sample of accommodation providers. In addition, the harnessing and use of alternative energy such as solar power does not have a significant, detrimental impact upon the environment and accordingly, was not of interest to this study. 3.1.3 Temporal scope

The temporal scope varied depending upon the data available from participating businesses. Where possible, data was collected over a five year time span because tourist accommodation infrastructure and its associated components such as technological standards, services and facilities, management and general staff, are often subject to change. In turn, these changes affect levels of resource consumption. Additionally, economic up-turns or downturns, or unusual climatic patterns such as uncharacteristic wet or dry years, may also affect

16

levels of resource consumption. Thus, it was considered important to gather data for a number of years if possible, in order to account for fluctuations in energy use due to random changes in internal or extraneous variables. Furthermore, the larger the sample of data collected for each enterprise, the greater the power of statistical analyses and the greater the potential for detecting real effects. 3.2 Business sampling and affiliation

To ensure support from selected accommodation providers and to establish a long-term working relationship, visits were made by the researcher to a number of enterprises in the three study regions. These visits allowed the researcher to meet with managerial, accounting, engineering and maintenance staff, to look over the accommodation facilities, and to directly collect data. In addition, confidentiality agreements were signed between the researcher and industry partners. These agreements ensured data security, stipulating that data would not be released unless it was amalgamated with other data and the name(s) of the owner(s) and property were disguised. Specific details of sampling for each accommodation type are provided below. With this being an exploratory, benchmarking study, the sampling procedures were largely judgmental and criterion directed. Hotels Hotels were selected to reflect different components associated with this particular accommodation type. As a group they represented various levels of services and facilities within this industry sector. Contact was made with managerial, accounting, engineering and maintenance staff in order to gain access to data. Self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs) SCACs were self-selecting as opposed to being selected. The internal management structure of these complexes often resulted in legal constraints that did not permit the release of data. Consequently, it was a matter of securing the cooperation of any that were willing and able to assist, rather than choosing particular businesses.

17

Initial contact was made with Body Corporate service providers who are responsible for legal and financial management issues. Body Corporate service providers who were willing to cooperate provided contact details for resident managers of apartment complexes. If assistance was secured from managers, they either agreed to directly provide data, or they supplied contact details for individual apartment owners. In the latter case, letters were sent to owners, seeking permission to access data relating to their individual apartments. Eco-resorts Eco-resorts were selected if they had been awarded accreditation by the Ecotourism Association of Australia, through its National Ecotourism Accreditation Program (EAA, 1996). This method of sampling allowed for effective selection of this particular accommodation type. It escaped problems associated with defining the ecotourism category and then attempting to determine if businesses met the definition criteria. In addition, ecotourism accommodation was selected on the basis of size. Size was an important consideration in order to ensure reasonable comparisons could be made with mainstream accommodation, which usually has large bed capacities. Accordingly, ecotourism businesses were only contacted if they were a relatively large operation, that is, they could accommodate at least forty people. Affiliation was established with managerial, accounting, engineering and maintenance staff. Caravan parks A management body was contacted for a group of typical tourism orientated caravan parks (tent sites, powered and unpowered van sites, and cabins). This method of selection was deemed necessary given resource constraints faced by the researcher. It allowed a considerable quantity of data to be collected with ease and within a minimal time frame. 3.3 Data collection

Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected for the study. Detailed descriptions of the data collections are provided below.

18

3.3.1

Qualitative data

For each accommodation provider, an attempt was made to collect the following descriptive information: building location year of construction building style building floor space measurements number of storeys number of rooms/apartments (number of bedrooms in apartments) number of elevators type of hot water system general services/facilities provided (for example pool/spa, restaurant, laundry) temperature control system NRMA star rating details of in-house environmental auditing Qualitative information was collected from websites, brochures, and interviews with managerial, engineering or maintenance staff. NRMA star ratings were obtained from the 2000-2001 NRMA Accommodation Guide (AAA Tourism, 2000). 3.3.2 Quantitative data

Quantitative data were compiled in spreadsheet databases, with separate databases created for each accommodation provider. These

19

databases consisted of figures for climatic variables, occupancy rates, electricity consumption, gas consumption and total energy consumption. Climatic data were obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology. Figures were recorded at the Cairns Aero, Maroochydore and Coolangatta Airport weather stations, thus reflecting weather conditions in each of the study regions. Figures for occupancy rates, electricity and gas consumption were collected from accommodation providers. However, owing to different managerial structures, different bookkeeping practices and different levels of in-house auditing, the form of this data and the methods employed for data collection varied. Details of data collection for each accommodation type are provided below. Hotels Generally, figures for electricity consumption, gas consumption and occupancy rates were sourced from electronic accounting systems. Utility consumption figures were usually recorded by hotel engineers or maintenance managers, and occupancy rates were generally maintained by the finance/accounting section. Self-contained apartment complexes Occupancy rates were collected directly from building managers, while figures for electricity consumption were collected from electricity bills held by one of three possible sources. These three sources; namely Body Corporate service providers, individual apartment owners and resident building managers, are shown in Figure 2. This Figure illustrates different purchase and payment arrangements that have become possible with the deregulation of the energy market in Queensland.

20

Figure 2: SCACs the different payment arrangements for electricity purchase and payment ELECTRICITY
Contestable consumption market Body Corporate Service Provider manages common property accounts and accounts for individual apartments On tariff with local network provider Body Corporate Service Provider manages common property accounts Apartment Owners manage their own accounts Resident Managers manage apartment accounts on behalf of owners

Figure 2 shows that electricity can be purchased through either the contestable consumption market or on a tariff basis via the local network. In the case of the former, the Body Corporate service provider makes bulk purchases of electricity on behalf of an entire self-contained apartment complex. Accordingly, they can directly provide electricity consumption figures for both common property areas and individual units. In the case of apartment complexes on tariff with the local network provider, only figures for common property consumption can be collected from the Body Corporate service provider. Details of electricity consumption in individual apartments have to be sourced from either the apartment owners themselves or from resident building managers, who sometimes take care of accounts on behalf of apartment owners. In these two situations it is not always possible to obtain resource consumption data for an entire apartment complex, only for those apartments whose owners permit the release of figures. Eco-resorts Ecotourism accommodation has unique and varied operational setups. This meant that data availability and data provision differed from one accommodation provider to the next. Table 2 shows the data sources for each ecotourism business in this study.

21

Table 2: Sources of data collection for eco-resorts

DATA SOURCES NAME OF ENTERPRISE Gold Coast Eco-resort 1 Gold Coast Eco-resort 2a Gold Coast Eco-resort 3 Cairns Eco-resort 1 Cairns Eco-resort 2 Electronic system accounts department Electronic system engineering department Electronic system ecotourism manager Recording system unknown, data supplied by resort owner Recording system unknown, data supplied by resort owner OCCUPANCY FIGURES ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION FIGURES Electricity bills accounts department Electronic system engineering department Electricity bills ecotourism manager Manual bookkeeping maintenance staff Manual bookkeeping resort manager GAS CONSUMPTION FIGURES Gas bills accounts department

Gas bills ecotourism manager Origin Energy Retail Ltd Origin Energy Retail Ltd

a Gas-fired power station generates the bulk of energy for this resort. Energy consumption figures were provided in terms of kWh of electricity consumption.

Caravan parks Figures for occupancy rates, electricity consumption and gas consumption were obtained from an electronic record-keeping system. They were recorded and maintained by the Administration Officer responsible for the group of caravan parks. 3.4 Data analysis

The three levels of environmental auditing provide a framework for detailing the qualitative and quantitative analyses that were undertaken for this study.

22

3.4.1 Level A auditing environmental performance of individual businesses Qualitative analysis Examination of in-house environmental auditing (Aim 1) Involved examining whether businesses collected resource consumption data, the type of data collected, the units of measurement, the methods of record keeping and the people or departments that were responsible for data collection. Quantitative analyses Investigation of factors affecting electricity, gas and total energy consumption (Aim 2) Linear regression was used to determine if and to what extent total monthly occupancy levels and/or climatic factors, (mean monthly temperature and mean monthly relative humidity readings at 3pm), affected levels of total monthly resource consumption. Where possible, linear regression models were run for individual enterprises, for each dependent variable electricity, gas and total energy consumption. In general, regression analyses could only be conducted for those enterprises that supplied monthly figures. However, Gold Coast SCAC 5 supplied quarterly figures for a number of years and these figures allowed regression analyses to be undertaken. The number of independent factors included in each regression model depended upon the amount of data collected for individual enterprises. Where sample sizes were small and all factors could not be considered, those deemed most relevant according to the type of enterprise and its location, were selected for analysis. Calculation of benchmark figures for electricity and total energy consumption (Aim 3) Average annual figures were calculated for consumption of electricity (kWh) and total energy (MJ) for individual accommodation providers. These figures were calculated in per guest night (GN), per room night (RN) and per unit night (UN) terms. The resource consumption per guest night figures indicated resource consumption per capita. These were calculated for all eco-resorts and hotels. However, for hotels that

23

only provided occupancy figures in terms of room nights, a conversion factor of 0.51 was used to convert resource consumption per room night into resource consumption per guest night. This conversion factor was based on the average ratio of per guest night to per room night resource consumption, which was calculated for hotels that provided occupancy figures in both forms. Electricity consumption per unit night figures was calculated for SCACs because these enterprises did not record occupancy in terms of guest nights. However, an estimation of electricity consumption per guest night was achieved by determining the number of bedrooms in the units and using the conservative assumption of one guest per room. Figures for electricity consumption per guest night and total energy consumption per guest night were also arrived at for caravan parks, after adjusting raw data. Occupancy figures for site nights and cabin nights were firstly converted into guest nights using conservative assumptions of four guests per cabin and two guests per site. These separate figures were then added together to obtain a total guest nights figure for each caravan park. Generally, average energy consumption figures for all accommodation providers were based upon the most recent twelve months for which data were provided. In a few instances, a complete twelve-month data set was unavailable, so average figures had to be calculated from whatever information was supplied. In order to calculate these figures, adjustments often had to be made to the raw energy data so that it corresponded directly with calendar months or was measured in consistent units. For instance, accounts issued by local electricity providers covered unique monthly or quarterly periods for each business. These periods varied depending upon individual payment arrangements with the energy providers, and the date when an application was made for connection to the electricity grid. The adjustments involved calculating average daily values and then adding or subtracting these from initial totals, to establish representative estimates for monthly or quarterly electricity consumption. This standardisation process allowed for effective

24

resource consumption accommodation providers.

comparisons

between

different

The following equation provided the basis for monthly or quarterly data adjustment: Ei = (/da x daysi a) + (/db x daysi b) where Ei = electricity consumption in month i/quarter i /da = average daily electricity consumption during period a daysi a = number of month i/quarter i days that fall in period a /db = average daily electricity consumption during period b daysi b = number of month i/quarter i days that fall in period b Where gas was purchased in bulk and gas consumption was not metered by an enterprise, it was impossible to determine when particular quantities of gas were used. This meant that all bulk quantities purchased during a period (for example, one year) were added together, and a total figure was calculated for gas use. In addition, gas consumption was often measured in different units by different enterprises. Where necessary, these measures were converted to MJ. Electricity figures on the other hand, were generally measured in terms of kWh. However, for one ecotourism business, kWh of electricity consumption had to be calculated using an average diesel consumption rate of 5000L/week and a specific fuel consumption rate of 3.65 kWh per litre of diesel. All kWh figures were converted into MJ when calculating figures for total energy consumption. 3.4.2 Level B auditing environmental performance comparisons between businesses

Quantitative analysis Comparing benchmark figures for energy consumption within and between accommodation types (Aim 4) The analysis of variance (ANOVA) technique was used to compare benchmark figures for resource consumption within and between accommodation types.

