2014/15 Sustainable City Annual Report

Academic excellence for business and the professions

Creating a Sustainable City Annual Report 2014/15 www.city.ac.uk 1

Vice-Chancellor’s foreword This is the fourth Sustainability Report, compiled by the University’s Sustainability team, which provides a broad review of the sustainability activities we have undertaken during 2014/15.

As a research and education provider to both UK and International students, the University has a leading role in promoting sustainability both locally and globally. We aim to fulfil this role by not only reducing our carbon emissions and ensuring that our facilities are built to the highest sustainability standards but also through our commitment to behaviour change and Education for Sustainable Development.

The initiatives carried out over this period build on our recent successes, such as our first class accreditation within the People & Planet University League and the achievement of IS014001 certification of our Environmental Management System, whilst highlighting the diversity of actions undertaken as part of our commitment to embedding sustainability within all of our activities.

We hope this report will help to communicate the sustainability message to our staff, students and all University stakeholders and look forward to continuing our journey towards a sustainable future.

Professor Sir Paul Curran Vice-Chancellor

1 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Welcome

2

Environmental Management System

3

Environmental management structure

4

Executive summary

6

Education for Sustainable Development

8

Informal Curriculum

12

Campus sustainability

17

Water

20

Construction and maintenance

22

Sustainable procurement

24

Ethical investment

27

Biodiversity

28

Sustainable food and Fairtrade

30

Waste management

32

Transport and travel

35

Welcome During the 2014/15 academic year the University has worked to further embed sustainability across all of its activities. The University Sustainability team has continued to broaden the focus to include a wider range of aspects, with this year seeing a particular focus on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD).

A Sustainability Vision Statement has been developed, with a view to ensuring the University remains committed to embedding sustainability as it develops its 10 year strategy to 2026.

Sustainability Vision Statement The University Strategy recognises that to achieve its Vision, City must deliver academic excellence and student satisfaction whilst maintaining financial and environmental sustainability.

The University’s sustainability strategy aims to support this Vision by providing an education-centred approach to meeting its sustainability objectives. Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) involves the recognition and infusing of sustainability, through formal and informal means, in learning, teaching, curriculum design, research and student-led activities.

Using this approach City’s ESD initiatives will: • Take account of disciplinary differences • I llustrate different mechanisms for promotion and application • Focus on areas such as: – The formal curriculum – Informal learning and curricula – Campus sustainability.

2

Environmental Management System Our Environmental Sustainability Policy is supported by underlying policies which address the following specific impact areas: • Energy and Carbon Management • Waste Management • Travel and Transport • Construction and Refurbishment • Sustainable Food • Fairtrade • Sustainable Procurement • Biodiversity.

We aim to create a sustainable working and learning environment through efficient use of resources.

3 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

By developing and pursuing these policies and their associated objectives, we aim to create a sustainable working and learning environment through efficient use of resources, raising awareness of sustainability issues amongst our staff and students and by integrating the principles of sustainability within our strategies and operational procedures.

The principles of our Environmental Sustainability Policy have been applied in the development of an Environmental Management System (EMS). Our EMS is certified to ISO14001, the international standard for Environmental Management Systems and is underpinned by a robust management structure. The diagram on the following page outlines the University’s Environmental Management structure showing the operational reporting lines across each area.

Environmental management structure Executive Committee

Sustainability Committee

Head of Sustainability

Environmental Committee • Head of Sustainability (EMS, Energy & water) • Sustainability Officer (Transport) • Head of Projects (Construction & refurbishment) • Safety Manager (Health, welfare & safety)

University Working Groups • Sustainability Leaders Network • Safety Liaison Officers (SLO) Forum • T ravel Plan Working Group • Catering Committee • Fairtrade Steering Group.

• Purchasing Manager (Sustainable procurement) • Facilities Manager (Waste management) • Contract Safety Coordinator (Contractor liaison) • Leadership & Staff Development Unit (Staff training & volunteering)

Staff and students

• PAF Communications Officer (Communications) • ICT.

Suppliers, contractors, visitors and other external stakeholders

4

Environmental management structure cont.

This section details the University’s performance against each of its key environmental aspects: • Energy • Water consumption • Waste • Construction and maintenance • Transport and travel • Purchasing and procurement • Sustainable food • Biodiversity • Stakeholder engagement.

Figure 1: Summary of performance against objectives

12% 19%

Progress against each target is appraised as Met, Partially met or Not met. A commentary is provided for each aspect and target for 2014/15.

69%

Met Partially met Not met

5 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Targets for 2014/15 were identified for each aspect to address the most significant environmental impacts.

Executive summary The agreement of the University’s Sustainability Vision Statement signals our intent to embed sustainability across all of our activities. This commitment underpinned City’s strong performance against its Key Performance Indicator, the People & Planet University League, where we retained our First Class ranking. The University improved its overall score and are now ranked 5th in the UK, the highest ranked London university.

Education for Sustainable Development (ESD), was a key focus within the University and an area in which City scored particularly well. This focus is reflected in this year’s report, which uses an ESD approach and reports on performance in each of the three areas identified within the Sustainability Vision Statement.

Formal Curriculum Two research exercises have now been carried out to assess the extent to which sustainability is embedded in the University curriculum and its research activities. The first used the three pillars of sustainability, environment, economy and society to identify courses and modules within the curriculum, which could be described as part of the University’s sustainability offering. This study found that 46% of the courses currently offered fall within the sustainability remit, with the highest concentration of sustainability related courses being offered by the School of Mathematics, Computer Science and Engineering (SMCSE) closely followed

by Cass Business School.

The second used a similar methodology to examine the University’s 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF) submission, to gain an understanding of the level of sustainability research being carried out at City. This study found that 12% of the University’s outputs were judged to have some relevance to the themes of sustainable development, with the highest number being submitted from the School of Arts & Social Science.

These studies provide a good indication of the extent to which sustainability is currently embedded within the formal curriculum and should be considered a sound basis for continued integration.

The results of these studies are covered in greater detail later in this report.

Informal Curriculum Sustainability engagement activities continued to be a key area of focus throughout the year. The Sustainability Leaders programme was launched, consolidating all activities previously carried out under Green Impact, the Environmental Champions Network and Green Dragons into one measurable strand of activities.

This reorganisation led to an additional 280 students registering as sustainability leaders and taking part in sustainability activities across the University and 32 staff and student teams taking part in the Green Impact programme. A 6th Green City week was held in October 2014, which also saw the launch of a second round of Green Dragons City’s student led initiative, which aims to enable students to carry out their own sustainability projects around the University and within the local community. A raft of innovative projects were commissioned focusing on aspects such as volunteering, recycling and sustainable food and leading to a nomination in the 2014 Green Gown awards for the Green Gowns Initiative.

The operation of the gas fired Combined Cooling Heat and Power System (CCHP), in addition to the effects of the cold spells experienced in January and February 2015 contributed to a significant increase in gas consumption, this was partially mitigated by the reduction in electrical consumption as a result of the operation of the CCHP.

Campus Sustainability The University retained its Environmental Management System (EMS) certification to ISO 14001 and continues to use this to drive operational sustainability. This year has seen some acquisition, namely the reintroduction of sports facilities at CitySport. The inclusion of Abacus House, as well as a significant amount of development activity, particularly around Northampton Square. We have continued to utilise the SKA assessment methodology which ranks refurbishments as bronze, silver or gold based on several sustainability criteria, to assess the sustainability and mitigate the impact of each of these developments. However, the increase in floor area, usage and additional equipment particularly the additional equipment on the roof of the Tait building and research specific equipment installed for the School of Mathematics Computer Science and Engineering (SMCSE) has had some impact on energy consumption and emissions.

6

9%

Electricity

Total utilities costs were reduced by

14%

Recycling rate increased by

5%

Gas

49%

Weather corrected gas

35%

3.4%

CO2

14%

Costs Table 1: Energy consumption and emissions 2014/15 figures.

For greater clarity and to ensure consistent use of conversion factors, we will use the Carbon Reduction Energy Efficiency Scheme (CRCEES) figures for carbon emissions which now stand at 8,621 tonnes CO2. This is an increase of 5% on the previous year and 31.8% below the University’s 2005/06 Carbon Management Plan baseline. Whilst the University remains on track to meet its target of a 43% reduction in carbon emissions by 2020, it is evident that with proposed future developments and more intensive use of the Northampton Square campus, significant energy reduction initiatives need to be investigated and implemented.

The addition of new buildings, ongoing development work and more intensive use of the Northampton Square campus had a similar impact on water consumption, which increased by 14.9% when compared to the previous year.

7 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

14.9%

Water

Despite these increases in gas and water consumption, total utilities costs were reduced by 14%. These reductions can be attributed to the performance of flexible gas and electricity contracts and the rebates received as a result of VAT auditing.

