THOUGHTFUL COOLING

ENGINEERING STUDENT
CERTIFICATE
WORKSHOP
D2.9
Life-Cycle Carbon Footprinting and
Economics
Methods for comparative assessment of cooling
technologies

Overview
1. Definitions & Concepts of GHG Inventorying
2. WRIs GHG Protocol
3. Mathematical Basis of GHG Inventorying
4. Sample GHG Calculation for a Power Plant
5. Alternative GHG Inventory Frameworks for Buildings
6. A Method for Life-Cycle GHG Inventorying of Air Conditioners
7. Sample Calculation for comparison of a Conventional vs. Sustainable Cooling Technology
(get your notebooks and calculators out!!)

GHG Inventorying Corporate Accounting Standard

(the standard inventorying methodology)

Carbon ERP

Abbreviations, Synonyms, Terminology, Equivalences

1.

GHG EF = Emission Factor = Emission Coefficient

2.

GHG Inventory = Carbon Footprint (CF)

3.

ERP = Enterprise Resource Planning

4.

CO2 not equal to CO2e. CF is always in CO2e

5.

Realizer = Client = Reporting Entity

6.

Domestic Action = Minimize

7.

Neutralize = Offset

Carbon ERP

Carbon ERP
GHG Inventorying Definitions Emission categories
Emission estimates are presented in accordance with the categories of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories (1996).

Carbon ERP
GHG Inventorying Definitions Activity data
Activity data, according to the Revised 1996 IPCC Guidelines for National
Greenhouse Gas Inventories, are defined as data on the magnitude of human
activity resulting in emissions or removals taking place during a given period of
time.
Emission factors
An emission factor is defined as the average emission rate of a given GHG for a
given source, relative to units of activity.
Global Warming Potentials
The Global Warming Potentials (GWP) used for presentation of CH4 and N2O in
terms of CO2 equivalent are 21 and 310, respectively.
Implied emission factor
An implied emission factor is defined as emissions divided by the relevant
measure of activity
IEF = Emissions / Activity data

Carbon ERP
GHG Inventorying Definitions -

Carbon ERP
Emission Sources -

Carbon ERP
Principles of GHG Inventorying -

Carbon ERP
Principles of GHG Inventorying -

Carbon ERP
Framework of GHG Inventorying Process -

Source The GHG Protocol

Carbon ERP
Framework of GHG Inventorying Process -

Carbon ERP
Framework of GHG Inventorying Process -

Carbon ERP
Framework of GHG Inventorying Process -

Carbon ERP
Framework of GHG Inventorying Process -

Carbon ERP
Framework of GHG Inventorying Process -

Source DEFRA Guidance on how to measure and report your greenhouse gas emissions, Sept 2009

Carbon ERP
Framework of GHG Inventorying Process Organizational Footprint (scope 1, 2 and 3)
Scope 3

Scope 2

Scope 1

Scope 3

Purchased
Electricity, Heat
and Steam

Raw Materials
Extraction and
Production

Distribution of
Raw Materials

Organizations
Operations
(fossil fuel
consumption)

Distribution of
products and
Retails

Consumption

Employees
commute and
Business Travel

Product Footprint (scope may vary but should be clearly defined

Reuse / Recycle
/ Disposal

Carbon ERP
GHG Inventorying Process

Carbon ERP
GHG Inventorying Methodology

An emission factor is defined as a factor allowing [carbon] emissions to be estimated

from a unit of available activity data (e.g. litres of fuel consumed) (Defra, 2009 p. 67)
and is typically expressed in tCO2e.