25

4.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this section results will be presented for Level A and Level B auditing. For the sake of coherency, these results will be described in line with the study aims and a discussion will be incorporated within each results sub-section. Firstly however, it should be noted that in conducting environmental audits for this study, a number of difficulties were encountered that affected the quantity and quality of collected data. Generally, the biggest challenge was securing the approval and assistance of relevant people in order to gain access to required information. Table 3 shows the number of enterprises contacted, the number of positive responses, and the number of responses that produced data suitable for analysis. Initially, contact was made with eighteen hotels, one hundred and six people connected with SCACs, sixteen eco-resorts and a managerial body for a group of caravan parks. This lead to the collection of suitable data for eleven hotels, thirteen SCACs and five eco-resorts, or 61, 12 and 31 percent respectively. From the single caravan parks contact, data were obtained for six different accommodation providers.

26

Table 3: Results of the data collection process

ACCOMMODATION TYPE Hotels SCACs Body Corporates Resident Managers Unit owners Total Eco-resorts Caravan parks
a

NO. CONTACTED 18 18 23 65 16 1

NO. POSITIVE NO. RESPONSES THAT RESPONSES YIELDED SUITABLE DATA 11 5 11 29 9 1 11 5 9a 11b 13c 5d 6e

Contact details provided by managers for unit owners did not produce data in all cases. Some unit owners could not supply figures for a twelve-month period, others provided energy consumption figures in dollar terms rather than kWh. c This figure represents the total number of buildings that provided energy consumption data in a form that was suitable for analysis. d Four businesses excluded due to small accommodation capacity. e Contact with one administration officer yielded data for six different caravan parks.
b

The quantity and quality of data varied both within and between the three accommodation types. The resource consumption figures collated for each enterprise are shown in Tables 4 and 5. The shaded areas correspond to the time periods for which data were obtained and the white areas signify that data were unavailable or not provided. Alternating colour shades denote data intervals within a time period. For instance, Table 4 shows that data were collated for Gold Coast Hotel 1 for the time period 1995-2000. For this period, both per guest night and per room night electricity consumption were calculated on a monthly basis. On the other hand, Table 4 shows that limited data were available for Cairns Hotel 4. Per room night electricity consumption could only be calculated for eight months in 2000. These tables reveal a number of principle inconsistencies with the baseline data: Figures for electricity consumption were more readily available than figures for gas.

27

 It was not possible to collect data for the same time period from every single enterprise. Some enterprises provided data for a number of years, others only provided data for a twelve-month period or less. Calculated figures corresponded with annual, monthly, quarterly or four monthly intervals. Data were relatively easier to collect from hotels, compared with other types of accommodation. Per capita resource consumption figures could not be easily calculated for every enterprise. SCACs generally provided occupancy figures in terms of unit nights, three hotels provided occupancy figures in terms of room nights only, while caravan parks provided occupancy figures in terms of site nights and cabin nights and these had to be amalgamated for the calculation of room nights. These observations will be explained below.

28

Table 4: Electricity consumption data

29

Table 5: Gas consumption data

30

4.1

Level A auditing environmental performance of individual businesses Examination of in-house environmental auditing and the potential for conducting independent environmental auditing (Aim 1)

4.1.1

These results relate to the first aim of this study, stated in section 3.0. Table 6 summarises in-house environmental auditing undertaken by individual accommodation providers. SCACs are not listed in this table, as these enterprises did not formally measure utility consumption. In-house auditing results will be explained in detail for each accommodation type, along with the implications for independent environmental auditing. Table 6: The extent of in-house energy auditing
NAME OF ENTERPRISE GC Hotel 1 GC Hotel 2 GC Hotel 3 GC Hotel 4 SC Hotel 1 SC Hotel 2 SC Hotel 3
c

ELEC GAS Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y y y Y Y n.a. n.a. Y Y Y Y Y Y y y

b

NATURE OF ENERGY AUDITING COMMENTS Standardised spreadsheets. Energy audit undertaken in 2000 by Ergon Energy. Participant in GCPa. Standardised spreadsheets. Complete energy audit undertaken. Participant in GCP. Standardised spreadsheets. Participant in Green Hoteliers competition. Participant in GCP. Standardised spreadsheets. Complete energy audit undertaken. Participant in GCP. Parent hotel chain conducts an internal audit every 12 months. Participant in GCP. Records incomplete. Eco-efficiency assessment undertaken in conjunction with EPAd. Independent environmental audit by University of Queensland, Gatton in 1999 unpublished.

Cairns Hotel 1 Cairns Hotel 2 Cairns Hotel 3 Cairns Hotel 4 GC Eco 1

31

NAME OF ENTERPRISE GC Eco 2

ELEC GAS Y Y

NATURE OF ENERGY AUDITING COMMENTS Centralised electronic Advanced Energy System continually monitors energy consumption throughout the resort. Independent environmental audits by University of Queensland, Gatton in 1995 & 1998 unpublished. Records incomplete. Records incomplete. Independent energy audits undertaken by Energex and Northpower.

GC Eco 3 Cairns Eco 1 Cairns Eco 2 GC Caravans 1-6e

y y y Y

y y y Y

Y electronic record-keeping, y manual record-keeping a Greenhouse Challenge Program b Figures are probably recorded but they were not provided. c Utility consumption recorded on a four monthly basis. All other enterprises recorded utility consumption on a monthly basis. d Environmental Protection Agency, Queensland e Central administrator looks after all of these caravan parks.

Hotels Generally, the hotels that agreed to participate were found to maintain accurate records for energy consumption. Electricity consumption was recorded in terms of kWh and gas consumption was recorded in terms of L (compressed gas), m3, Mcal or MJ. These data usually accounted for all aspects of hotel operations. Engineering or maintenance departments recorded these figures and in all but one case, they related to monthly intervals. Sunshine Coast Hotel 3 provided four monthly figures only. In some cases, hotel engineers and maintenance managers directly provided figures for energy consumption. In other cases, permission to release information had to be sought from senior hotel management. However, even after permission was granted, there was often considerable delay before data were provided to the researcher. As shown in Table 6, ten of the eleven hotels kept electronic rather than manual records for energy consumption. Electronic record keeping meant that energy figures could be supplied with relative ease, provided spreadsheets were kept up-to-date. Four of the eleven hotels used standardised electronic record keeping, developed and implemented by their parent hotel chains. With hotels that did not

32

use standardised record keeping, discrepancies were sometimes found in their energy records, particularly if there was a change in engineering or maintenance staff. These discrepancies arose when new staff members modified previous record keeping procedures. The occupancy data provided by hotels were variable. Occupancy figures were usually maintained by business management or accounting departments, separate from the engineering and maintenance department. These figures were recorded as room nights or guest nights per month. In six cases, monthly figures for both room nights and guest nights were provided. In five cases, hotels provided one or the other. In most instances, hotel engineers included occupancy figures on the spreadsheets that contained their utility data. However, occupancy figures for Sunshine Coast Hotel 2 were collected from its accounts department. With Cairns Hotel 4, it was only possible to calculate an average annual occupancy figure, as senior management deemed occupancy statistics to be confidential information. In the case of Gold Coast Hotel 4, separate record keeping meant occupancy and utility figures covered different periods. Electricity figures usually covered between 28-35 days, while occupancy figures covered either a 25 or 35 day period. Consequently, adjustments had to be made to the raw data so that it covered identical monthly periods and allowed the calculation of per capita values (see section 3.4.1 for details of the data adjustment process). Substantial data were collected for the Gold Coast hotels owing to a pilot study that initiated data collection in 1997. However, Gold Coast Hotel 4 did not grant access to further data for the present study. The current General Manager believed the owner would not permit the release of additional energy and occupancy figures. Self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs) Auditing energy consumption for SCACs was relatively complicated. This was due to the considerable number of people that hold some form of managerial influence over each complex. These people range from members of the Body Corporate Committee, to resident managers and individual apartment owners.

33

None of the managerial levels formally recorded figures for energy consumption but figures for electricity consumption, measured in kWh, could be obtained from electricity bills. Methods of data collection, the quantity of data collected and the time periods covered by the collected data, differed from one SCAC to the next. In most instances it was only possible to obtain figures for twelve months. This was due to difficulties and inconvenience associated with locating earlier records. Gold Coast SCACs 3 and 4 purchased their electricity through the contestable consumption market. As explained in section 3.3.2, this meant that electricity figures could be collected from the Body Corporate service provider for both buildings in their entirety, that is, for all apartments plus all common property areas. The other SCACs on the Gold Coast purchased electricity through the retail arm of their local electricity provider. For these buildings, figures for consumption in individual apartments and figures for common property consumption had to be collected separately. For Gold Coast SCACs 1 and 2, common property figures could not be obtained and limited data were collected for individual apartments. Two apartment owners from Gold Coast SCAC 1 and two apartment owners from Gold Coast SCAC 2 permitted access to their electricity bills. For Gold Coast SCACs 6, 7, 8 and 9, only common property figures could be collected. These figures were supplied by the Body Corporate service provider. On the other hand, considerable data were collected for Gold Coast SCAC 5 owing to a pilot study that initiated data collection in 1997. In fact, electricity consumption figures were obtained for common property areas and also for forty-four to forty-eight apartments, the exact number depending upon the time period. These apartments constituted between 68-73% of the complex. With Sunshine Coast SCAC 1, four apartment owners provided electricity figures. In addition, figures for common property electricity consumption were supplied by the Body Corporate service provider. In the case of Sunshine Coast SCAC 2, electricity figures were collected for three apartments only.