The University continues to operate a Zero Waste to Landfill strategy with monthly waste statistics published on the University website. The recycling rate increased from 53% to 58% and while this is an improvement, the University target of 60% for the year has not been met. Further analysis of these figures shows that while the recycling at Northampton Square is well above target, performance at satellite locations is significantly lower, as such the University average does not meet its target.

This will be a key area of focus in 2015/16.

Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) In recent years the focus of sustainability activities within the sector has shifted to include wider sustainability factors. This has resulted in the publication of guidelines from HEFCE highlighting the benefits of using an ESD approach to embed sustainability within higher education institutions.

In addition to the above we have also seen changes to the sector measurement metrics, such as the People & Planet University League, which now places a greater emphasis on ESD. The University has responded to this through the publication of its Sustainability Vision Statement, and its underlying strategy, which aims to measure the University’s sustainability performance, across its three areas of activity; • The Formal Curriculum • The Informal Curriculum

pages detail these activities and conclude with an assessment of the University’s current position in regard to the Formal Curriculum.

Formal Curriculum A research exercise carried out by the University Sustainability team assessed the current curricular offering against the three pillars of sustainability, environment, economy and society with a view to understanding the extent to which sustainability is already embedded within its Formal Curriculum.

•C ampus Sustainability.

279 courses were identified across the five Schools;

Historically, the University has only reported on its Campus Sustainability and Informal Curriculum. In order to prepare for future metrics which are likely to relate to the Formal Curriculum. The University Sustainability team carried out several research activities to ascertain a baseline assessment of the University’s current performance in these areas. The following

• School of Arts & Social Sciences

The published description for each course was then used to ascertain whether each course references any of the three pillars.

The figure below shows the number of courses which reference sustainability when the assessment methodology is applied across the Schools.

The results show that when this methodology was applied across these 279 courses adherence to the principles of sustainability could be demonstrated in 129 instances. The study gives a good initial indication of the extent to which sustainability is taught at City but will require further investigation at a modular level if the University wishes to emphasise this as an area of strength.

• Cass Business School • The City Law School • School of Health Sciences • School of Mathematics, Computer Sciences & Engineering.

Figure 2: Courses referencing sustainability

Figure 3: Courses identified across all Schools Economy Environment Social

20 18

37% 63%

16

14%

14 12

79%

10

86%

8 6 4 2

School of Arts & Social Sciences

chool of Health S Sciences

0

Cass Business School The City Law School

School of Mathematics, Computer Sciences & Engineering

SASS

CASS

CLS

SHS

SMCSE

8

1504

academic outputs were submitted to REF 2014 by City.

Research activities A second study by the University Sustainability team sought to assess City’s research output with the aim of understanding more about the extent to which the academic research being undertaken at City is relevant to the themes of sustainable development.

This was undertaken by an analysis of the University’s Research Excellency Framework (REF) submission against the three pillars of sustainable development and the criteria for education for sustainable development, as defined by People & Planet.

This project used academic outputs from City’s Research Excellency Framework (REF) 2014 submission, the results of which were published in December 2014, thus giving an insight into research undertaken by City academics conducted since the Research Assessment Exercise (REA)in 2008.

The first stage aimed to identify all outputs that were deemed suitable for further investigation, through an assessment of the title of the research and therefore its possible relevance to the themes of sustainable development. From this initial sift, 375 outputs were identified for further investigation.

The second stage involved accessing these selected outputs and assessing their abstracts to see the extent to which they were focused upon the two sets of criteria outlined below: 1. The three pillars of sustainable development: • E conomy • E nvironment • Society.

City submission to REF 2014 totalled 1,504 academic outputs, with the outputs distributed across the University’s five Schools.

375

2. The five elements of ESD as defined by People & Planet: • Global Citizenship • E nvironmental Stewardship

Once outputs had been collated and assigned to the correct School, they were assessed for their relevance to sustainable development in two stages.

• Social Justice, Ethics and Wellbeing • F uture-facing • Adaptation of Systems and Societies.

outputs were identified for further investigation from the initial analysis sift.

Figure 4: Breakdown of REF submissions across the University’s five Schools 500

400

300

SMCSE

SASS Cass

SHS

200

100 0

9 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

CLS

School

Outputs Direct

Indirect

Total percentage of relevant outputs (direct & indirect)

SASS

5%

8%

12%

Cass

3%

12%

15%

CLS

12%

31%

43%

SHS

3%

3%

6%

SMCSE

4%

4%

8%

Following the assessment of abstracts and removal of duplicates, the total number of outputs that to some extent met the criteria, totalled 179 from the initial 375 identified through assessment of output titles – 12% of the outputs submitted to the REF by the University.

Table 2: Shows what percentage of each School’s total outputs fall within categories Direct and Indirect, arranged by the total percentage of outputs that meet at least one of the criteria.

School

Outputs

Economy

Environment

Society

SASS

50

31 (62%)

16 (32%)

45 (90%)

Cass

48

34 (79%)

10 (21%)

27 (56%)

CLS

30

13 (43%)

3 (10%)

16 (53%)

SHS

18

9 (50%)

1 (5%)

17 (94%)

SMCSE

33

3 (9%)

24 (73%)

5 (15%)

Table 3: Outputs from each school categorized by pillars of sustainability.

School

Global citizenship

Environmental stewardship

Social justice, Ethics and wellbeing

Future -facing

Adaptation of systems and societies

SASS

7%

4%

10%

3%

2%

Cass

7%

3%

8%

4%

2%

CLS

22%

4%

25%

3%

4%

SHS

1%

1%

6%

1%

1%

SMCSE

0%

6%

1%

1%

6%

Table 4: Illustrates how each School performed across People & Planets five-point definition of ESD. Showing the percentage of total outputs that fall within each category.

Figure 5: The three pillars of sustainable development University’s research outputs against sustainable development criteria.

50

SASS

Each output’s abstract was assessed against both criteria and it was noted into which area – or multiple areas – the output fell.

Cass

Of those outputs judged to be relevant to the three pillars of sustainable development (direct and indirect), Cass was found to have the highest proportion to fall within Economy, with 79% of its relevant outputs being assigned to this pillar. In contrast, SMCSE was the School with the lowest percentage of its relevant outputs to fall under Economy (9%). In the Environment pillar, SMCSE was the School that had the highest percentage of its relevant outputs classified within the pillar (73%), while the School whose relevant research was found to be least pertinent to this pillar was SHS (5%). SHS’s and SASS’s relevant research was found to be most likely to fall within the Society pillar (94% and 90%, respectively), compared to SMCSE’s outputs, of which 15% were found to be relevant to the Society pillar.

When analysed against People & Planet’s five ESD criteria, The City Law School’s high percentage scores across the three pillars is reflected in the percentage of studies judged to be of relevance to the Global Citizenship and the Social Justice, Ethics and Wellbeing categories (22% and 25% respectively).

Similarly when compared against the three pillars, SMCSE had the highest proportion of outputs relevant to Environmental Stewardship (6%). SMCSE was also shown to have the highest proportion of studies that explored themes related to Adaption of Systems and Societies (6%) and Cass had the highest when it came to placing studies in the category of Future-facing (4%).

40

SMCSE CLS

30

20

SHS

Economy

0

Economy

10

10

When looking at the results judged to meet at least one of the areas of the People & Planet criteria for ESD, it was found that 60% of SASS’s outputs judged to be relevant to least one of the People & Planet categories were relevant to Global Citizenship. In contrast no studies from SMCSE fell into this area.

Of SMCSE’s relevant outputs, 70% of them were judged to be pertinent to the area of Environmental Stewardship, in addition, 70% were deemed to be relevant to the category Adaptation of Systems and Societies. SHS had the lowest percentage share of its relevant studies fall within Environmental Stewardship (6%) and the School with the lowest proportion of its relevant studies fall within the Adaption of Systems and Societies category was CLS (10%). SHS’s outputs were shown to be particularly relevant to the Social Justice, Ethics and Wellbeing category, with 94% of the Schools relevant outputs meeting this criteria, compared to 6% of those outputs from SMCSE. It was shown that 26% of SASS’s relevant outputs were in the area Future-facing, while 7% of CLS’s relevant outputs were deemed to be pertinent to this area.

The research shows, that whilst sustainability may not always be explicitly referenced, some research that touches on the themes of sustainable development is being undertaken across each of the University’s schools. Further, the vast majority of Schools have research output that is relevant to ESD, as defined by People & Planet’s five criteria.

Figure 6: The People & Planet criteria University’s research outputs against sustainable development criteria.

50

SASS

20

10

0

11 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Cass

CLS

SHS

SMCSE

Informal curriculum Several achievements have been made this year in student and staff engagement, including the continuation of the Green Dragons project, increased participation in the Environmental Champions Network and Green Impact schemes, and progress made in advancing Education for Sustainable Development.