Carbon ERP
Applied GHG Inventorying Cases Studies

Carbon ERP
Applied GHG Inventorying Cases Studies

Carbon ERP
Applied GHG Inventorying Cases Studies

Carbon ERP
Applied GHG Inventorying Cases Studies

Carbon ERP

Alternative GHG Inventorying Frameworks

for Buildings / Real Estate

Visually
Background
Why carbon footprinting and building operations performance-based
certification of real estate / cooling technologies developments adds value
above and beyond Green Building Ratings

Currently:
The real estate sector follows various standards for building
design such as LEED, GRIHA, IGBC etc
While these standards are very helpful they are static, intent
based rather than performance based
These methods advise you on what targets are to be achieved
but does not help you select the appropriate interventions for
your project
For instance: The Energy Conservation Building Code (ECBC)
devised by the Central Government (through the BEE)
provides minimum requirements for energy efficient design
and construction of buildings

Currently:

This code is applicable to buildings or complexes with a connected load of

500KW or a contract demand of 600 kVA or greater which is normally
buildings with conditioned area of more than 1000sq.m

The code is already mandatory for commercial buildings in 8 states

including Maharastra since 2012 and will in the near future be compulsory
for all new constructions.

The provision of this code apply to :

Building Envelopes
Mechanical systems and equipment including HVAC
Service hot water heating
Interior and exterior lighting
Electrical power and motors

However, a simple compliance system is not sufficient to accurately

measure and convey the savings and the effect of the efficiency and
conservation measures undertaken for the project to potential customers

As a Result:

Most companies just

proclaim sustainability
through words

None of them quantify and

convey the impact of the
certification or rating on the
customer

None of them get their

claims of savings certified

Most customers are not

convinced of the claims and
perceive it as a gimmick

The 4th IPCC assessment states that the greatest potential for reducing
GHG emissions are from the building sector and the highest potential and
cheapest method was to do so in developing countries.

Emission during the lifecycle of a building

Energy Usage
During Building
Operation Stage
27%

Land Use
9%
Water Use
19%
Solid Waste
19%
Raw material
Usage
23%

Energy Usage
During All other
Stages of Building
Construction
3%

If only the Energy usage component is considered 80 90% of Energy used by the
building is consumed during Operational Stage (Occupancy and Maintenance Stage)
for Heating, Cooling, Ventilation, Lighting, Appliances etc
10-20% of Energy used (varies according to life of the building) during Extraction,
Manufacturing, Onsite Construction, Demolition and Transportation involved during
the LCA of building

What is Carbon Footprinting

The total quantity of greenhouse gas emissions caused by an organization, event,
product or person. Calculated as carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) using the relevant
100-year global warming potential (GWP100)

The building sector has the largest potential for reducing GHG emissions. With proven
and commercially available technologies, the energy consumption in both new and
existing buildings can be cut by an estimated 30-50% without significantly increasing
investment costs

Common Carbon Metric

United Nations Environment Programs Sustainable Buildings & Climate

Initiative
(UNEP-SBCI) has developed the Common Carbon Metric for Building
Operations
CCM is an international standard to measure the carbon footprint of a
building during its operational phase and report and verify reductions in a
consistent manner
The metrics measured are:
Energy intensity = kWh/sq.m/year
Carbon intensity = kgCO2e/sq.m/year
It is a useful aid for incentive based policy for the sector as well as enables
sharing of technology across countries

Define Boundaries and

Scope of CO2
measurement

Calculate the
CO2e savings as a
result of the
intervention

Calculate footprint if
the intervention was
not introduced

Identify each
component that has a
emission contribution

General Carbon
Footprinting
Process

Multiply emission factor

by quantity to get
footprint

Quantify each
component that has a
emission contribution

Identify the emission

factor for each emission
contributor

Life Cycle GHG Emissions of Cooling Technologies

Life Cycle GHG Emissions of Cooling Technologies

Scope 1
Emissions
(Ref. Fugitive
Emissions)

Scope 2
Emissions (
Electricity
Emissions)

Scope 3
Emissions (
AT&C Loss
Emissions)

Total Life
Cycle GHG
Emissions

Case A:

Library Building
84 TR Direct-Expansion Chiller System
EER of System = 2.93
R22 Refrigerant
3,000 hours/year use
Energy Cost = 13.25 INR/kWh
Energy Penalty (above contract demand) = INR 300 / kVA / month
Capital Cost = INR 16.20 Lakh
Building Dimensions:

Length: 131 feet

Width: 82 feet
Height: 10 feet 6 inch per floor
5 Floors

Case B:

Library Building
84 TR Output Direct-Indirect EAC + DX Hybrid System
53 TR Compressor Output (i.e. 37% downsizing) @ 2.93 EER
R290 Refrigerant
3,000 hours/year use
Energy Cost = 13.25 INR/kWh
Energy Penalty (above contract demand) = INR 300 / kVA / month
Capital Cost = INR 54.00 Lakh
Building Dimensions:

Length: 131 feet

Width: 82 feet
Height: 10 feet 6 inch per floor
5 Floors

Case A:
Step 1: Derive power consumption for 84 TR system cooling output
84 TR = 84 TR x 3.517 kW / TR = 295.4 kW cooling
EER = 2.93 = 295.4 kW output / X kW input
X = 295.4 kW / 2.93 = 100.8 kW input (electrical)
Step 2: Determine annual energy consumption for calculated system kW
100.8 kW x 3,000 hours/year = 302,486 kWh/year
Step 3: Calculate annual GHG emissions for energy consumption
Scope 2 Emissions (Indirect Electricity Emissions) = 302,486 kWh/year x
0.96 kg CO2e/kWh (Avg. India Grid Electricity Emission Factor) = 290.4 MT
CO2e/year
Scope 3 Emissions (AT&C Loss Emissions) = 302,486 kWh/year x 0.29 kg
CO2e/kWh (Avg. India Grid AT&C Losses Emission Factor) = 87.7 MT
CO2e/year

Case A:
Step 4: Determine Non-Energy (Fugitive) Emissions from Refrigerant Use LifeCycle
Step 1: Methodology for determining total emissions from refrigerant leakage from refrigerators and air
conditioners
Guidelines:
REFRIGERATION AND AIR CONDITIONING, Volume 3: Industrial Processes and Product Use, Chapter 7: Emissions of
Fluorinated Substitutes for Ozone Depleting Substances, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas
Inventories
Etotal ,t = Econtainers,t + ECharge,t + Elifetime,t + Eend of life,t
EMISSIONS FROM MANAGEMENT OF CONTAINERS
Econtainers, t = RMt c / 100
Where:
Econtainers, t = emissions from all HFC containers in year t, kg
RMt = HFC market for new equipment and servicing of all refrigeration application in year t, kg
c = emission factor of HFC container management of the current refrigerant market, percent
EMISSIONS WHEN CHARGING NEW EQUIPMENT
Echarge, t = Mt k / 100
Where:
Echarge, t = emissions during system manufacture/assembly in year t, kg
Mt = amount of HFC charged into new equipment in year t (per sub-application), kg
k = emission factor of assembly losses of the HFC charged into new equipment (per sub-application), percent

Case A:
EMISSIONS DURING EQUIPMENT LIFETIME
Elifetime, t = Bt x / 100
Where:
Elifetime, t = amount of HFC emitted during system operation in year t, kg
Bt = amount of HFC banked in existing systems in year t (per sub-application), kg
x = annual emission rate (i.e., emission factor) of HFC of each sub-application bank during operation,
accounting for average annual leakage and average annual emissions during servicing, percent
EMISSIONS AT SYSTEM END-OF-LIFE
Eend-of-life, t = Mt-d P/100 (1-nrec,d/100)
Where:
Eend-of-life, t = amount of HFC emitted at system disposal in year t, kg
Mt-d = amount of HFC initially charged into new systems installed in year (t-d), kg
p = residual charge of HFC in equipment being disposed of expressed in percentage of full charge,
percent
rec,d = recovery efficiency at disposal, which is the ratio of recovered HFC referred to the HFC
contained in the system, percent

Case A:
IPCC/TEAP. 2006. IPCC/TEAP Special Report: Safeguarding the Ozone Layer and the Global Climate
System. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
DISTRIBUTION
PHASE

HFC- USE PHASE

END-OF-LIFE PHASE

OPERATIONAL
LEAKAGES

LEAKAGES
FROM
INITIAL
CHARGING

REMAINING
CHARGE
FOR
SERVICING

LEAKAGES
FROM
SERVICING
RECHARGE

REMAINING
CHARGE AT
END-OF-LIFE

RECOVERY
EFF.