34

With Cairns SCAC 1 it was not possible to collect electricity consumption figures for individual units. However, figures for common property consumption were obtained from the Body Corporate service provider. Figures for Cairns SCAC 2 covered all units and common property areas. These were supplied by the Body Corporate service provider who had a bulk purchase arrangement with the local electricity distributor. In terms of occupancy figures, the ease with which data could be obtained depended upon the management and size of each complex. With the larger SCACs, occupancy records were kept electronically and computer print-outs could be supplied. These print-outs displayed monthly occupancy figures in terms of unit nights. For smaller complexes, occupancy was recorded manually and monthly totals of unit nights had to be collated by the researcher. There are other findings worth noting in relation to data collection for SCACs. In a few cases it was found that a change in management brought a change in book-keeping practices and generally, previous managers did not leave behind occupancy records for their period of management. Cairns SCAC 1 could only provide an average annual occupancy figure, owing to a computer malfunction that had wiped monthly records. With Gold Coast SCAC 4, a staff member commented that official occupancy records were not very accurate. This is because their two bedroom apartments could be separated and let out as single bedroom apartments. When this occurred, occupancy in each single bedroom apartment was not always accounted for separately. In addition, the manager of Sunshine Coast SCAC 2 mentioned that when apartment owners were staying in their own premises, their occupancy was not recorded. A lack of recording would obviously lead to an underestimation of unit nights. Another important point is that for Gold Coast SCACs 3 and 4, where electricity figures were collected for the entire complex, per unit night consumption figures may not have truly reflected resource use by tourists. A number of permanent residents occupy units in each complex and it was not possible to effectively separate their electricity consumption from that of guests.

35

Eco-resorts It was found that all of the ecotourism operators monitored monthly energy consumption, although in varying forms and with differing attention to detail. Engineering or maintenance departments generally recorded these figures either electronically or manually. Gold Coast Eco-resort 1 is connected to the mains power grid and purchases gas on a bulk basis. This enterprise consulted its energy bills to provide figures for kWh of electricity consumption and L of compressed gas purchased in bulk. The operation components that contributed to these figures were its lodge and campsite accommodation, food and beverage services, water and sewage treatment facilities. Gold Coast Eco-resort 2 generates its own electricity using five gaspowered generators. It provided energy consumption figures from powerhouse records. These figures were measured in kWh and covered the entire resort, including the power consumed in accommodation units, food and beverage operations, and by water and sewage treatment plants. Like Gold Coast Eco-resort 1, Gold Coast Eco-resort 3 is connected to the mains power grid and purchases gas in bulk. Figures for electricity consumption, measured in kWh, and figures for compressed gas, measured in L, were obtained from its energy bills. These figures related to power consumed in cabin and campsite accommodation, food and beverage services, and also by water and sewage treatment operations. Cairns Eco-resort 1 has its own power station with electricity generated by three diesel generators. Maintenance staff recorded figures for electricity consumption in terms of kWh and litres of diesel consumed. However, few kWh figures were provided for this study. As explained in section 3.4.1, this meant that energy calculations had to be based on an average weekly figure for diesel consumption that was quoted by a staff member. In addition, this enterprise purchases gas in bulk, however consumption figures for this utility were not provided. Cairns Eco-resort 2 also has its own power station, equipped with two diesel generators. Details of monthly electricity consumption,

36

measured in terms of kWh, were obtained from powerhouse records. Figures for bulk gas consumption were not provided. For both Cairns operations, utility figures covered accommodation, food and beverage services, equipment for water collection and treatment, and sewage treatment. All of the ecotourism enterprises provided occupancy figures in terms of guest nights per month. Gold Coast Eco-resort 3 and Cairns Ecoresorts 1 and 2 also accommodate staff on-site. However, no attempts were made to calculate separate figures for guest and staff energy consumption, for two reasons. Firstly, guests and staff are likely to consume energy at different rates. Thus, it is not practical to distinguish between their different levels of resource use, given a single total for energy consumption. Secondly, energy consumption by staff can be considered an extension of energy consumption by guests. Quite simply, staff are part of the basic accommodation infrastructure and would not be present if it were not for the guests. Caravan parks A central administrative body was responsible for overseeing the operation of all caravan parks included in this study. For each park, monthly figures for energy consumption and occupancy rates during 2000 were obtained from the central administrator. Electricity was measured in terms of kWh, gas was measured in terms of MJ and as mentioned above, occupancy was measured in terms of cabin nights and site nights. These figures were recorded in electronic spreadsheets, which allowed them to be collected with relative ease. 4.1.2 Discussion: in-house auditing and the potential for independent auditing (Aim 1)

Effective in-house energy auditing was undertaken by most hotels and by the administrator for the group of caravan parks. Eco-resorts monitored their energy consumption to some degree but SCACs did not undertake any auditing or data collation. The extent of in-house auditing seemed to depend upon factors such as managerial structure, managerial philosophy and size of operation. Hotels often have central and well-ordered managerial structures that encourage monitoring of all operational aspects, including

37

environmental performance. Monitoring of energy consumption is possibly undertaken for two main reasons. Firstly, energy consumption accounts for a sizeable proportion of hotel operating budgets. Large hotels are likely to seek efficient patterns of energy use, in order to reduce their input costs and achieve high economic returns. Indeed, engineering and maintenance departments are often seeking ways to reduce hotel energy consumption while maintaining expected levels of service for their guests. It is important for these departments to keep accurate records so they can analyse consumption trends over time, particularly after the installation of new fittings and equipment that are geared towards energy conservation. Secondly, hotels often have prominent brand names and associated reputations to uphold. In order to maintain their position in the competitive tourist accommodation market, it is important they are seen to be doing the right thing, operating with a corporate conscience that demonstrates a sense of environmental and social responsibility. Indeed, a sense of environmental and social responsibility is something that should be inherent to the operation of eco-resorts. This sense of responsibility was reflected in the management of the Gold Coast eco-resorts, who operated under philosophies that placed emphasis on monitoring and reducing the environmental impacts of their operations. On the other hand, the managerial philosophies behind the Cairns eco-resorts seemed to be concerned with promoting and providing a nature-based accommodation experience, rather than monitoring operational impacts. Discussions with management at these resorts suggested that the monitoring of resource consumption was primarily connected with minimising operating costs and promoting economic efficiency, rather than environmental concerns. The diffuse managerial structure of SCACs worked strongly against the application of in-house auditing. This managerial structure provides many different parties with a stake in the complexes, from individual apartment owners, to resident managers and the Body Corporate. It is unlikely that all of these parties will share the same interest in improving environmental performance, which means it is difficult to achieve co-ordinated environmental management action, particularly auditing of operations.

38

At the other end of the scale, the surveyed Gold Coast caravan parks had a top-down managerial structure with data collated by a central administrative body. All of these parks operate under the name of the local city council, which means it is important they are run efficiently and effectively. Like hotels that operate under a prominent brand name, these businesses must be seen doing the right thing, striving to implement and achieve best practice. It is important they have accurate records on hand so their operations can be easily accounted for. Certainly, if businesses undertake effective in-house auditing, then independent Level A and Level B auditing can become a relatively straightforward process, providing permission is secured for view or release of relevant data. For this particular study, it was relatively easy to obtain energy consumption figures for hotels, caravan parks and eco-resorts, but obtaining this information for SCACs was difficult. Considering occupancy figures, these could be collected in terms of guest nights for most hotels and eco-resorts, however it was not possible to collect guest night occupancy figures for SCACs or caravan parks. Indeed, the occupancy figures provided by some SCACs were likely to be unreliable. This suggests that occupancy figures collated by the Australian Bureau of Statistics may not be entirely accurate, given this government department relies on individual enterprises to supply raw data. 4.1.3 Investigation of factors affecting electricity and gas consumption (Aim 2)

Despite inconsistencies with the collection of energy and occupancy data, it was still possible to address the second aim of this study (refer to section 2.0). However, as described in section 3.4.1, adjustments had to be made to the raw data before this became feasible. Table 7 shows results of regression analyses conducted for individual enterprises. Examining these results, it was found that monthly occupancy levels (Occup) had a significant effect on monthly electricity consumption in 9 out of 23 analyses, while mean monthly relative humidity at 3pm (RH 3) was not a significant factor in any of the regression models. On the other hand, mean monthly temperature (Temp) had a significant effect on monthly electricity consumption in 9 out of 10 analyses. This last result strongly indicates,

39

even without additional data and further testing, that changes in temperature will affect per capita electricity consumption. In addition, it can be noted that a positive relationship was found between temperature and electricity consumption for air-conditioned accommodation, while a negative relationship was found between temperature and electricity consumption for accommodation without air conditioning. Table 7: Regression results factors affecting electricity and gas consumption

40

The regression results for gas revealed significant relationships between monthly gas consumption and monthly occupancy levels in 9 out of 11 analyses. Mean monthly temperature was also found to have a significant effect in 3 out of 5 analyses, with the relationship between temperature and gas always negative. Mean monthly relative humidity however, was not found to be a significant factor affecting monthly consumption of gas. Results from the regression analyses will be discussed below in relation to each accommodation type. It is acknowledged that this discussion may not be completely comprehensive, given it is based upon limited technical and descriptive information collected from the accommodation providers. Unfortunately time and other resource constraints prevented the collection of extensive technical details from each business. In addition, some businesses provided more extensive information compared with others. 4.1.4 Discussion: factors affecting electricity and gas consumption (Aim 2)

Hotels Generally, significant positive relationships were found between occupancy and energy consumption for hotels that were relatively compact in design. Such hotels included Gold Coast Hotel 2, Gold Coast Hotel 4 and Cairns Hotel 3 (see Table 7). With these buildings, it is likely that guest rooms account for a large proportion of total energy use, while cooling and ventilation requirements in general areas are comparatively low. Thus, changes in energy consumption in line with the number of guests are likely to be evident. Hotels that had a gas hot water system showed positive relationships between occupancy levels and gas consumption (for example, Gold Coast Hotel 2, Sunshine Coast Hotel 1, Cairns Hotel 2, Cairns Hotel 3). It is likely that with a rise in the number of guests there will be a rise in the consumption of hot water in guest rooms, kitchens and laundries, and correspondingly, a rise in consumption of gas. Similarly, the negative relationships observed between temperature and gas consumption can also be explained by the installation of gas hot water systems. As temperatures rise there is likely to be less demand for hot showers and hence, less consumption of gas.