£182,000

Commentary This year we introduced significant changes to the way we engaged staff and students in the sustainability agenda at City in order to increase our impact. The Green Dragons and Green Impact projects were merged and a new Sustainability Leaders programme was created for students. This replaced the Environmental Champions Network for students. The staff Environmental Champions network continued to run.

Green Dragons The City University London Student Union (CULSU) was one of 25 institutions to receive a share of the £5 million Students’ Green Fund available for new student-led sustainability ventures. CULSU received £182,000 over two years to establish and develop Green Dragons, a project designed to increase engagement with environmental and sustainability issues at City University London and in the local community.

was received by CULSU over two years to establish and develop Green Dragons.

Green Dragons

is an institution-wide campaign, giving students and staff an opportunity to obtain funding for collaborative sustainability projects.

2014/15 targets Target

Met/partially met/not met

Notes

Develop a sustainability strategy which supports the sustainability vision approved by the University.

Partially met

With the publication of its Sustainability Vision Statement and its focus on ESD, the University has begun to develop its Sustainability Strategy. Further work is currently being undertaken with key elements due to be delivered in 2015/16.

Increase points in the Staff and Student Engagement section of the People & Planet Green League.

Met

Achieved highest position ever in the annual People & Planet University League (5th place overall in the UK and 1st in London). Scored 45% in the Engagement section.

Increase points in the Education and Learning section of the People & Planet Green League.

Met

Achieved highest position ever in the annual People & Planet University League (5th place overall in UK and 1st in London). Scored 65% in the Education section.

12

Over 100 members of staff make up the Environmental Champions Network.

18%

more teams took part in Green Impact this year.

60

energy conscious pledges were collected from students through the student led “Act Smart” campaign.

23

students received Sustainability Leader training.

£150

as raised for the Fairtrade w Foundation by the Fairtrade bake sales at Cass Business School.

13 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Green Dragons is an institution-wide campaign, giving students and staff an opportunity to obtain funding for collaborative sustainability projects. A central funding pot of £25,000 in the first year and £35,000 in the second year is available to fund projects ranging from £500 to £5000. Applicants compete for funding by producing a video and a simple business case for their proposal. Proposals and videos are then hosted on the Green Dragons website www.green-dragons.co.uk where students and staff are able to pledge their support. Once an engagement threshold is met, funds are released to allow the delivery of the project.

Three projects from last year continued, some under new leadership. These are the Meat-Free Mondays campaign, Hydrovillage (a project aimed at using hydroponics to address food growing challenges) and One Small Change, aimed at encouraging recycling. Other projects from the year include, City Pick The Right Bin Campaign, Back To The Roots, City Volunteering Trips, Get Your Green On, Sustainable Events Guide @City Grow, Textbook Trade, The Vapour Screw Project and ANE Stations. The latter three as well as Meat-Free Mondays are on-going.

This year, staff were also able to utilise their Green Dragons projects to earn Bronze, Silver, Gold or Platinum awards under Green Impact. This added incentive along with the new changes introduced to Green Impact had a positive effect on the performance of staff teams in Green Impact.

Environmental Champions Network The Environmental Champions network is vital to the implementation of sustainability projects at City. The network is formed of over 100 members of staff who help encourage positive environmental behaviour changes amongst their peers. The Environmental Champions Network continued to grow strongly this year. Despite high levels of staff turnover, the network welcomed nearly 30 new members of staff from across City.

The champions were kept engaged through monthly newsletters, social events and the opportunity to participate in projects such as Green Impact and Green Dragons.

Green Impact City participated in the Green Impact programme for the sixth time this year.

Green Impact, an NUS environmental accreditation scheme, encourages staff and students to take small tangible actions that have a positive impact on their institutions and local community.

This year, the structure of Green Impact was used as a tool to bring together all the sustainability opportunities available to staff and students, with new sections for Green Dragons, Gold Excellence and other projects added to the workbook.

The Student Zone section introduced last year was edited to include all standalone opportunities available to students through the former Environmental Champions network. These opportunities included the Fairtrade mentor role and the Green Impact Auditor role. By including these in the workbook, students were able to earn points towards their Green Impact awards.

Throughout the workbook, there was a greater focus on encouraging student and staff-led projects and campaigns; and a greater degree of flexibility in the ways they could earn their awards. Several outstanding projects emerged out of this change.

Examples include: •F airtrade bake sales in the Information Services department and at Cass Business School which raised close to £150 for the Fairtrade Foundation • The Pondlife biodiversity project led by the Cass Facilities team which involved the upcycling of old pallets into planters. The planters have been put up on the roof and in the courtyard at Bunhill Row and will be used to grow herbs and flowers. As part of the project, a fish pond was also set up in the courtyard.

• The student-led Act Smart campaign encouraging students to be energy conscious. They collected over 60 pledges from students and engaged just under 100 students in conversation.

In addition to the above, there were also two Gold Excellence projects: Fairtrade @ CULSU and the Garden project. The latter formed a partnership with the of the staff teams Green Dragons GROW project and they will be continuing to work together in the coming year.

Award Level

Number of teams 2013/14

Number of teams 2014/15

Students

Staff

Students

Staff

Gold Excellence

N/A

3

N/A

2

Platinum

0

2

1

8

Gold

1

6

5

4

Silver

0

4

5

2

Bronze

1

10

2

1

Working towards accreditation

1

2

1

1

Totals

3

24*

14

18

Total teams

27*

32

Table 5: Breakdown of teams participating in Green Impact and awards achieved. *Includes extra award earned by West Smithfield Facilities for their work on the Cleaning & Portering section of Green Impact.

14

This year, 32 staff and student teams took part in Green Impact (an increase of 18.5% from last year). The number of staff teams decreased from 23 in 2013/14 to 18 this year.

This was primarily due to organisational changes. Three new teams signed up and five of the existing teams were led by new members of staff. Most of the staff teams performed exceptionally well this year, with eight achieving a Platinum award.

The number of student teams increased from three in 2013/14 to 14 this year. This was a reflection of the changes made through the Sustainability Leaders programme. Twenty three students received training approved by the Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (IEMA) for the Green Impact Auditor role.

In recognition of their contribution through Green Impact and Green Dragons, staff and students were celebrated during a special awards luncheon in June. The event was attended by the Pro Vice-Chancellor Professor Richard Verrall. The event also marked the end of our old campaign and brand ‘The Point’ and the launch of our new brand ‘Sustainable City’.

Green City Week City celebrated its sixth annual Green City Week in October 2014. Several events and activities were held to showcase environmental and other sustainability initiatives taking place at City and beyond, while encouraging students and staff to lead a more sustainable life. Events included: City celebrated its

sixth annual

Green City Week in October 2014.

15 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

• The Square Meal Debate: Why we need a new recipe for food, health, farming, animal welfare and

wildlife – a panel event which brought together representatives from various organisations who contributed to the report calling for the UK government to ‘fix our broken food system’ • Eco Action Games: Fun and interactive games aimed at educating students on how to save energy and water and reduce waste • Upcycling workshop: A workshop aimed at converting waste materials into new materials, such as wallets made from drink cartons and jewellery made from brochures • Careers within Energy and Sustainability: A panel event aimed at giving students an insight into the different opportunities available to them post graduation or when looking for internships • Cycle Cinema: Featuring Wayne’s World, powered by bikes.

Sustainable City Week 2016 will be held October 2016. The week has been renamed from Green City Week to fit in with the new Sustainable City branding.

Staff training Staff who are required to perform tasks that have the potential to cause significant environmental impacts (including operational managers, project managers, maintenance staff, porters and cleaners) are required by our ISO14001-certified Environmental Management System to undergo in-depth environmental awareness training. This training was last conducted

by Vital Efficienci in January 2015. A total of 31 staff members and three contractors attended one of the four training sessions held. eneral environmental and sustainability G awareness training and induction is provided to all new staff at City through a variety of channels, including: • I ntroduction to City’s sustainability initiatives and targets at the quarterly Welcome to City staff inductions •E nvironmental and sustainability awareness training sessions held termly which can be booked through the Leadership and Staff Development Unit. These are available to staff who are interested in finding out what City is doing to address its environmental impact and how they can help and become involved in sustainability at City •A s part of an individual’s local induction, line managers will introduce new staff to the local Environmental Champion to give a local green induction.

Looking ahead: 2015/16 will see many changes with regards to engagement in sustainability initiatives at City.

Student Sustainability Leaders will be recruited to work alongside the Sustainability team to deliver fun and engaging activities, events and communications which raise awareness on sustainability at City and beyond. These volunteers will receive training, support and resources to lead on projects and campaigns. They will also be celebrated and recognised at our annual Sustainable City Awards ceremony in the summer.

