Rethinking Carbon Neutrality on Campuses

In recent years, efforts by institutions and communities to address climate change have focused increasingly on achieving net carbon neutrality. This approach typically involves reducing—but not entirely eliminating—emissions on site, as long as equivalent counter measures are taken off site. Like balancing a scale, the idea is that any carbon released should be matched by emissions reduced elsewhere—essentially, by removing the same amount of carbon from the air.

Campuses in the United States have been pioneers in this movement, with more than 800 higher education institutions committing to achieving net carbon neutrality. In 2021, 11 universities reached their carbon neutrality goals by combining on-campus emissions reductions with purchased off-campus measures and carbon sequestration. In this article, I summarize the study, Carbon Neutrality Should Not Be the End Goal: Lessons for Institutional Climate Action from U.S. Higher Education, that examines how these universities’ approaches align with the U.S.’s overarching national decarbonization agenda.

Campuses achieved carbon neutrality through Scope 1, 2, and 3 reductions

In their initial stages, many of these institutions reduced their Scope 1 emissions through a plethora of energy-efficiency measures ranging from installing more energy-efficient heating and lighting to improving building envelopes, enhancing energy operations and management, and using biofuels.

To address Scope 2 emissions, which are related to purchased electricity, some institutions installed on-site solar generation, but most purchased renewable energy certificates (RECs) as proof that a certain amount of their energy use came from off-site renewable sources.

Scope 3 emissions, such as institution-funded air travel and employee commuting, were reduced through on-campus incentive programs.

Achieving carbon neutrality in higher education involves significant use of accounting-based instruments

It’s important to note, however, that no institution achieved net neutrality without significant use of accounting-based instruments to track on-site sequestration and/or off-site measures. Some universities calculated the carbon sequestered by trees on college-owned land. Most purchased RECs or carbon offsetting measures elsewhere, including landfill methane capture and sustainable forestry practices.

Carbon neutrality commitments in higher education institutions have demonstrated positive results in reducing emissions and effectively promoting sustainability and efforts to address climate change. But there are concerns that achieving carbon neutrality should not overshadow the importance of direct decarbonization.

The quantitative measurement of offsets and sequestration is hard to calculate

Unfortunately, markets for carbon trading offsets are not as well understood as commodity and financial markets. Quantitative measurements of greenhouse gas (GHG) removal and sequestration are challenging to calculate and unreliable, and many traded offsets do not actually perform as promised. How, for instance, can you accurately measure the quantity of carbon captured by a forest, and how do you ensure that the sequestered carbon will remain sequestered? Without robust protocols for monitoring carbon offsets and in the absence of transparent accounting mechanisms, market-based approaches to reducing atmospheric GHG are vulnerable to misrepresentation and fraud. Indeed, recent investigations suggest that the great majority of products transacted on offset markets remove very little GHG from the atmosphere. For example, in 2018, the University of California (UC) system struggled to find reliable tree-planting projects for carbon offsets. This led UC to revamp its sustainability plans by reducing reliance on third-party offsets and focusing more on direct emissions cuts. This move by the influential UC system reflects a broader shift away from carbon markets, encouraging a more direct approach to emissions reduction.

Achieving urgent national climate action goals requires direct decarbonization of electricity, transport, industry, and buildings

The carbon-reduction hierarchy of actions typically suggests that offsets should be a last resort to cover difficult-to-reduce emissions, such as air travel. In practice, however, they are the largest source of reported emissions reductions for many campuses. Meanwhile, buyers of carbon offsets may be tempted to relax the direct reduction of their own GHG emissions, believing that their purchased offsets relieve them of their responsibilities at a lower cost.

Even with robust accounting, this growing reliance on off-site reductions cannot be scaled up to address the larger U.S. economy’s urgent climate goals, which require direct decarbonization of electricity, transport, industry, and buildings. Relying too much on carbon neutrality accounting tricks could stop us from making real progress in these critical areas.

Carbon neutrality commitments should not overshadow the importance of direct decarbonization

Campus energy-facility managers can play a pivotal role in transitioning from the goal of carbon neutrality that begins by understanding the institution’s carbon neutrality commitments and becoming aware of the inherent limitations of off-setting; by engaging with campus policymakers and stakeholders to push for more extensive direct emissions reductions that prioritize shifting to zero-carbon electricity (on site or off); and by electrifying transportation and heating systems. If offsets are used, they should be carefully reviewed to meet high-quality transparency standards and align with broader environmental and social goals.

By focusing on direct emissions reductions, embracing renewable energy and electrification, and advocating for effective policies, higher education institutions can lead the way in addressing the urgent challenge of climate change. Campus energy facility managers’ awareness and actions can make a tangible difference in creating a sustainable and climate-resilient future for universities and communities alike.

---

Simone Pertuiset, an 11-year veteran at JLL, is a pioneering figure in energy, sustainability, and tenant experience. Notably, she played a vital role in crafting the original Green Globes sustainability certification protocol and is the author of Smart, Green + Productive Workplace. She can be reached at [email protected]. This is her first article for Facilities Manager.