41

The positive relationships found between temperature and electricity consumption can possibly be explained by the use of air conditioning systems. In hotel buildings, these systems generally account for a large proportion of electricity use and correspondingly, total energy use. It is highly likely that the use of air conditioning systems will increase with warmer weather and so too, will the consumption of energy. All the results detailed above are in line with technical information and experience that was revealed during discussions with engineering and maintenance staff. This suggests the collected data produced reasonable results, despite the fact that it was considerably amended in order to allow analyses to be undertaken. Self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs) For Gold Coast SCAC 3, a positive relationship was not found between occupancy levels and electricity consumption. This complex contains approximately 45 holiday units and 91 permanent resident units and although permanent residents were factored into occupancy calculations, these residents are likely to consume resources at a lesser rate relative to holidaymakers. Thus, a clear relationship between occupancy levels and resource consumption is unlikely to emerge. Furthermore, it was assumed that the occupancy rate for permanent resident units was always 100%. However, this may not always be the case, particularly if owners only reside in their units during holiday periods. For Gold Coast SCAC 5 there were five types of regression analyses. Electricity figures for units were collected separately from electricity figures for common property, which allowed these areas to be analysed independently. In addition, individual analyses were conducted for different types of units, to determine if there were any effects particular to unit type. All units included in the analyses were in the holiday-letting market. With Gold Coast SCAC 5, two and three bedroom units without air conditioning and two bedroom units with air conditioning, revealed positive relationships between occupancy levels and electricity consumption. These relationships can be expected because the units were metered individually, with hot water and air conditioning (where installed) generated separately for each unit, according to the

42

presence and demands of guests. On the other hand, common property electricity consumption failed to show a positive relationship with occupancy. This is understandable, given that common property areas are maintained regardless of occupancy levels. The results for regression models with temperature and electricity consumption were generally self-evident. For three bedroom units without air conditioning, no relationship was observed. For two bedroom units with air conditioning, there was a significant positive relationship. Interestingly, for two bedroom units without air conditioning, a significant negative relationship was observed. Perhaps this is because during warm weather periods, holiday-makers use less hot water when showering, which means the water in boilers needs to be reheated less frequently. Considering the overall regression model that accounted for all unit types in Gold Coast SCAC 5, there was a positive relationship between electricity consumption and occupancy, and a negative relationship between mean temperature and occupancy. Understandably, these general results are the same as those obtained for the most common type of unit two bedrooms, no air conditioning. Eco-resorts For resorts that offered cabin and campground accommodation, Gold Coast Eco-resort 1 and Gold Coast Eco-resort 3, no relationship was observed between electricity consumption and occupancy levels. Presumably, campground guests will consume less energy than cabin guests and this will mean that total levels of electricity use are dependent on the number of guests staying in each type of accommodation, rather than the total number of guests per se. Indeed, a review of 12 months of occupancy figures for Gold Coast Eco-resort 1, showed that campground guest numbers exceeded lodge guest numbers during 5 of these months. This relatively high and varying proportion of campground guests is likely to explain the absence of a clear relationship between resource consumption and occupancy levels. On the other hand, for Gold Coast Eco-resort 2, a significant positive relationship was found between occupancy levels and electricity consumption. This relationship can possibly be explained by the

43

installation of an Energy Management Control System. This System enables accurate control and monitoring of over 4000 devices, whose operation can be manipulated according to the number of guests. It means that large electricity consumers such as air conditioning systems can be operated as needed. Caravan parks Only one caravan park showed a positive relationship between electricity consumption and occupancy levels. On the other hand, for 4 out of 5 parks a significant positive relationship was observed between gas consumption and occupancy. These results can be explained by the fact that all of these parks have gas hot water systems and the heating of water is the primary consumer of energy for this accommodation type. 4.2 Level B Auditing environmental performance comparisons between businesses Calculating and comparing benchmark figures for energy consumption within and between accommodation types (Aims 3 & 4)

4.2.1

Benchmark figures for hotels and eco-resorts Table 8 summarises benchmark figures calculated for hotels, eco-resorts and caravan parks. SCACs are not featured in this table, their results are dealt with separately due to the variable nature of their data. Table 8: Benchmark energy figures for hotels and eco-resorts
MEASURE kWh/GN (electricity) MJ/GN (total energya)
a

ACCOM TYPE Hotels Eco-resorts Caravan parks Hotels Eco-resorts Caravan parks

N 11 5 6 9 5 6

MEAN 44.16 29.93 4.49 191.19 164.56 31.54

STD ERROR 5.53 5.65 0.81 17.99 37.51 3.07

MIN 23.92 10.48 1.99 110.58 67.51 22.11

MAX 84.28 40.80 7.21 265.19 256.29 43.12

electricity and gas consumption

On average it was found that per capita consumption in hotels was greatest, followed by per capita consumption in eco-resorts, and per

44

capita consumption in caravan parks, for both electricity and total energy consumption. Figures 3 and 4 display the raw data for each accommodation type. Figure 3: Electricity consumption data

Hotels Hotels O = Gold Coast business,

Eco-resorts Eco-resorts

Caravan parks Caravan Parks

= Sunshine Coast business, + = Cairns business

Figure 4: Total energy consumption data

Hotels
O = Gold Coast business,

Eco-resorts

Caravan Parks

= Sunshine Coast business, + = Cairns business

45

ANOVAs were conducted to test for differences in electricity and total energy consumption between the different types of accommodation. A significant result was found for the kWh/GN figures (F = 14.422, df = 29, p< 0.001) and also for the MJ/GN figures (F = 15.932, df = 19, p < 0.05). Dunnetts T3 post hoc analysis (unequal variances assumed) was used to further examine these differences. With the kWh/GN figures, no significant difference was found between the means calculated for hotels and eco-resorts. However, significant differences were found between the means for hotels and caravan parks (mean difference = 39.67, p < 0.001) and the means for eco-resorts and caravan parks (mean difference = 25.43, p < 0.05). With the MJ/GN figures, a significant difference was only observed between the means calculated for hotels and caravan parks (mean difference = 159.65, p < 0.001). 4.2.2 Discussion: energy consumption comparisons hotels and eco-resorts (Aim 4)

Each ANOVA produced a significant result, suggesting that the mean energy consumption figures differed between the three accommodation types. However, post-hoc analyses revealed there was no significant difference between energy consumed in hotels and eco-resorts. On the other hand, caravan parks were found to consume considerably less energy than both of the other accommodation types and it is this difference that is likely to have produced the significant ANOVA results. Looking specifically at the range of figures within each accommodation type, it can be seen that the range for the group of caravan parks is relatively narrow. This is understandable, as these businesses tend to provide similar services and facilities. On the other hand, there is considerable variation in the energy figures for hotels and eco-resorts. Businesses within these accommodation types often try to distinguish themselves in terms of the services and facilities provided for their guests and this is likely to produce differing levels of energy consumption. Overall, these results should be viewed with caution, particularly given the small sample sizes for eco-resorts and caravan parks. Further

46

investigations incorporating greater sample sizes are definitely needed, to support or refute the picture that has emerged here. 4.2.3 Benchmark figures for self-contained apartment complexes (SCACs) (Aim 3)

Table 9 presents the benchmark figures calculated for SCACs. It displays figures for all enterprises in order to convey the complexity of the data collection. Brief comments explain how the data varies in nature and scope. Where data has been collected for both individual units and common property areas, average per capita figures have been calculated for electricity consumption. However, these figures are only crude estimates. They are based upon converting electricity consumption per unit night into electricity consumption per room night, and using the conservative assumption of one guest per room. For Gold Coast SCACs 1 and 2, and Sunshine Coast SCAC 2, average estimates for kWh/UN are based upon data collected for a few units only. Common property consumption is not included in these estimates. On the other hand, for Gold Coast SCACs 6, 7, 8 and 9, electricity data were collected for common property areas only. From these data, electricity consumption figures were calculated in terms of kWh/unit/day. This is because common property electricity is shared across all units in a building, regardless of whether they are vacant or occupied. Table 9: Benchmark figures for self-contained apartment complexes
NAME GC SCAC 1
a

kWh/UN kWh/GN kWh/U/dh 21.47 21.26 19.35 76.17 18.58 38.09

COMMENTS Quarterly data Aug99-Jul00 for 2 units; no a/ce Quarterly data Nov99-Oct00 for 2 units 1 with a/c Monthly data for all units & CPf Jan00Dec00; all a/c; gas hot water Monthly data for all units, CP & retail shops Dec99-Nov00; a/c in all units

GC SCAC 2a GC SCAC 3b, d GC SCAC 4b, d

47

NAME GC SCAC 5 2 bedrm, no a/c 2 bedrm, a/c

b

kWh/UN kWh/GN kWh/U/dh COMMENTS 24.07 30.71 31.81 37.41 25.71 27.54 12.04 15.36 10.60 12.47 12.43 13.77 4.87 7.77 6.64 4.53 8.04 Quarterly data Feb96-Nov98, fluctuating unit nos; monthly CP data for 762 days & 64 units Monthly CP data for 366 days & 35 units Monthly CP data for 330 days & 52 units Quarterly CP data for 287 days & 109 units Monthly CP data for 241 days & 26 units Quarterly data for Sep99-Aug00 for 4 units; no a/c; monthly CP data for 365 days & 118 units Quarterly data Nov99-Oct00 for 3 units; no a/c Quarterly CP data for 368 days & 60 units Monthly data for all units, CP & bistro Nov99-Oct00; a/c, gas hot water

3 bedrm, no a/c 3 bedrm, a/c all unit types GC SCAC 6c GC SCAC 7

c

GC SCAC 8c GC SCAC 9
c

SC SCAC 1b

SC SCAC 2a CairnsSCAC 1c Cairns SCAC 2

a

18.97
b, d

30.8
g

7.13 n.a.