Staff volunteers (previously known as Environmental Champions) have been renamed Sustainability Leaders and will continue to lead their departments in raising awareness on environmental and other sustainability issues at City. They will also help to encourage colleagues to participate in the Sustainable City Challenge.

The Sustainable City Challenge is a new in-house staff engagement programme developed by the Sustainability team, aimed at increasing staff engagement in sustainability initiatives. The challenge will replace Green Impact (the National Union of Students’ programme) that City has participated in for the past six

years. Schools and departments will earn points for green actions, taking part in competitions and running their own sustainability projects or campaigns (The Extra Mile). Points will feed into a leader board which will be used to determine award levels and the challenge winner.

The Sustainable City Challenge is unique in that it benefits and rewards all staff who participate in City’s sustainability initiatives and enables engagement levels to be monitored and measured to show how effectively the staff and student engagement strategy is working.

2015/16 targets • Develop a sustainability strategy which supports the sustainability vision approved by the University • Increase points in the Staff and Student Engagement section of the People & Planet Green League • Increase points in the Education and Learning section of the People & Planet Green League.

Sustainability Leaders will continue to lead their departments in raising awareness on environmental and other sustainability issues at City.

16

Campus sustainability The University estate consists of several buildings of diverse age and construction type, the greatest concentration of which are found in Northampton Square.

Energy and carbon reduction The use of energy to power equipment and heat and cool our buildings is a key operational activity, a resultant impact of which is the emission of CO2. The University publishes emissions from its key buildings monthly on its website and reports progress in tonnes of CO2 emitted annually. The University has made significant progress in reducing its carbon emissions since the appointment of a full time energy manager in 2006. An initial Carbon Management Plan was produced in May 2007; this was revised and republished in May 2011 in line with HEFCE guidelines. The plan commits City to reduce its carbon emissions by 30% by 2015 and 43% by 2020 (against 2005/06 baseline figures) through a variety of initiatives, including awareness campaigns, the use of renewable energy sources and provision of energy saving devices in new and refurbished buildings.

The University has made good progress against these targets having achieved an overall reduction of 31.8% to date. To maintain this downward trajectory, an annual target of a minimum 3% reduction was identified within our environmental management system objectives.

Policy objectives •T o utilise energy as efficiently as possible by no-cost measures (i.e. good housekeeping)

• To reduce dependence on fossil fuels by using alternative ambient and renewable forms of energy where it is practical and economic to do so

•T o develop a monitoring and targeting system so that ultimately each department will become responsible for its own energy and water policy and performance

• To procure goods and services from organisations who demonstrate a positive commitment to energy efficiency where it is practical and cost effective to do so

• To invest in energy efficient plant and projects with paybacks of less than four years

• To reduce carbon emissions by 43% by 2020.

•T o design in energy efficiency to all new buildings, refurbishments and equipment •T o publish clear targets for energy consumption annually and to report progress on the previous year •T o minimise gaseous emissions and waste products which are likely to cause damage to the environment •T o increase the energy awareness of staff and students

2014/15 targets Aspect

Target

Met/Partially met/Not met

Notes

Energy

Achieve a minimum 3% annual carbon emissions reduction by 31st July 2015

Not met

A 6.2% increase was seen across the University estate

Electricity

CO2

43%

overall reduction of carbon emissions target by 2020.

17 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Commentary Total energy consumption (gas and electricity) increased by 18% when compared to the previous year, whilst this is a significant increase on the previous year, there are several mitigating factors. The increase in kWh relates entirely to gas consumption which rose by 49%. Some of this rise was anticipated due to the full year’s operation of the Combined Cooling, Heat and Power Plant and colder weather in January and February as evidenced by the degree day weather corrected figures.

The inclusion of the new CitySport facility and the full occupation of Lecture Spaces Phases

Gas

2012/13

2013/14

12,148MWh

11,062 MWh

0.110 MWh/m2

0.100 MWh/m2

10,529MWh

15,683MWh

-9% +49%

0.094 MWh/m

0.142 MWh/m2

1,473

1,626

+10% +35%

2

Degree days

Change

Weather corrected gas

10,865MWh

14,660MWh

Total Energy MWh

22,676MWh

26,745MWh

+18%

Total carbon CO2

8208 Tonnes*

8621 Tonnes*

+5%

1

Table 6: Utilities consumption figures. * Previous year’s figure has been revised to allow comparison with published carbon reduction commitment (CRCEES) figure.

2 & 3, and the provision of conditioned spaces for SMCSE will have also contributed to the increase in gas consumption.

Despite the increase in floor area electrical consumption decreased by 8.9%, this can be directly attributed to the consistent operation of the CCHP and also attests to the use of more energy efficient equipment in the newly developed areas such as LED lighting and variable speed drives.

The below analysis clearly indicates that energy efficiency initiatives need to be concentrated on heating control and response.

Improvements to the building envelope and

insulation should therefore be prioritised in the upcoming revision of the University Carbon Management Plan if the University is to remain on track for its 2020 target. Additionally, commissioning data and a first year of operational data for these new areas can now be used to refine operational controls in each of these areas, which will enable better heating performance in the coming year.

The graph below (figure 8) illustrates decrease across all utilities and the trend since the baseline year.

The net result of the increase in consumption is a 6% increase in carbon emissions when compared to the previous year, as a result of which the University’s emissions now stand 31.8% below its 2005/06 baseline.

The use of renewable sources is reported within estates management records and was viewed favourably within the People & Planet University League. The graph below shows the proportion of the University carbon emissions derived from renewable sources.

Figure 7: City University London energy consumption trend

Electricity kWh Fossil fuel kWh Total kWh

kWh 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 Year

05/06

06/07

07/08

08/09

09/10

10/11

11/12

12/13

13/14

14/15

Figure 8: City University progress against its carbon management plan 14,000 12,000

Tonnes CO2/annum

10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000

Baseline reduction Actual reduction Target reduction

20/21

19/20

18/19

17/18

16/17

15/16

14/15

13/14

12/13

11/12

10/11

09/10

08/09

07/08

06/07

05/06

2,000

Figure 9: Utilities emission constituents from baseline year 14,000 12,000

Tonnes CO2

10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000

Year

05/06

06/07

07/08

08/09

09/10

10/11

11/12

12/13

13/14

14/15

Oil (T CO2) District heat (T CO2) Gas (T CO2) Green elec (T CO2) Non green elec (T CO2)

18

Display Energy Certificates All Display Energy Certificates (DECs) were renewed in October 2015 for the period covering 01/08/2014 to 31/07/2015.

The table below shows the ratings and bandings achieved. Despite the overall increase in energy use and carbon emissions, both College Building and Northampton Square improved their typical rating. The Cass Business School remains the lowest ranked building though its score has improved, which suggests that measures implemented in 2013/14 which included LED lighting and HVAC improvements are having some impact.

2015/16 objectives Achieve a minimum 2.75% annual carbon emissions reduction by 31st July 2015. This will ensure that the University remains on track to meet its 2020 target.

Building

Rating

Efficiency

Gloucester Building

C 51 – 75

56

Princeton Street

C 51 – 75

69

Abacus House

D 76 – 100

80

Northampton Square

D 76 – 100

86

Grays Inn Place

D 76 – 100

96

College Building

D 76 – 100

96

City Innovation Centre

E 101 – 125

110

Social Science Building

E 101 – 125

116

Cass Business School

G 150 +

151

Table 7: Display Energy Certificates.

19 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Water Water consumption is not a prescribed area within the HEFCE guidelines for Carbon Management Plans; however, water consumption has been included as a measurement metric since the first edition of City’s Carbon Management Plan.

Policy objectives • To promote the efficient use of environmental resources (energy, water and raw materials) • Reduce water consumption by 30% by 2020

2014/15 targets Aspect Target

Met/Partially met/ Not met

Notes

Water

Not met

A 15% increase was seen across the portfolio.

A large proportion of this is attributable to commissioning activities for new systems installed at Northampton Square. Furthermore major water intensive additions were made to the portfolio including Abacus House, Franklin Building and CitySport.

• Ensure the University meets or exceeds legislative compliance.

Commentary Water consumption across the University portfolio increased by 15% when compared to the previous year. This was due to major refurbishment projects being commissioned and delivered as part of the University Estates Strategy including the addition of Abacus House, LSP 2&3, Franklin Building and most notably CitySport.

The University’s Water Action Plan, identifies construction and project activities as a key area to be addressed to reduce consumption across the University estate.

The Estates Strategy represents an excellent opportunity to design out consumption through the use of best practice technology.

Each of these projects was assessed under the SKA methodology and several water good practice measures included within their design. These measures have now been added to the University standard specifications. The addition of sites such as CitySport and Abacus House along with a full year of operation of additional equipment such as chillers and other HVAC equipment installed during 2014/15 will enable a new baseline to be set and we can expect a return to a downward trend in 2015/16.