[% OF
MARKET]

[% OF
INITIAL
CHARGE /
YEAR]

[% OF
INITIAL
CHARGE]

[% OF
INITIAL
CHARGE]

[% OF
SERVICING
RECHARGE]

[% OF
INITIAL
CHARGE]

[% OF
REMAININ
G
CHARGE]

BUSINESS-ASUSUAL SCENARIO

10%

10%

1%

60%

2%

80%

INTERMEDIATE
LEAKAGE
SCENARIO

10%

5%

1%

65%

2%

85%

BEST-PRACTICES
SCENARIO

2%

1%

0.20%

NA

0.40%

90%

80%

SCENARIO

FROM
HANDLING
CONTAINERS

Case A:
Calculated Refrigerant (Fugitive) Life-Cycle Emission Factors for Developing Countries (India) with
Minimal Leakage Mitigation Efforts

System Type

Refrigerant Type

GHG EF

Units

Ductable AC
(Conventional)

Avg. High GWP

Refrigerant Mix

149.76

kg CO2e/kW cooling/year

Ductable AC
(Conventional)

HFC-32

16.32

kg CO2e/kW cooling/year

Ductable AC
(Conventional)

R-290

0.08

kg CO2e/kW cooling/year

Case A:
Step 4: Determine Non-Energy (Fugitive) Emissions from Refrigerant Use LifeCycle
Scope 1 Emissions (Refrigerant Leakage) = 149.76 kg CO2e/kW cooling/year
x 295.4 kW cooling = 44.2 MT CO2e/year
Step 5: Determine Annual Operating (Energy) Cost
Energy Use Cost = 302,486 kWh/year x 13.25 INR/kWh = 40.08 INR
Lakh/year
Energy Penalty Cost:

Electrical Load = 100.8 kW

Power Factor = 0.9
Apparent Power = 100.8/0.9 = 112 kVA
Penalty Cost = 300 INR/kVA/month x 112 kVA x 12 months/year = 4.03 INR Lakh/year

Case A:
Annual Emissions and Cost Summary

Parameter

Value

Units

Scope 1 Emissions

44.2

MT CO2e/year

Scope 2 Emissions

290.4

MT CO2e/year

Scope 3 Emissions

87.7

MT CO2e/year

TOTAL GHG Emissions

422.3

MT CO2e/year

Capital Cost

16.20

INR Lakh/Year

Annual Operating Cost

44.11

INR Lakh/Year

Case B:
Step 1: Derive power consumption for 84 TR system cooling output
84 TR = 84 TR x 3.517 kW / TR = 295.4 kW cooling
EER = 2.93 = 53 TR compressor output x 3.517 kW/TR / X kW input
X = 186.4 kW compressor output / 2.93 = 63.6 kW input (electrical)
Effective EER is therefore = 295.4 / 63.6 = 4.64
Step 2: Determine annual energy consumption for calculated system kW
63.6 kW x 3,000 hours/year = 190,854 kWh/year
Step 3: Calculate annual GHG emissions for energy consumption
Scope 2 Emissions (Indirect Electricity Emissions) = 190,854 kWh/year x
0.96 kg CO2e/kWh (Avg. India Grid Electricity Emission Factor) = 183.2 MT
CO2e/year
Scope 3 Emissions (AT&C Loss Emissions) = 190,854 kWh/year x 0.29 kg
CO2e/kWh (Avg. India Grid AT&C Losses Emission Factor) = 55.3 MT
CO2e/year