30.8

data provided for individual units only data provided for both individual units & common property c data provided for common property only d electricity purchased through contestable consumption market e a/c = air conditioning f CP = common property g all units contain 1 bedroom only h common property figures only
b

Table 10 provides an overview of the data in Table 9. The mean figures for SCACs are 20.57 kWh/UN, 6.82 kWh/unit/day, and 22.73 kWh/GN. Table 10: Results summary for self-contained apartment complexes
MEASURE kWh/UN kWh/U/day kWh/GN
a

N 3
a

MEAN 20.57 6.82 22.73

STD ERROR 0.80 0.62 5.02

MIN 18.97 4.53 12.43

MAX 21.47 8.04 38.09

5b 5
c

SCACs that provided data for individual units only b SCACs that provided data for common property areas only
c

SCACs that provided data for both individual units & common property areas

48

4.2.4

Discussion: benchmark figures for SCACs

The electricity consumption figures calculated for SCACs generally fell within a relatively narrow range, particularly if figures that accounted for similar components were grouped together (see Table 10). This suggests that electricity consumption does not vary greatly between these businesses. Indeed, this is to be expected, given that SCACs are often similar in design and equipped with appliances of similar capacities (for example, electric hot water system, stove, oven, microwave, washing machine, dryer). There was however, a noticeable outlier, Gold Coast SCAC 4. This SCAC purchases its energy through the contestable consumption market and has a number of retail shops that operate within its confines. The electricity consumed by these retail operations is not recorded separately from the electricity consumed in the apartments, only a single figure is listed on its electricity bills. Thus, any calculations of electricity consumption per capita will contain an additional retail shops component and this will produce inflated figures, as observed. It is interesting to note that although the per capita figures for SCACs are only rough estimates, the mean per capita figure for this accommodation type is lower than the mean per capita figures for hotels (44.16 kWh/GN) and eco-resorts (29.93 kWh/GN). Indeed, if occupancy figures for SCACs were recorded in terms of guest nights, their true per capita resource consumption figures are likely to be even lower than those observed here. As mentioned above, the per capita figures for SCACs are based upon the assumption of one guest per room and thus, they are likely to overestimate per capita energy consumption.

49

5.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The results from Level A and Level B auditing have implications for Level C auditing, which is concerned with measuring and monitoring environmental impacts produced by industry sectors. In particular, these results have implications for measuring greenhouse gas emissions, a significant environmental impact that results from consumption of energy derived from fossil fuel sources. In Queensland, energy obtained from the main grid is predominantly generated from black coal (Queensland Government, 2000), and this process produces substantial quantities of greenhouse gases. It is therefore important to identify and monitor major energy consumers in order to limit their contribution to global warming, one of the most serious environmental problems currently facing the planet. Several methodologies have been identified for calculating annual greenhouse gas emissions produced by the tourist accommodation sector. The possibilities and shortcomings of these methodologies are discussed here, in light of results from this study, and with regard to statistics regularly collected by the ABS survey Tourist Accommodation Queensland. This ABS survey covers the accommodation categories: 1) hotels, motels and guesthouses 2) holiday flats, units and houses (that have 15 or more accommodation units) 3) caravan parks 4) visitor hostels The data set covers eleven Queensland geographical divisions and includes variables such as number of businesses in each accommodation category and number of guest nights/number of unit nights (ABS, 1997).

50

5.1

Level C auditing calculating energy use and greenhouse gas emissions for industry sectors

5.1.1 Calculating greenhouse gas emissions produced by the tourist accommodation sector (Aim 5) The floor space approach Variations on this approach can be found in academic literature. For example, Deng and Burnett (2000), in studying the energy performance of sixteen hotels in Hong Kong, employed an Energy Use Index that was based on site energy consumption per unit of gross floor area. On a larger scale, Mortimer et al. (1999) have used a similar measure to develop a database of energy use in the UK non-domestic building stock. In terms of calculating greenhouse gas emissions produced by the tourist accommodation sector, the floor space approach involves the following: 1) Establish mean annual values for different forms of energy consumption per unit of floor area, for different categories of accommodation (as defined by the ABS). These mean values should be based on figures collected from a representative subsample of businesses for each category of accommodation. For example: [average MJ(elec)/m2floor area/yr] i and [average MJ(gas)/m2 floor area/yr]l where i = ABS accommodation category 2) Multiply these mean values by the number of businesses classified under each accommodation category, to achieve total energy consumption values for each accommodation category. For example: [av. MJ/m2 floor area/yr] i x no. businesses in category = [MJ/m2 floor area/yr] i
i

51

3) For each form of energy, sum the values calculated for different categories of accommodation, to achieve a sector wide value for energy consumption. For example: [MJ/m2 floor area/yr]i
i = 1- 4

4) Convert these sector-wide energy consumption values into greenhouse gas equivalents, using appropriate conversion rates according to the form of energy. For example, according to the Australian Institute of Energy (2001), conversion rates for energy consumption in Queensland include: Natural gas: 1 GJ 56.7 kg CO2 emissions Electricity: 1 kWh 1.04 kg CO2 emissions Using these conversion rates in conjunction with the previous steps, it is possible to calculate kg CO2 emissions/ m2 floor area/year, for the entire accommodation sector. The main advantage of the floor space approach is that calculations are based on floor space, a standard, readily obtainable measure. In addition, this approach assesses the effectiveness and efficiency of building design, providing an indication of building shell performance. Unfortunately, it also has major limitations. Firstly, it is not ideal for drawing environmental performance comparisons between different categories of accommodation and secondly, it does not allow effective monitoring of the environmental performance of a single business over time. These limitations are based on the fact that if greenhouse gas emissions are simply measured in terms of floor space, no account is made for changes in occupancy levels or temperature. These factors can significantly impact upon levels of energy consumption and CO2 emissions, independent of environmental management initiatives (see section 4.1, Aim 2). The limitations of this approach mean it is difficult to determine if different environmental management practices or the installation of new technologies have a real effect on environmental performance. For example, a particular business could install a new energy efficient air conditioning system, and over the next year it

52

observes a dramatic reduction in energy consumption. However, this reduction in energy use may not be due to the technical change alone. Occupancy levels could have been unusually low or perhaps temperatures throughout the year were lower than average. Unfortunately when resource consumption is measured per unit of floor area, it cannot be ascertained whether changes in energy use have resulted from the influence of internal factors or extraneous factors. Thus, it is difficult to determine if appropriate actions are being taken to improve environmental performance. The approach described below however, does allow for temperature, occupancy and other variables to be factored into calculations. The energy model approach Deng and Burnett (2000), in their audit of tourist accommodation in Hong Kong, found that variation in energy use in hotel buildings reflected variations in outdoor air temperature. Similarly, the results in section 4.1, Aim 2 suggest that levels of energy consumption can be influenced by temperature. In addition, section 4.1, Aim 2 demonstrates that occupancy figures can also be an influential variable. This suggests that these factors need to be taken into account when estimating energy use by tourist accommodation. Accordingly, if total annual energy consumption figures and annual occupancy rates are collected for a representative sub-sample of businesses, along with mean annual temperatures, a reasonable model can be established for predicting total annual energy consumption and in turn, greenhouse gas emissions. Such models can be developed for each accommodation category for different climate zones. Where necessary, these models can also account for other factors that may be considered to have a significant impact on energy consumption. Generally, they can be described by the following equation: i = a + b1occup + b2temp + b3x + b4y +.. where: i = mean figure for total annual energy consumption (MJ/year), for a particular accommodation category in a particular climate zone

53

occup = mean annual occupancy rate for this accommodation category temp = mean annual temperature for the region where the accommodation is based x, y = other factors of interest, added or omitted as appropriate Using this approach, the steps for estimating greenhouse gas emissions are: 1) Use the energy model to establish mean values for different forms of energy consumption, for different categories of accommodation located in different climate zones. 2) For each form of energy, sum the values calculated for the different categories of accommodation in the different climate zones, to achieve sector wide values. For example:

i A i = 1-4

] [
+

i B i = 1-4

] [
+

i C i = 1-4

where: i = mean annual energy consumption (measured in MJ/year) for a particular accommodation category A, B, C = different climate zones 3) Convert these sector-wide energy consumption values into greenhouse gas equivalents, using appropriate conversion rates (see examples under the floor space approach). The final figures obtained will be measured in kg CO2 emissions/year. One advantage of this energy model approach is that it produces figures that can be used to calculate further indicators of environmental performance. For instance, annual sector-wide figures for greenhouse gas emissions can be divided by ABS statistics for annual sector-wide accommodation takings. The resultant figures will indicate environmental impact per dollar of gross revenue. In addition, the model can possibly be used as an effective selfassessment tool by individual businesses. In fact, Saxena and Modepalle (1994) have used multiple regression analysis to develop

54

such a tool. These researchers found their model to be a feasible form of self-assessment that predicted the existence or non-existence of energy conservation opportunities reasonably well. Another advantage of the energy model approach is that the model can be modified as necessary, to include few or many factors. For example, the factors employed in the model can be changed from one category of accommodation to the next in order to improve its predictive ability. However, the greater the number of factors included, the larger the sub-sample of businesses that will be needed, in order to calculate relatively accurate parameter values. Another important consideration is that as old buildings are refurbished and new buildings are established with energy efficient designs, results from the model will become outdated. Accordingly, it will be important to undertake further sub-sampling of businesses from time-to-time, in order to refine the calculations and ensure the model produces relatively accurate estimations of energy use. The centralised approach While the two approaches described above were based on independent auditing, this approach is based on in-house auditing and external data collation. It involves enacting legislation that requires individual accommodation businesses to record figures for their energy consumption, which must be forwarded to the ABS. Indeed, the idea of mandatory auditing has been around for at least twenty years, being first introduced in United States chemical and steel industries in the late 1970s, in order to ensure these industries met legislative and regulatory requirements (Goodall, 1995; Diamantis and Westlake, 1997; Sinclair-Desgagne and Gabel, 1997). Nowadays, in-house environmental auditing is becoming more commonplace in other industries with the development of the ISO 14000 series and at a European level, the Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (Diamantis and Westlake, 1997). Goodall (1995) has even suggested that in the future, in-house environmental auditing is likely to become a mainstream activity, with legislation making it mandatory for a range of economic sectors.