Achieve a minimum 2.5% per m2 annual reduction by 31st July 2015.

Comparison to previous academic year

2013/14

2014/15

43,630

Water

50,102 2

0.40 m /m

0.45 m3/m2

110,437 m2

110,767 m2

3

Gross floor area

Change -15% 0.3%

Table 8: Water consumption by floor area.

Figure 10: Water consumption progress against 2010/11 baseline year m2 70,000 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000

10/11

11/12

12/13

13/14

14/15

Year Consumption m3

Figure 10: Comparison in water consumption against 2010/11 baseline year. Note baseline year was changed to 2010/11 from 2005/6 to reflect the loss of the University halls in the last academic year and to provide a robust reduction baseline.

20

Discharges The University does not have a site wide consent to discharge to Thames Water surface or foul drainage. The University requires that all flushing or drain down effluent is tankered away and the appropriate documentation provided.

A contractor may also apply directly to Thames Water for a discharge consent.

Over the course of the year five discharge consents were granted to contractors working at City. The applying contractors are detailed below and records of the consents are stored in the University Environmental Management System.

LSP 2&3

1. Overbury 2. I.SG

SMCSE redevelopment

Drinking water provisions at City In an effort to discourage the use of plastic water bottles on campus, City provides free chilled drinking water across the University.

Water coolers are provided by www.

Tapwater.org and are currently available at 25 locations across the University (15 at Northampton Square and 10 at Cass Business School).

Chilled drinking water is also provided for staff in office kitchen areas where Zip Taps (which provide hot and cold water) are now standard for any new and refurbished kitchen areas.

Aspect

Northampton Square

Cass Business School

Total across University

Number of machines as of 31st July 2015

15

10

25

Average litres dispensed across all machines on site

23,000 litres/month

11,000 litres/month

19,000 litres/month

276,000 litres/year

132,000 litres/year

228,000 litres/year

Cost of water (based on Thames Water figures of £1.21 per 1000 litres)

£27.83/month

£13.31/month

£41.41/month

£333.96/year

£159.72/year

£493.68/year

Number of 500ml bottles NOT being sent to landfill a result of these consumption figures

46,000/month

22,000 bottles

38,000/month

552,000/year

264,000/year

456,000/year

Carbon (CO2) saved by not transporting bottled water (0.043kg per 500ml bottle)

1978 kg/month 23,736 kg/year

946 kg/month 11,352 kg/year

(23.74 tonnes/year)

(11.35 tonnes/year)

2924 kg/month 35,088 kg/year = 35.09 tonnes/year

Table 9: Monthly and annual statistics, water cooler machines.

35.09

City is committed to reducing the amount of plastics on campus and therefore encourages students and staff to take advantage of the free drinking water that is available rather than purchasing water in plastic bottles.

City-branded water bottles are available for purchase at various outlets across campus.

Carbon (CO2) saved per month by not transporting bottled water per year.

tonnes

All water provided through in-house hospitality is filtered and bottled onsite into reusable glass bottles. No plastic bottles are provided.

2015/16 targets • Achieve a 5% reduction in water consumption by July 2016 •C omplete installation of AMR across all water meters by May 2016.

25

The number of locations water coolers are currently available across the University.

5% Overall reduction of water consumption by July 2016.

228,000 Overall number of litres dispensed by all water cooler machines at the University per year.

21 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Construction and maintenance As the requirements of our staff and students evolve, construction activities form a major part of the operations at the University. These activities may also pose a significant environmental risk, as such, they are covered under the University’s Environmental Management System.

Throughout the course of the 2014/15 academic year, the University has been engaged in the delivery of its Estates Strategy, a portfolio of projects designed to enhance its existing facilities and where appropriate, procure or build new spaces to accommodate its staff and students. In delivering these projects the University utilises industry best practice methodologies to assess the sustainability of each project with all major refurbishment projects assessed using the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) SKA methodology, whilst all new build projects are assessed using the Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Methodology (BREEAM).

The University maintenance activities may pose similar risks and as such are also included within the University Environmental Management System.

Maintenance activities are regularly audited to ensure legal compliance, a register of which is retained within the University EMS document control system.

Policy objectives • To initiate an environmental cost benefit analysis for all new major projects, retrofits and refurbishments • Monitor all projects to ensure they are delivered to the highest environmental standard • Ensure all organisations working on behalf of the University are aware of City’s environmental policies and responsibilities

• Ensure all organisations working on behalf of the University have received adequate training to carry out these activities in an environmentally responsible manner • Ensure a minimum of 80% recycled material in all projects.

Commentary Eight projects were completed during the 2014/15 academic year. As in previous years the majority of these were major refurbishments projects, however the number and extensive nature of the projects identified within the University Estates Strategy, have required a significantly higher degree of co-ordination to ensure their successful delivery whilst maintaining the level of quality expected by our students and staff.

The University uses the SKA methodology to assess the sustainability of all projects at design and handover with all projects required to achieve a minimum silver rating at both stages. Eighteen projects are currently registered as undergoing design or handover assessment, the chart below shows the ratings achieved at the design stage.

Four of these projects have successfully achieved SKA handover, all achieving a minimum silver rating. Handover information on a further four projects is currently being collated. Once completed SKA ratings for all projects will be displayed prominently at the completed project and via the University website.

The development and embedding of the sustainability brief and register and the inclusion of the SKA assessment methodology has led to a much closer working relationship between the University Project and Sustainability teams, whose participation was fundamental in the planning submissions to Islington Borough Council.

Over the course of the year environmental audits were undertaken on all major projects; the results of these audits and all relevant documentation are stored within the University EMS document control system.

The University has continued its participation within the Waste Resources Action Plan (WRAP) Halving Waste to Landfill commitment. As part of this commitment, the University commits to ensure that contractors produce Site Waste Management Plans on all projects above £300K, to forecast and identify amounts of waste to be produced in each waste stream and identify their waste recovery route. The commitment also requires that the contractor should monitor waste streams and recover at least 80% of material generated through demolition or strip out.

Site Waste Management Plans were produced for all projects. The Site Waste Management Plans of completed projects have been used to produce the table below which shows the tonnage of waste produced from construction activities and the route of diversion from landfill.

Figure 11: SKA ratings at design

Gold 22%

2014/15 targets Aspect

Target

Met/Partially met/Not met

Construction and maintenance

Complete SKA handover assessments for all completed projects by 31st July 2015

Partially met

Maintain 80% of all construction waste diverted from landfill

Met

Review F-Gas and asset register to ensure completeness and environmental compliance

Met

Silver 78%

22

The volume of waste produced increased by 33% when compared to the previous year. This was due to the delivery of several major projects which are integral to the University Estates Strategy. These included Lecture Spaces 2 & 3 and the Tait/Students’ Union project which enabled high quality education space to be created in primarily unused lower ground space. Despite the increase in waste volume the average recycling rate has been retained at 89% thus exceeding our targeted recycling rate of 80%.

Several smaller maintenance projects which do not require a Site Waste Management Plan due to their individual value being less than £300K were delivered during the year. Waste figures for these projects are not included, however the University policy states that these projects must also ensure a minimum recycling rate of 70%. These figures were not available at the time of report production and will therefore be published on the University website and issued as an addendum.

The University retains robust F-Gas and COSHH registers, each of which are held by the Operations team and stored centrally. In addition to this, the University has developed a managed environmental legislation register.

The register is an online tool with access for key staff. Monthly reports are generated and sent to the Head of Sustainability.

Where changes to environmental legislation have occurred which are applicable to the University, these are highlighted. The Head of Sustainability then ensures that the maintenance managers and project managers are aware of any changes which can be communicated to contractors as necessary.

This environmental legislation register was reviewed as part of the ISO14001 audit and certified fit for purpose.

2015/16 targets

Contractor

Quantity (tonnes)

Recycled (tonnes)

Recycled (%)

Method

Notes

Lecture Spaces 2&3

173.6

136

78%

Off site MRF

Lower rate due to asbestos disposal

Tait ground floor

116.6

103.8

89%

Off site MRF

Myddleton Street

4.8

4.5

93%

Off site MRF

Clinics

117.2

104.3

89%

Off site MRF

Tele Health

1.7

1.6

94%

Off site MRF

Students’ Union/Tait lower ground

280

266

95%

Off site MRF

Totals

693.9

616.2

89%

Overbury

ISG

Table 10: Construction waste recycling figures.

•M aintain 80% of all construction waste diverted from landfill • Achieve minimum SKA silver rating on all refurbishment project.

9

The overall number of projects completed with a Site Waste Management Plan.

80% 23 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

The overall recylcing rate of the University construction projects.