Case B:
Step 4: Determine Non-Energy (Fugitive) Emissions from Refrigerant Use LifeCycle
Scope 1 Emissions (Refrigerant Leakage) = 0.08 kg CO2e/kW cooling/year x
186.4 kW cooling = 0.015 MT CO2e/year
Step 5: Determine Annual Operating (Energy) Cost
Energy Use Cost = 190,854 kWh/year x 13.25 INR/kWh = 25.29 INR
Lakh/year
Energy Penalty Cost:

Electrical Load = 63.6 kW

Power Factor = 0.9
Apparent Power = 63.6/0.9 = 70.7 kVA
Penalty Cost = 300 INR/kVA/month x 70.7 kVA x 12 months/year = 2.54 INR Lakh/year

Case B:
Annual Emissions and Cost Summary

Parameter

Value

Units

Scope 1 Emissions

0.015

MT CO2e/year

Scope 2 Emissions

183.2

MT CO2e/year

Scope 3 Emissions

55.3

MT CO2e/year

TOTAL GHG Emissions

238.5

MT CO2e/year

Capital Cost

54.00

INR Lakh/Year

Annual Operating Cost

27.83

INR Lakh/Year

Case A vs. B:
Relative Annual Emissions and Cost Summary

Parameter

Value

Value

Savings

CASE A

CASE B

CASE B vs. A

Scope 1 Emissions

44.2

0.015

- 44.185

MT CO2e/year

Scope 2 Emissions

290.4

183.2

- 107.2

MT CO2e/year

Scope 3 Emissions

87.7

55.3

- 32.4

MT CO2e/year

TOTAL GHG Emissions

422.3

238.5

- 183.8

MT CO2e/year

Capital Cost

16.20

54.00

+ 37.8

INR Lakh/Year

Annual Operating Cost

44.11

27.83

- 16.28

INR Lakh/Year

Life Cycle Cost (15 yrs.)

677.85

471.45

- 206.4

INR Lakh

Life Cycle GHG Emiss. (15 yrs.)

6334.5

3577.5

-2,757

MT CO2e

-7,486.4

INR/MT CO2e

Marginal Abatement Cost = Life Cycle Cost / Life

Cycle GHG Mitigation

Units

Marginal Abatement Cost Curve Analysis

MACC Analysis

What is a MAC Curve?

A enterprise-specific Marginal GHG Abatement Cost Curve (MACC) analysis is a key
component of an institutionalized Sustainability strategy. It is designed to discover the
most cost-effective means of reducing carbon emissions, energy consumption, and
water consumption through technological interventions or modifications in
management practices. It is a vital decision-support input for planning capital
expenditure on Energy Efficiency, Water Conservation, Waste Reduction & Management
etc. projects in a manner that safeguards the financial sustainability of the Organization
while achieving tangible environmental and socio-economic sustainability benefits for
the planetary ecosystem.
The idea is to harvest the low-hanging fruits first, accumulate the economic benefits
from these no-regret options and then steps through more challenging interventions. In
this way, it reduces financial risk and ensures longevity of the environmental program at
large. Furthermore, de-linking energy consumption and GHG emissions can leverage the
multiplier-effect of reducing energy intensity and integrating renewable electrical
energy into the energy procurement mix of the property.

MACC Analysis

MACC Analysis

Source: McKinsey & Company

USD/ton CO2e
-100

-200

-300

-400

-500

-600

-700

-900

-1,000
Hydro - Xiangjiaba

Solar Thermal Heating

LED Lighting

CFL Lighting

EV - Shanghai Expo

EV - World

HFCV (Bus) - World

Supercapacitor Trolley Bus - World

HFCV (Car) - Shanghai Expo

Battery-Supercapacitor Bus - World

HFCV (Cart) - World

HFCV (Car) - World

Hybrid Bus - World

River Water / Geothermal Heat

Pumps

Hybrid Taxi/Car - World

Solar PV (Expo Park)

Offshore Wind - Donghai Bridge

Supercritical Thermal - Nanshi Plant

-800
Gas Fired Air Conditioning

Phase 3: MACC Analysis

Marginal Abatement Cost Curve - Shanghai World Expo 2010

1,200

1,100

1,000

900

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

MACC Analysis