55

Apart from ensuring that businesses monitor their in-house environmental performance, the major advantage of the centralised approach is that it allows accurate, real values to be calculated for annual energy use and annual greenhouse gas emissions, for the entire tourist accommodation sector. Unfortunately however, such an approach may not be appropriate for all types of accommodation. While hotels can possibly meet data collection requirements with relative ease, given that many already record figures for energy consumption, SCACs are likely to have problems collecting and assembling energy data. As shown in Figure 2, section 3.3.2, a number of different bodies can hold energy consumption figures for any one complex. In cases where the Body Corporate service provider manages common property accounts, and resident managers or unit owners manage accounts for individual units, it will be difficult to collate data for an entire complex. The exception of course, is SCACs that purchase energy through the contestable consumption market. In the case of these businesses, total energy consumption figures are held by the Body Corporate service provider. However, if SCACs accommodate both holiday-makers and permanent residents, total energy consumption figures from the contestable market do not allow the determination of separate values for tourist-related energy consumption. 5.2 Recommendations for calculating accurate estimates of greenhouse gas emissions

Unfortunately, the data collected for this study was not extensive enough to allow calculation of greenhouse gas emissions for the entire tourist accommodation sector. However, it was possible to identify issues that must be taken into account in order to achieve accurate sector-wide calculations. Five recommendations are made below for Level C auditing. The first four recommendations are applicable to the floor space and energy model approaches, while the fifth recommendation is relevant to all three auditing approaches.

56

5.2.1

Energy consumption figures should be collected over several years

The results for Level A auditing revealed that changes in mean monthly temperature and to some extent, changes in monthly occupancy levels, affected monthly energy consumption. This implies that energy consumption figures should be collected over a number of years, in order to obtain typical mean values. Larger data collections can account for unusual climatic patterns that produce significant fluctuations in temperature and in turn, energy consumption. They can also account for special economic and sociocultural events that may affect occupancy levels and lead to uncharacteristic levels of energy use. Indeed, it would be unwise to establish a mean calculation for energy use or develop an energy model simply on the basis of twelve months of data. 5.2.2 Sampling from accommodation sector should include a wide cross-section of businesses

The Level B auditing results revealed that energy consumption figures for coastal Queensland accommodation varied both within and between accommodation types. Similarly, Deng and Burnett (2000) and UK CEED (1998) have also found that energy consumption varies within and between different types of accommodation. Accordingly, in order to develop accurate mean estimates or effective models for predicting energy use for particular accommodation categories, data samples must be collected from a wide cross-section of businesses. For each accommodation category, these data samples should cover buildings of various styles, at different locations, with different technical standards, different services and facilities, different managerial structures, and different combinations of electricity and gas use. 5.2.3 Accommodation categories should be narrowly defined

As mentioned above, the ABS presently collates accommodation statistics in line with four broad categories. However, in order to calculate more accurate mean estimates of greenhouse gas emissions for different types of accommodation, these categories should be

57

sub-divided. Indeed, this study has indicated that particular energy consumption trends are found within categories such as hotels and eco-resorts, in line with building and accommodation style. Examples of ways to sub-divide the hotel and eco-resort categories include differentiating hotels according to compact or non-compact building design, and separating eco-resorts according to the style of accommodation available, for example cabin and lodge accommodation only, or a mix of cabin and campground accommodation. 5.2.4 Figures for energy consumption should be information in the public domain

Level A and Level B auditing were restricted in this study, particularly for SCACs, due to inability to access kWh figures for electricity consumption. Indeed, Mortimer et al. (1999) have also commented on the difficulty of obtaining reliable data for energy use in nondomestic buildings. While it is understandable that dollar figures for electricity consumption are often considered confidential information, given their direct relationship with operating costs and profit, kWh figures on the other hand, are relatively neutral. Energy authorities should allow the general public to access these latter figures, particularly for study and research purposes. Independent auditors could then collect a large data sample with relative ease and establish more accurate mean estimates and predictive models for energy consumption. 5.2.5 Standardised auditing spreadsheets should be developed for different types of accommodation

Level A Auditing which assessed the extent of in-house auditing action, found that various methods and measures were used for recording utility and occupancy figures. This varied record keeping did not aid the independent auditing process. It meant adjustments often had to be made to the raw data before it could be analysed. Accordingly, it would be beneficial if simple, standardised electronic spreadsheets were developed for different types of accommodation. Standardised records from individual businesses could then be collected and easily amalgamated by the ABS.

58

Indeed, examples of such spreadsheets have been developed by Good and Wirdzek (1999). Their spreadsheets provide businesses with an efficient and effective means for conducting in-house audits and allow businesses to quantify and demonstrate improvements in environmental performance. The spreadsheets have been developed for recording energy consumption and also contain simple conversion rates for calculating atmospheric emissions. Importantly, to facilitate effective technology transfer and encourage widespread uptake of standardised recording tools, spreadsheets would need to be developed in conjunction with representatives from accommodation businesses. In particular, consultations would need to be made with those who will be responsible for recording data, such as engineering and maintenance staff. Ultimately, the spreadsheets should have a clear layout and simply require entry of monthly data, with calculations of annual energy consumption and annual greenhouse gas emissions being undertaken by a computer program. It is important to make the spreadsheets as user-friendly as possible as administrative work is often seen as an inconvenience, particularly by small-scale tourism operators who have many demands on their time. Additionally, spreadsheets and instructions for their use should be developed in line with the ISO 14000 series on environmental auditing, in order to ensure they meet international quality assurance standards. Perhaps standardised spreadsheets could even become an integral part of the Nature and Ecotourism Accreditation Program, which is currently lacking a standard objective assessment component (EAA, 1996). Being a form of environmental performance appraisal that is based on hard data, these spreadsheets would improve the effectiveness of the ecotourism accreditation scheme. Indeed, the collection of hard data is likely to encourage accredited operators to seek real improvements in environmental performance, rather than simply make token adjustments to their operations.

59

5.3

Final conclusions

Environmental auditing is one instrument for promoting the permanence of the tourist accommodation sector and ultimately, the tourism industry. While some tourism operators currently recognise the importance of using this environmental management tool, others do not. The use and extent of energy auditing was found to vary between accommodation providers in this study. In turn, this affected the potential for independent Level A, Level B and Level C-type auditing. Yet with the tourism industry presently demonstrating rapid and intensive development, now more than ever, sectors like accommodation need to monitor their impacts. Ideally, energy auditing at all levels should be conducted on a regular basis. Environmental management tools such as energy auditing are important not only from an environmental viewpoint but also from an economic viewpoint. Energy costs generally account for a high proportion of the operating budgets of accommodation providers, which means that energy auditing can contribute to two major aspects of sustainability: protection of ecological systems and economic viability. This suggests that energy auditing is an area of environmental management research that should be given high priority. The CRC for Sustainable Tourism could be a means through which standardised auditing spreadsheets are developed and commercialised for different types of tourist accommodation.

60

REFERENCES
AAA Tourism, 2000. NRMA Touring Services Accommodation Guide 2000-2001. AAA Tourism Pty Ltd, Melbourne. Anon, 1999. Cleaner and greener production in the desert. Hospitality: Foodservice Beverage Accommodation, 531: 30. Aulbach, R., 1988. Energy and Water Resource Management, (2nd ed.). The Educational Institute of the American Hotel and Motel Association, East Lansing, Michigan. ABS, 1997. Tourist Accommodation, Queensland, 8635.3, June Quarter 1997. Australian Bureau of Statistics, Belconnen, ACT. Australian Greenhouse Office, 1999. Australian Commercial Building Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990-2010. Executive Summary Report 1999. Australian Greenhouse Office, Canberra. Australian Institute of Energy, 2001. Energy Value and Greenhouse Emission Factor of Selected Fuels. At: www.aie.org.au Becken, S., Frampton, C., and Simmons, D., in press. Energy Consumption Patterns in the Accommodation Sector the New Zealand Case. Ecological Economics, submitted. Bhat, V., 1998. Total Quality Environmental Management. An ISO 14000 Approach. Quorum Books, Westport, Connecticut. Birkin, F., 2000. The Art of Accounting for Science: A Prerequisite for Sustainable Development? Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 11: 289-309. Bohm, E. and Walz, R., 1996. Life-cycle analysis: a methodology to analyse ecological consequences within a Technology Assessment Study? International Journal of Technology Management, 11(5-6): 554-565.

61

Buckley, R., 1991. Perspectives in Environmental Management. Springer-Verlag, New York. Commonwealth of Australia, 1997. Australias Second National Report under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. At: www.environment.gov.au/net/natcom.html Deng, S. and Burnett, J., 2000. A study of energy performance of hotel buildings in Hong Kong. Energy and Buildings, 31: 7-12. Diamantis, D. and Westlake, J., 1997. Environmental Auditing: An Approach Towards Monitoring the Environmental Impacts in Tourism Destinations, with Reference to the Case of Molyvos. Progress in Tourism and Hospitality Research, 3: 3-15. Diesendorf, M., 1996. How can a competitive market for electricity be made compatible with the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions? Ecological Economics, 17: 33-48. Ding, P. and Pigram, J., 1995. Environmental Audits: An emerging concept in sustainable tourism development. The Journal of Tourism Studies, 6 (2): 2-10. Dowling, R. and Charters, T., 2000. The Planning and Development of Ecotourism in Queensland. In T. Charters and K. Law (eds.), Best Practice Ecotourism in Queensland. Tourism Queensland, Brisbane, pp. 1-16. EAA, 1996. National Ecotourism Accreditation Program. Ecotourism Association of Australia, Red Hill, Queensland. Forsyth, T., 1997. Environmental responsibility and business regulation: the case of sustainable tourism. The Geographical Journal, 163 (3): 270-281. Good, L. and Wirdzek, P., 1999. Auditing to the Cutting Edge. Energy Engineering, 96(6): 63-79.