18

The overall number of projects that are currently registered as undergoing design or handover assessment under the SKA methodology.

Sustainable procurement Sustainable procurement is being pursued at City as part of the University’s wider commitment to sustainability and as an integral part of efficient and cost-effective procurement across the University. City has a Sustainable Procurement Policy which recognises its responsibility to carry out purchasing activities in an environmentally responsible and sustainable manner.

HEFCE now include Scope 3 emissions, including supply chain emissions, in its assessment of university emissions. It is imperative that we consider the impact and sustainability of the University’s procurement and supply chain, as this will potentially affect the amount of funding the University will receive.

Procurement is also included in the People & Planet University League criteria and requires the University to set sustainable procurement targets to reduce environmental impacts.

Commentary Supplier selection and review City is a member of the Southern Universities Purchasing Consortium (SUPC), the largest of six regional higher education purchasing consortia that operate throughout the United Kingdom.

SUPC offers its members a wide range of collaborative purchase agreements covering many commodity areas, and encourages all of its suppliers to operate with corporate social responsibility.

Questions relating to sustainability are asked to all bidders during the tender process. Sustainable development

is a major issue within the education sector and SUPC takes these factors into consideration where possible when awarding agreements.

Suppliers are now assessed at the supplier selection stage to ensure they have the appropriate environmental credentials. In addition, annual reviews of key suppliers (high-risk or high-spend) are carried out. A supplier review template has been implemented which measures supplier performance in five categories against a range of criteria which is suitable to that supplier or set of suppliers. A criterion covers progress against environmental objectives.

their progress on sustainable procurement over time. The suggested approach to implementing the Flexible Framework is to systematically work through each of the five themes from levels one to five.

This involves five levels of achievement, namely: • Level 1 – Foundation • Level 2 – Embed • Level 3 – Practice • Level 4 – Enhance • Level 5 – Lead. he five Levels of success are measured T across the following themes:

Flexible Framework

• People

To help provide a mechanism for driving forward our sustainable procurement objectives and ensuring that they are effective monitored, City has adopted the Flexible Framework.

• Policy, Strategy and Communications

The Flexible Framework is a widely-used self-assessment tool developed by the government-sponsored UK Sustainable Procurement Taskforce, which allows organisations to measure and monitor

Our current assessments are highlighted on the table on the next page in blue and our objective targets for 2014/15 are highlighted in green. Our 2014/15 targets to achieve Level 3 on all sections by 31st July 2015 has been achieved, however the stretch target of reaching level 4 on the People, Procurement and Engaging Supplier sections, has been deferred to July 2016.

2014/15 targets Target

Met/Partially met/Not met

Notes

Achieve minimum Level 3 in all sections. Achieve level 4 on the People, Procurement and Engaging Supplier sections of the Flexible Framework by 31st July 2015.

Partially met

The University has achieved Level 3 in all sections of the flexible framework. The target for achieving Level 4 for all sections in July 2016.

Review Ethical Investment Policy and procedures against People & Planet Criteria by January 2015.

Met

The Ethical Investment Policy is kept under review and will be updated accordingly with any amendments to the criteria.

Develop action plan for key activities in regard to Ethical Investment procedures to enable greater student and staff engagement.

Met

The reporting against the plan will be part of the reporting to Council, annually, the first report will have been made by September 2016.

• Procurement Process • Engaging Suppliers • Measurements and Results.

24

Sustainable Procurement Flexible Framework Flexible Framework

Foundation

Embed

Practice

Enhance

Lead

Level 1

Level 2

Level 3

Level 4

Level 5

People

Sustainable procurement champion identified. Key procurement staff have received basic training in sustainable procurement principles. Sustainable procurement is included as part of a key employee induction programme.

All procurement staff have received basic training in sustainable procurement principles.

Key staff have received advanced training on sustainable procurement principles.

Targeted refresher training on latest sustainable procurement principles. Performance objectives and appraisal include sustainable procurement factors.

Simple incentive programme in place.

Sustainable procurement included in competencies and selection criteria.

Sustainable procurement is included as part of employee induction programme.

Achievements are publicised and used to attract procurement professionals.

Internal and external awards are received for achievements. Focus is on benefits achieved. Good practice shared with other organisations.

Policy, Strategy & Communications

Agree overarching sustainability objectives.

Simple sustainable procurement policy in place endorsed by VCG. Communicate to staff and key suppliers.

Review and enhance sustainable procurement policy, in particular consider supplier engagement.

Ensure it is part of a wider Sustainable Development strategy.

Communicate to staff, suppliers and key stakeholders.

Augment the sustainable procurement policy into a strategy covering risk, process integration, marketing, supplier engagement, measurement and a review process. Strategy endorsed by VCG.

Review and enhance the sustainable procurement strategy, in particular recognising the potential of new technologies. Try to link strategy to key Strategies, e.g. IT, Energy Management System (EMS), etc. and include in overall corporate strategy.

Strategy is: reviewed regularly, externally scrutinised and directly linked to organisations’ EMS. The Sustainable Procurement strategy recognised by political leaders, is communicated widely. A detailed review is undertaken to determine future priorities and a new strategy is produced beyond this framework.

Procurement Process

Expenditure analysis undertaken and key sustainability impacts identified. Key contracts start to include general sustainability criteria.

Contracts awarded on the basis of value-formoney, not lowest price.

Procurers adopt Quick Wins.

Detailed expenditure analysis undertaken, key sustainability risks assessed and used for prioritisation.

Sustainability is considered at an early stage in the procurement process of most contracts.

Whole-life-cost analysis adopted.

All contracts are assessed for general sustainability risks and management actions identified. Risks managed throughout all stages of the procurement process.

Targets to improve sustainability are agreed with key suppliers.

Detailed sustainability risks assessed for high impact contracts. Project/ contract sustainability governance is in place.

A life-cycle approach to cost/impact assessment is applied.

Life-cycle analysis has been undertaken for key commodity areas.

Sustainability Key Performance Indicators agreed with key suppliers.

Progress is rewarded or penalised based on performance. Barriers to sustainable procurement have been removed. Best practice shared with other organisations.

Engaging Suppliers

Key supplier spend analysis undertaken and high sustainability impact suppliers identified. Key suppliers targeted for engagement and views on procurement policy sought.

Detailed supplier spend analysis undertaken.

General programme of supplier engagement initiated, with senior manager involvement.

Targeted supplier engagement programme in place, promoting continual sustainability improvement. Two way communication between procurer and supplier exists with incentives.

Supply chains for key spend areas have been mapped.

Key suppliers targeted for intensive development.

Sustainability audits and supply chain improvement programmes in place.

Achievements are formally recorded.

VCG involved in the supplier engagement programme.

Suppliers recognised as essential to delivery of organisations’ sustainable procurement strategy. VCG engages with suppliers.

Best practice shared with other/peer organisations.

Suppliers recognise they must continually improve their sustainability profile to keep the clients business.

Measurements & Results

Key sustainability impacts of procurement activity have been identified. Simple measures based on achieving all aspects of the Foundation level of the flexible framework are put in place and delivered.

Detailed appraisal of the sustainability impacts of the procurement activity has been undertaken.

Measures implemented to manage the identified high risk impact areas.

Simple measures based on achieving all aspects of the Embedding level of the flexible framework are put in place and delivered.

Sustainability measures refined from general departmental measures to include individual procurers and are linked to development objectives. Simple measures based on achieving all aspects of the Practicing level of the flexible framework are put in place and delivered.

Measures are integrated into a balanced score card approach reflecting both input and output.

Comparison is made with peer organisations.

Benefit statements have been produced. Simple measures based on achieving all aspects of the Enhancing level of the flexible framework are put in place and delivered.

Measures used to drive organisational sustainable development strategy direction. Progress formally benchmarked with peer organisations. Benefits from sustainable procurement are clearly evidenced.

Independent audit reports available in the public domain. Simple measures based on achieving all aspects of the Leading level of the flexible framework are put in place and delivered.

Table 11: Performance against procurement Flexible Framework areas shown in green have been achieved. Areas shown in blue are targeted to be achieved in the following year.

25 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

26

Ethical investment The University has a published Ethical Investment Policy and aims to remain consistent with the ethical values it champions. In order to achieve these aims, the University will not invest in companies whose activities could be seen to endanger individuals or groups of people, or whose activities are inconsistent with the mission and values of the University, its community and its wider stakeholder network.

Ethical Policy objectives: • Consider the ethical implications of all future investments alongside the commercial opportunities • Allow members of the University community and other relevant stakeholders to engage with the Ethical Investment Policy by posting the policy on the University webpages with appropriate contact details • Ensure that fund managers responsible for the University’s investments are operating to socially responsible objectives consistent with those of the University • Review this policy on an annual basis as part of the University’s Treasury Policy.