62

Goodall, B., 1995. Environmental Auditing: a tool for assessing the environmental performance of tourism firms. The Geographical Journal, 161 (1): 29-37. Gssling, S., 2000. Sustainable Tourism Development in Developing Countries: Some Aspects of Energy Use. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 8 (5): 410-425. Grubb, M., Vrolijk, C. and Brack, D., 1999. The Kyoto Protocol. A Guide and Assessment. Royal Institute of International Affairs, London. IHA, IHEI and UNEP, 1995. Environmental Action Pack for Hotels: practical steps to benefit your business and the environment. UNEP Industry and Environment, Paris. IH&RA and UNEP, 1995. Environmental Good Practice in Hotels. Case Studies from the International Hotel & Restaurant Association Environmental Award. IH&RA and UNEP Industry and Environment. IHEI, 1993. Environmental Management for Hotels The Industry Guide to Best Practice. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford. Janic, M., 1999. Aviation and externalities: the accomplishments and problems. Transportation Research Part D, 4: 159-180. Kirk, D., 1996. Environmental management for hotels: a students handbook. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford. Lawrence, T., Wickins, D., and Phillips, N., 1997. Managing legitimacy in ecotourism. Tourism Management, 18 (5): 307-316. Mathieson, A. and Wall, G., 1982. Tourism: Economic, Physical and Social Impacts. Longman, London. Mortimer, N., Ashley, A., Elsayed, M., Kelly, M., and Rix, J., 1999. Developing a database of energy use in the UK non-domestic building stock. Energy Policy, 27:451-468.

63

NECA, 2001. National Electricity Market. At: www.neca.com.au/ Queensland Government, 2000. Queensland Energy Policy, A Cleaner Energy Strategy. At: www.env.qld.gov.au Saxena, U. and Modepalle, R., 1994. Development of Self Assessment Tool For Energy Conservation. Energy Engineering, 91(3): 57-65. Short, S., 1999. I Want My Hotel Room Clean. Really Clean. Time International, 153 (12): 8. Sinclair-Desgagne, B. and Gabel, H.L., 1997. Environmental Auditing in Management Systems and Public Policy. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 33: 331-346. TCA and CRC Tourism, 1998. Being green keeps you out of the red. Tourism Council Australia, Woolloomooloo, NSW. UK CEED, 1994. A Life-Cycle Analysis of a Holiday Destination: Seychelles. British Airways Environment Report 41/94. UK CEED, Cambridge. UK CEED, 1998. An Assessment of the Environmental Impacts of Tourism in St Lucia. British Airways Environment Report 5/98. UK CEED, Cambridge. Wight, P., 1993. Ecotourism: Ethics or eco-sell? Journal of Travel Research, 31 (3): 3-9. WTTC, WTO and Earth Council, 1995. Agenda 21 for the travel and tourism industry: towards environmentally sustainable development. WTTC, London.

64

65

APPENDIX 1: TECHNICAL DETAILS AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION FOR HOTELS

GC HOTEL 1 Location Hope Island, o/looks marina lagoon & golf course 1988

GC HOTEL 2 Southern Surfers Paradise, GC Highway 1991: S tower 1997: N tower

GC HOTEL 3 The Spit Main Beach

GC HOTEL 4 Southern Surfers Paradise, GC Highway 1995/1996

SC HOTEL 1 Coolum Beach

Year of Construction

1987/1988

1988

Building Style Floor space m2 No. storeys No. rooms Elevator(s) U/gr parking Temp Control System

low rise accom courts resort style 32 200 1: 2 bldgs 3: 7 bldgs 247 4 & 4 dumb waiters N

2 towers

low rise

tower

low rise villas suites, houses resort style 43 968 single & double storeys 324 (accom units) N N individ a/c systems in accom units

49 124 32: S tower 25: N tower 378 8 & 3 dumb waiters Y: 2 floors

3 323 9 Y

21 410 7 Y 3 central chiller sets, fan coil a/c units in rms

central chillers central chillers, central chillers, individ a/c units local thermostats fan coil a/c in rms, lrg a/c units units in rms controlled controlled by bldg mgmt by bldg mgmt system system electric gas eleca

Hot water

gas

gasb

66

SC HOTEL 2 Twin Waters

SC HOTEL 3 Hastings St b/w Laguna Bay & Noosa River 1989

CAIRNS HOTEL 1 Esplanade, o/looks harbour 1967: motel units 1981:tower tower & low rise units ~10 600 2: motel 10: tower 50: motel 80: tower Y split system a/c for reception area individ a/c units in rms

CAIRNS HOTEL 2 Wharf St, o/looks Trinity Inlet 1987

CAIRNS HOTEL 3 Esplanade o/looks harbour & city 1990

CAIRNS HOTEL 4 Esplanade, o/looks harbour 1986: harbourside 1992: mountainside medium rise

1988-1990

low rise rms & suites resort style 40 029 grnd floor & upper level 368 (accom units) 6 dumb waiters N cental plant circulates water through 6 cooling towers individ rm a/c units electric

medium rise

medium rise

medium rise pear-shaped 9 219 7 232 4 Y central chillers, individ rm a/c units

21 173 6 170 Y Y a/c

24 830 10 264 Y Y a/c central chillers

172 Y Y central unit on roof using chilled water, individ fan coil a/c units in rms gas

electric

elec & gasc

gas

gas

67

APPENDIX 1: TECHNICAL DETAILS AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION FOR HOTELS cont.

GC HOTEL 1 Garden irrigation Star rating Price ($A)I Facilities/Services: Restaurant(s) Bar(s) Lounge Caf Nightclub Conv fac In house laundry Guest laundry Pool(s) (heating) retreated water from GCCC 5 110 Y Y(2) Y Y N Y N N Y(2): 750,000L (heat pump) & 4,500,000L Y:2000L (heat pump) Y Y (9) Y (2) Y GC HOTEL 2 GC HOTEL 3 manual watering 5 160 Y(2) Y(2) Y N Y Y GC HOTEL 4 retreated water from GCCC 5 60 Y(2) Y(2) N N N Y N N Y: 100,000L (gas) SC HOTEL 1 water sourced from resort lakes 5 98 Y(4)e Y(4) N N N Y Y Y(in rms) Y(8): 150,000L 600,000L (gas) Y(6)(gas) Y Y(7) Y Y

5 70 Y(3) Y(2) Y N N Y Y Y

Y (3): Y(1) 450,000L (elec, changing (solar) to gas 150,000L (gas) March 2001) 25,000L (elec) Y(2) (elec) Y Y N Y Y N Y (4) N Yd

Spa(s) (heating) Sauna Tennis crt(s) Golf course Gym/health club

Y(4)(elec) Y N N Y

Changing to gas in March 2001 Conversion from electricity to gas began Oct 1995, completed Dec 1997 c Gas in laundry d Not included in energy figures
b

68

SC HOTEL 2 retreated water from MSC 41/2 100 Y(3)f Y(4) N N N Y N N Y:1,063,000L (gas)

SC HOTEL 3 auto watering system, mains water 41/2 165 Y Y(3) Y N N Y N Y Y:450,000L (heat reclaim from chilled water system) Y (2) (elec) Y N N Y

CAIRNS HOTEL 1 small garden hose/sprinkler mains water 31/2 68 Y(3)g N N Y N Y Y Y Y(2): 45,000L 112,500L

CAIRNS HOTEL 2 auto watering system, mains water 5 140 Y Y(2) N N N Y Y N Y:600,000L (heat reclaim from chilled water system) Y:10,000L (elec) Y N N Y

CAIRNS HOTEL 3 irrig sys timed & manual operation 41/2 120 Y Y N N N Y N Y Y

CAIRNS HOTEL 4 sprinkler system, bore water 41/2 65 Yh Y N N N Y N Y Y:156,000L

Y(gas) N Y(6) Y Y

N N N N N

Y N N N Y

Y:3,000L N N N N

e f

Accom units contain electric hotplates, micro & d/wash; pizzeria & delicatessen also on-site some accom units contain micro & stove g restaurants not included in energy figures h suites contain elec hotplates & micro i standard twin-share accom price divided by two (low season rate)

69

APPENDIX 2: TECHNICAL DETAILS AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION FOR SELF-CONTAINED APARTMENT COMPLEXES

GC SCAC 1 Location Year of construction Building style No. storeys No. apartments (no. of each type)a Apartment sizes (no. of each size) Elevator(s) U/gr parking Temp control system Hot water Garden irrigation Coolangatta 1998 low rise 3 55 (30H, 6P, 19PR) 1 bed(1) 2 bed(52) 3 bed(3) N Y c/fans,a/c (4 apts) electric

GC SCAC 2 Broadbeach 1983 low rise 3 18 (14H, 2P, 2V) 2bed(15) 3bed(3) N Y c/fans,a/c (2 apts) electric

GC SCAC 3 Broadbeach 1997 medium rise 10 136 (45H, 91P) 1 bed(132) 2 bed(12) Y(2) Y a/c gas irrig system, mains water

GC SCAC 4 Broadbeach 1996

GC SCAC 5 Biggera Waters 1988 low rise 3

GC SCAC 6d

250

64 (57H, 7P) 2bed(59) 3bed(6) N Y c/fans, a/c (29 apts) electric irrig system, mains water

1bed 2bed Y(2) Y a/c electric irrig system, mains water

auto watering auto watering system, system mains water artesian bore

70

GC SCAC 7d

GC SCAC 8d

GC SCAC 9d

SC SCAC 1 Maroochy 1982 high rise 15 118(56H, 40P 17OR 5V) 2bed (115) 3bed(3) Y(4) Y c/fans, & portable fans electric irrig system & hose sprinkler

SC SCAC 2 Maroochy 1982 high rise 14 53 (45H, 4P, 1C, 3O) 2bed(33) 3bed(12) Y(2) Y c/fans, electric auto watering system mains water

CAIRNS SCAC 1 Trinity Beach 1995 low rise 3 60 (57H, 3P) 2bed(49) 3bed(11) N Y c/fans & a/c electric auto watering system

CAIRNS SCAC 2 Cairns City 1996 medium rise 7 38 (all H)c 1 bed (38)

Y Y a/c gas auto watering system mains water

71

APPENDIX 2: TECHNICAL DETAILS AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION FOR SELF-CONTAINED APARTMENT COMPLEXES

GC SCAC 1 Star rating Price ($A) Facilities/Services: Elec cook-top oven Microwave Refrigerator Dishwasher Washing mach & dryer Pool(s) Spa Sauna Tennis crt(s) Gym Y Y Y Y Y Y:65000L Y Y N Y 41/2

GC SCAC 2 31/2

GC SCAC 3

GC SCAC 4 5

GC SCAC 5 4 66 Y Y Y Y Y Y(2):50,000L, 60,000L Y N Y N

GC SCAC 6d

63 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y Y Y Y(2) Y(2) Y N Y

80 Y Y Y Y Y Y(3) Y(2) Y N Y

H = holiday rentals, P = permanent residents, PR permanent rentals, V = vacant, OR = outside rentals, O = other, C = commercial b No breakdown figures provided for apt types or apt sizes. Retail shops also located within the building c Bistro located in the building d Management did not provide assistance for this study

72

cont.