27 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

2014/15 targets Target

Met/Partially Met/Not met

Achieve minimum Level 3 in all sections.

Achieve level 4 on the People, Procurement and Engaging Supplier sections of the Flexible Framework by 31st July 2015.

Met

Review Ethical investment Policy and procedures against People & Planet criteria by January 2015.

Met

Develop action plan for key activities in regard to ethical investment procedures to enable greater student and staff engagement.

Not met

Biodiversity City has committed to protecting and enhancing biodiversity on campus. We recognise that our operations have the potential to impact on biodiversity both directly and indirectly and that we have a responsibility to manage these impacts.

One of the principles of our Environmental Sustainability Policy is “to mitigate the University’s impacts on biodiversity by incorporating the principles of conservation into estate planning and management and by preserving and enhancing existing habitats where possible.”

Biodiversity also forms a key part of the University’s key-performance-indicator (People & Planet Green League) for environmental performance; objectives and targets in this area are now incorporated into our Environmental Management System.

City’s Biodiversity Strategy promotes development in line with Islington Borough Council’s Biodiversity Action Plan and Strategy. All contractors delivering developments on behalf of the University which include biodiversity elements (such as trees, shrubs, planters, green roofs, etc.) must comply with the University’s planting schedule.

Existing biodiversity projects at City include: • College Courtyard – an open air and quiet contemplative garden which sits in the centre courtyard of the College Building. Contains a green wall, green roof over the performance theatre, bamboo trees and seating areas

raised bed planters, fruit trees, compost bins, water butt, small greenhouse, storage shed and picnic table. Student and staff volunteers tend the garden and share in the crops.

Policy objectives • To comply with all relevant UK legislation regarding biodiversity and link this with our environmental management system • To devise and implement a biodiversity strategy and action plan which will be reviewed regularly • To maintain and, where possible, enhance biodiversity on campus • To consider the ecological impacts and opportunities for ecological enhancement of any new buildings and refurbishment projects • To raise awareness of biodiversity at the University and encourage students and staff to engage in biodiversity activities • To work in partnership with environmental groups and local authorities where appropriate.

Commentary City is committed to mitigating the University’s impacts on biodiversity by incorporating the principles of conservation into estate planning and management and by preserving and enhancing existing habitats where possible on campus. We have implemented a Biodiversity Policy and Strategy to ensure mechanisms are in place for achieving this as part of any new building or refurbishment works.

Notable biodiversity enhancements have been made this year as part of two key estates projects, including: •T he Drysdale Lecture Spaces Project – resulted in new areas of raised planters and seating areas along Spencer Street (21 new planters for an increase of 53.6m2 in green space) • The Tait Building Project – resulted in new planters along Ashby Street from Goswell Road to Northampton Square (an increase of 15.3m2 in green space).

•V egetable garden – situated behind the Parkes Building off Spencer Street and also accessible via Goswell Place. The garden was established in 2010 as part of an Edible Islington grant and includes

2014/15 targets Target

Met/Partially met/Not met

Increase available green space by 10% by 2017.

Partially met

28

The Main Entrance project, which kicked off in summer 2015 and is due to complete by the end of 2016, will result in two extensive areas of green roof on the Drysdale Atrium Lantern Space and Main Entrance Pavilion (for an increase of 48m2 in green space).

A new bee hive was installed on the roof of the Innovation Centre in June 2015.

The University has had its own vegetable garden for the past several years now and already has one green roof (on top of the performance theatre in College Building) and a green wall (in the College Courtyard).

The intention of the beehive is to raise awareness with City staff, students and the local community about the importance of protecting our biodiversity and bees in particular. In the UK alone, bees contribute £200m a year to the economy through pollination. In all, bees play a crucial role in pollinating some 90 commercial crops worldwide.

The Mayor of London and the Greater London Authority are advocating the support of increased beekeeping in London.

They say, “In the winter of 2009/10, Britain lost a third of its bee colonies. Bees are a vital part of Britain’s ecology, and are directly responsible for pollinating at least 30% of the food crops we eat. They are also an important indicator of our ecosystem’s overall health.”

City’s bees will be producing honey and are expected to generate around 10–20kg within a year.

2015/16 targets • Establish a Bee Club to enable staff and student engagement with biodiversity projects on campus • Establish a Gardening Club to enable staff and student engagement with biodiversity projects on campus • Develop a framework for embedding biodiversity considerations in to all relevant projects delivered in 2015/16 • Establish a baseline of staff engagement with the Sustainable City Challenge in 2015/16 • Establish a baseline of student engagement with the Sustainability Leaders programme in 2015/16.

30%

of food crops we eat are pollinated by bees, making them a vital part of Britain’s ecology.

10–20kg the overall amount of honey City bees are expected to produce within a year.

29 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Sustainable Food and Fairtrade

City is committed to providing healthy and sustainable food to our students, staff and visitors, while at the same time minimising negative environmental and social effects associated with the products and services we provide. We aim to make progressive improvements to our food procurement and to raise awareness of the benefits of a healthy and sustainable diet.

The University works closely with its contract caterers, Sodexo at Northampton Square and Lexington Catering at Cass Business School (both new contracts as of 1st August 2014), to ensure our Sustainable Food Policy objectives are met.

Policy objectives • Promote the health and well-being of our staff and students • Increase sustainable food offerings in the catering outlets and hospitality menus • Support environmentally friendly farming, food/drink production and transportation • Ensure animal welfare is on the agenda when procuring eggs, meat and dairy products • Work with our suppliers to progress the sustainability agenda across the entire estate • Maintain Fairtrade University status • Ensure our Sustainable Food Policy is fully reflected in catering tenders and contract(s), where applicable.

Marine Stewardship Council’s (MSC) Chain of Custody standard – Both Sodexo and Lexington achieved the MSC Chain of Custody standard which ensures that consumers are being served fish that comes from a fishery that meets the MSC environmental standard for sustainable fishing.

Meat Free Mondays – Sodexo worked closely with the Students’ Union’s Meat Free Mondays Green Dragons project to implement Meat Free Mondays in the main cafeteria. This was trialled several times throughout the year and became a permanent fixture at two of the outlets (Delish and Guest) in the main cafeteria from the start of the 2015/16 academic year.

Elimination of bottled water – Sodexo have agreed to pilot the removal of retail bottled water in the main student and staff cafeterias from the 2015/16 academic year.

Fairtrade – City has been certified as a Fairtrade University since 2010 by the Fairtrade Foundation. We are committed to supporting and using Fairtrade

products and to educating our students and staff of the value of Fairtrade. By choosing Fairtrade, farmers and workers in developing countries are given a better chance to work their way out of poverty, through fairer wages, safer conditions at work, and extra income to invest in bringing about changes and improving life for their whole communities.

Sustainable Restaurant Association – City joined the Sustainable Restaurant Association (SRA) in August 2015. Both Sodexo and Lexington have agreed to complete the SRA’s audit which will hopefully result in one of their 3-Star ratings. The Food Made Good Sustainability Rating shows customers that we are passionate about serving great quality food in a way that isn’t costing the earth. The rating is based on a holistic assessment of our food service, covering 14 key-areas that consider our society, sourcing and environmental practices across all of our catering provisions.

Highlights this year Food for Life Catering Mark – Both Sodexo and Lexington successfully achieved the Soil Association’s Food for Life Catering Mark (Bronze for Lexington and Silver for Sodexo) in September 2015.

This prestigious national food award is the only UK-wide certification scheme that provides a guarantee that food is freshly prepared, free from undesirable additives and better for animal welfare. Bronze, silver and gold tiers recognise best practice and offer caterers a step-by-step approach towards using more fresh, seasonal, local and organic ingredients.

30

2014/15 targets Target

Met/ Partially met/Not met

Notes

2015/16 Targets All catering contractors Work with new catering to undertake Met Sustainable Restaurants contractors to achieve SoilAssociation audit followed by development Association’s Food for Life of action plan to achieve Cateringrating Mark Bronze standard

by January 2015 and Silver by August 2015.

Both Sodexo and Lexington have agreed to complete the SRA’s audit which will hopefully result in one of their 3-Star ratings.

Both caterers are due to receive Food for Life Catering Mark by the end of September 2015 (Sodexo is expecting Silver; Lexington will receive Bronze).

Achieve Marine Stewardship Council’s Chain of Custody certification by July 2015.

Met

Both Sodexo and Lexington have received the MSC Chain of Custody certification.

Achieve 100% food waste recycling. Ensure all food waste is being collected for recycling and not as part of general waste.

Partially met

Both caterers are recycling all kitchen food waste, but improvements can be made in recycling of prepared food waste (in catering outlets and in hospitality catering).

Roll out monthly Meat Free Mondays across all catering outlets.

Partially met

Meat Free Mondays were rolled out periodically at the main Northampton Square cafeteria during 2014/15.