GC SCAC 7d

GC SCAC 8d

GC SCAC 9d

SC SCAC 1 31/2 80 Y Y Y Y Y Y:65,000L Y Y N N

SC SCAC 2 31/2

CAIRNS SCAC 1 41/2 53

CAIRNS SCAC 2 41/2

Y Y Y Y Y Y:60,000L Y Y Y N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N

Y Y Y Y Y Y N N N N

73

APPENDIX 3: TECHNICAL DETAILS AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION FOR ECO RESORTS

GC ECO 1 Location Year of construction Building style Flr space m2 Lamington National Park 1933, regular upgrades/ extensions cabins, on-site tents & campsite 1485 (cabins, dining rooms kitchen & sundries, reception/ offices) 1&2 41 cabins: up to 115 guests; campsite: up to 110 guests elec oil heaters, set according to weather conditions, governed by program; a/c in office; portable fans for accom gas sprinkler & drip systems, water sourced from river 4 159 Y GC ECO 2 South Stradbroke Island 1998 low-rise cabins, lodges & villas ~ 35,000 (accom units only)

No. storeys No. rooms Temp control system

1&2 357 accom units; up to 1200 guests ceiling fans

Hot water Garden irrigation Star rating Price ($A) Facilities/Services: Restaurant(s) Bar(s) Caf Conv fac In house laundry Guest laundry Pool(s) (heating) Spa(s)(heating) Sauna Tennis crt(s) Gym/health club

solar (gas when needed) effluent treated on-site 5 113 Y(2) Y

Y Y N Y N N N N N

Y Y Y N Y(2)(generator heat recovery) Y N Y Y

74

GC ECO 3 Lamington National Park 1930, regular upgrades/ extensions cabins communal guesthouse & campsite

CAIRNS ECO 1 Daintree National Park 1988 first stage 1994 extensions cabins & lodge bunkhouse

CAIRNS ECO 2 Daintree National Park 1988 first stage, extensions cabins

1, 2 & 3 70 suites & rooms ceiling fans & a/c (8 rms only); thermostat controlled central heating (12 rms); computer controlled heating in other areas solar & gas soaker hoses rarely used water sourced from river 3 1/2 167 Y Y Y Y N Y Y(2)(gas) Y(gas) Y N N

1&2 67 cabins, 24 lodge rms ceiling fans

1&2 50 cabins ceiling fans & a/c

gas none 4 115 Y Y N Y Y Y Y(3): 160,000L, 180,000L/120,000L N N N N

gas manual watering 2 mths of the yr only, bore water 4 115 Y N N Y N Y Y(2):100,000L, 120,000L N N N N

75

APPENDIX 4: TECHNICAL DETAILS AND DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION FOR CARAVAN PARKS

GC CARAVAN PARK 1 Location Building style Southport cabins caravans & tent sites 14 cabins, 268 sites, gas bore water 4 1/2 (cabins) Y Y Y Y Y GC CARAVAN PARK 2 Burleigh Heads cabins & caravans & tent sites 3 cabins, 103 sites, gas bore water 4 1/2 (cabins) N N N Y Y GC CARAVAN PARK 3 Kirra cabins & caravans & tent sites 6 cabins, 328 sites, gas bore water 4 1/2 (cabins) Y N Y Y Y GC CARAVAN PARK 4 Main Beach cabins & caravans & tent sites 6 cabins, 160 sites, gas bore water 4 1/2 (cabins) Y N Y Y Y GC CARAVAN PARK 5 Palm Beach cabins & caravans & tent sites 19 cabins, 338 sites gas bore water 4 1/2 (cabins) Y N Y Y Y GC CARAVAN PARK 6 Miami tent sites

No. of each accom type Hot water Garden irrigation Star rating Facilities/Services: Pool Tennis crt(s) TV/recreation room Elec BBQs Laundry facilities

77 sites gas bore water n.a.

N N N Y Y

76

AUTHORS
Dr Jan Warnken Jan Warnken holds a Ph.D from Griffith University and since 1997 has been a full time lecturer in the School of Environmental and Applied Science at Griffiths Gold Coast campus. Dr Warnkens research interests include outcomes and quality of EIA processes in general, environmental management tools for sustainable tourism (environmental planning, impact assessment (project, cumulative, strategic), environmental audit, industry self regulation and bestpractice) with specialisation in impacts and management of recreational and tour boats. Contact: j.warnken@mailbox.gu.edu.au

Melanie Bradley Melanie Bradley has a B Sc/B Econ degree from the Australian National University, Canberra, and a B Sc(Hons) degree from Griffith University. She is currently employed as Research Officer, Environment and Natural Resources, with the Queensland Farmers' Federation (QFF). In her role at QFF Melanie deals with a diverse range of issues including vegetation management, coastal management, greenhouse and climate change, weeds and pest animals, salinity, water quality and environmental management systems. Her work and research is focused on investigating and promoting sustainable management practices that will protect and conserve the natural resource base, whilst delivering economic and social viability to rural communities.

77

78

The Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Tourism was established under the Australian Governments Cooperative Research Centres Program to underpin the development of a dynamic, internationally competitive, and sustainable tourism industry. Our mission: Developing and managing intellectual property (IP) to deliver innovation to business, community and government to enhance the environmental, economic and social sustainability of tourism. DEVELOPING OUR IP Director of Research Prof Leo Jago 1. Tourism, conservation and environmental management research Co-ordinator Prof Ralf Buckley (r.buckley@mailbox.gu.edu.au ) Wildlife Tourism Mountain Tourism Nature Tourism Adventure Tourism 2. Tourism engineering design and eco-technology research Coordinator Dr David Lockington (d.lockington@uq.edu.au) Coastal and marine infrastructure and systems Coastal tourism ecology Waste management Physical infrastructure, design and construction 3. Tourism policy, events and business management research Coordinator Prof Leo Jago (Leo.jago@vu.edu.au) Consumers and marketing Events and sports tourism Tourism economics and policy Strategic management Regional tourism Indigenous tourism 4. Tourism IT and Informatics research Coordinator Dr Pramod Sharma (p.sharma @uq.edu.au ) Electronic product & destination marketing and selling IT for travel and tourism online development Rural and regional tourism online development E-business innovation in sustainable travel and tourism 5. Post graduate education Coordinator Dr John Fien (j.fien@mailbox.gu.edu.au) 6. Centre for Tourism and Risk Management Director Prof Jeffrey Wilks (j.wilks@uq.edu.au ) 7. Centre for Regional Tourism Research Director Prof Peter Baverstock (pbaverst@scu.edu.au) MANAGING OUR IP General Manager Ian Pritchard (ian@crctourism.com.au) 1. IP register 2. Technology transfer 3. Commercialisation 4. Destination management products 5. Executive training 6. Delivering international services 7. Spin-off companies Sustainable Tourism Holdings CEO Peter OClery (poclery@iprimus.com.au) Sustainable Tourism Services Managing Director Stewart Moore (sts@crctourism.com.au) Green Globe Asia Pacific CEO Graeme Worboys (graeme.worboys@ggasiapacific.com.au ) For more information contact: Communications Manager Brad Cox CRC for Sustainable Tourism Pty Ltd Griffith University, PMB 50 GOLD COAST MC, Qld 9726 Ph: +61 7 5552 8116, Fax: +61 7 5552 8171 Visit: www.crctourism.com.au or email: Brad@crctourism.com.au

79

BRISBANE
Tourism Engineering, Design and Technology Research Dr David Lockington Ph: 07 3365 4054
d.lockington@uq.edu.au

DARWIN
Northern Territory Node Coordinator Ms Alicia Boyle Ph: 08 8946 6084
alicia.boyle@ntu.edu.au

CAIRNS
Cairns Node Coordinator Prof Philip Pearce Ph: 07 4781 4762
philip.pearce@jcu.edu.au

IT & Informatics Research Dr Pramod Sharma Ph: 07 3365 6513

p.sharma@uq.edu.au

Sustainable Tourism Services Mr Stewart Moore Managing Director Ph: 07 3211 4726
sts@crctourism.com.au

Education Program Coordinator Dr John Fien Ph: 07 3875 7105

j.fien@mailbox.gu.edu.au

GOLD COAST
Chief Executive Prof Terry De Lacy Ph: 07 5552 8172
t.delacy@mailbox.gu.edu.au

Conservation and Environmental Management Research Prof Ralf Buckley Ph: 07 5552 8675
r.buckley@mailbox.gu.edu.au

PERTH
Western Australia Node Coordinator Prof Jack Carlsen Ph: 08 9266 1132
CarlsenJ@cbs.curtin.edu.au

ADELAIDE
South Australia Node Coordinator Prof Graham Brown Ph: 08 8302 0313
graham.brown@unisa.edu.au

LISMORE
Centre for Regional Tourism Research Prof Peter Baverstock Ph: 02 6620 3809
pbaverst@scu.edu.au

CANBERRA
Industry Extension Coordinator Mr Peter OClery Ph: 02 6230 2931 poclery@iprimus.com.au Australian Capital Territory Node Coordinator Prof Trevor Mules Ph: 02 6201 5016
tjm@comedu.canberra.edu.au

MELBOURNE
Director of Research Prof Leo Jago Ph: 03 9688 5055
Leo.jago@vu.edu.au

SYDNEY
New South Wales Node Coordinator Mr Tony Griffin Ph: 02 9514 5103 tony.griffin@uts.edu.au International Program Co-ordinator Dr Johannes Bauer Ph: 02 6338 4284
jbauer@csu.edu.au

LAUNCESTON
Tasmania Node Coordinator Prof Trevor Sofield Ph: 03 6324 3578
trevor.sofield@utas.edu.au