2015/16 targets • Catering contractors to retain Marine Stewardship Council’s Chain of Custody certification • Complete biannual food waste audits of catering outlets and kitchens • Catering contractors to undertake Sustainable Restaurant Association audits and complete action plan to achieve one star rating.

31 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Waste management City operates a zero waste to landfill policy, under this policy the following waste streams are collected and diverted from landfill.

• Glass • Dry recycling • Waste for incineration • Food waste • WEEE (Waste Electrical & Electronic Equipment).

• Bulky waste • Confidential waste

Waste Management Hierarchy

Best Option Prevention

The principles of the Waste Management Hierarchy are applied to ensure that waste is dealt with in a way that impacts least on the environment.

Policy objectives • P rovide bins and containers across the University to ensure the effective segregation of waste and to maximise reuse and recycling opportunities

Minimisation

• D evelop targets for waste minimisation, recycling rates and diversion from landfill

Reuse

• M easure and monitor waste disposal rates, recycling rates and recovery rates to identify where waste management improvements can be made

Recycling

• R aise awareness amongst all staff, students and other stakeholders of the importance of sustainable waste management through education initiatives and campaigns.

Energy Recovery (Incineration)

Energy Recovery (Landfill)

Worst Option

publishing the results on a leader board that ranks how well departments perform. Several departments improved their performance as a result of the challenge • S hwop@work – a programme that gives unwanted clothes and shoes a future by working with Oxfam to resell, reuse and recycle them in order to raise money for people living in poverty. Those who donated clothing received a £5 voucher from project sponsor Marks & Spencer.

Several collection drives were carried out over the year, with very impressive results • U pcycling Workshop – held during the annual Green City Week 2014, focussed on creating wallets from drink cartons and jewellery from discarded City brochures.

Commentary Several new engagement activities, along with new bin standards, have resulted in a 5% increase in City’s recycling rate this year. With an overall recycling rate of 58%, we fell just short of the 60% target for 2014/15.

£5

Engagement activities included: • The Sorting Challenge for staff, which started last year, aims to improve recycling practices by conducting secret audits throughout the year and

Those who donated clothing through the Shwop@work programme received a £5 voucher from project sponsor Marks & Spencer.

2014/15 targets Target

Met/Partially met/Not met

Notes

Increase total recycling rate to 60% by end of July 2015.

Partially met

Increased overall recycling to 58% (a 5% increase over the previous year). The Northampton Square main site achieved 65% recycling rate, but Cass only achieved 38% and City Law School 41%.

Implement new standards for waste and recycling bins as part of estate project standards.

Met

New bin standards were agreed and implemented.

All new projects are now installing new bins and existing bins in use around campus are being replaced when possible.

32

• Several student sustainability engagement projects ran this year (as part of the Student Union’s Green Dragons programme and the Sustainability team’s Sustainability Leaders programme) focussed on waste and recycling themes: – One Small Change – aimed to design a prototype service that supports simple behaviour change in City’s students and staff with the objective of reducing waste and improving recycling rates. The project resulted in several new posters that were selected by students as being most effective in influencing behaviour – Get Your Green On – aimed to reduce the use of plastic water bottles and paper coffee cups at City by raising awareness and offering alternatives to students and staff (e.g. ceramic reusable cups) – City Pick The Right Bin – addressed the problem of City students and staff using the wrong bin for their waste.

The objective was to improve the differentiation of the waste by running a Sorting Challenge Competition.

These students also worked with the One Small Change project that prototyped the waste/recycling signage for City bins – Waste No More – aimed to reduce waste by establishing a reuse scheme from the unwanted items that City students leave behind in student halls around the University campus. The project also aimed to raise awareness on sustainable consumption through campaigns and other activities.

Their slogan was “Don’t bin it, just reuse it!”

2014/15 (tonnes) Waste to Energy

Recycled

Total

%Recycled

Northampton Square sites

204

380

584

65%

Cass Business School

105

65

169

38%

The City Law School

16

11

28

41%

CitySport Franklin Building

6

5

11

48%

Totals

330

461

791

58%

Table 12: Breakdown of waste by collection point 2014/15.

2013/14 (tonnes) Waste to Energy

Recycled

Total

%Recycled

Northampton Square sites

214

299

512

58%

Cass Business School

96

51

147

35%

The City Law School

11

12

23

51%

Totals

321

361

682

53%

Table 13: Breakdown of waste by collection point 2013/14.

Figure 12: Total waste by waste stream (tonnes) 2014/15 Food waste 11% Bulky waste 9% Confidential waste 3%

–G reen Dragons Restart Project – aimed to teach students and staff how to repair their own electronic appliances as an alternative.

A new dual-stream bin which allows disposal of both mixed recycling and general waste in a single split bin has been implemented as standard for all new projects and is proving to be considerably more successful than the single-stream bins.

By installing consistent bins and signage across campus, we hope to achieve even better recycling results going forward.

The Sustainability team works closely with City’s waste contractor, Bywaters, to continually find new ways to engage students and staff with a view to increasing recycling rates. Bywaters also conduct periodic waste audits to highlight areas that require improvements.

Dry recycling 33% Glass 2% Waste for incineration 42%

2013/14

Food waste 8% Bulky waste 6% Confidential waste 3%

Dry recycling 34% Glass 2% Waste for incineration 47%

33 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) waste is collected separately by e-Reco and includes all electrical and hazardous waste such as printer and toner cartridges. The WEEE Directive 2002/96/EC on waste electrical and electronic equipment aims to address the environmental impacts of WEEE and encourages separate collection and subsequent treatment, reuse, recovery, recycling and environmentally sound disposal.

WEEE collections 2013/14

Target

2013/14

2014/15

Hazardous waste

2071 kg

2087 kg

Non-hazardous waste

3705 kg

10,751 kg

Total WEEE collections

5776 kg

12,838 kg

By increasing recycling rates to 50% at Cass Business School and The City Law School, the new target of 65% for 2015/16 overall recycling rate across City should be easily achieved. Northampton Square main site would only need to maintain its existing 65% recycling rate.

As long as the new bin standards are upheld, consistent signage is used across all sites and as long as there is continual focus on raising awareness amongst staff and students, there is no reason for this target not to be reached. The new Sustainable City Challenge for staff should help to communicate and incentivise staff to change their habits.

The bigger challenge for the coming year and in the future will be in finding new ways to reduce overall waste. The University should make an effort to identify areas and activities which result in the most waste, with a view to targeting a reduction in those areas. For example, the new Managed Print Service which was implemented over the summer of 2015, should see quite a significant reduction in copier paper and toner usage at the University.

2015/16 targets • I ncrease total recycling rate to 65% by end of July 2016 (includes an increase to 50% at Cass and 50% at The City Law School).

65% The overall target recycling rate by the end of July 2016.

34

Transport and travel A new Travel Plan was published in September 2013 and demonstrates City’s commitment to supporting sustainable travel options for students and staff.

The Travel Plan focuses on identifying measures to encourage people to choose more sustainable modes of travel, which in turn results in improved environmental performance as a result of reduced carbon emissions associated with travel. Sustainable travel also enables a healthier work force and student body as it encourages more people to walk and cycle.

Policy objectives • Increase the proportion of trips to and within the University on foot • Increase the proportion of trips to and within the University by cycle • Reduce the proportion of trips to and within the University by public transport • Reduce the number of single occupancy car trips by staff and students • Build on the successes of the initiatives since and adoption of the 2010 Travel Plan

Commentary Student survey A student travel survey was conducted over a five and a half week period during November and December 2014. A total of 1,589 students (out of approximately 16,500 total students) completed the survey, representing a 10% response rate. This is an increase of 1% on the last survey in 2013 when 9% of the student population completed the survey.

81% of the respondents are situated mainly at the Northampton Square campus; 13% at Cass Business School (Bunhill Row); 5% at The City Law School (Gray’s Inn); and 1% at other sites.

73% of the respondents use public transport to travel to the University, with the Underground being the most popular form of public transport, accounting for 38% of all trips. 26% of respondents walk (21%) or cycle (5%) to the University.

• Reduce unnecessary travel • Reduce the University’s impact on climate change, per HEFCE Scope 3 guidance • Encourage staff and students to live a healthier and more active lifestyle.

2014/15 targets

73%

of the respondents for the student survey use the Underground to travel to the University.

35 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

Target

Met/Partially Notes met/Not met

Liaise with Finance to more accurately measure business travel in order to improve the accuracy of Scope 3 emissions reporting and help identify potential areas for reduction in business travel.

Not met

In order to accurately measure Scope 3 emissions for business travel, it will require that more detailed monitoring of travel is recorded, which at present can only be done via Key Travel (City’s travel management company). Specifically, we will need to capture either fuel used or distance travelled for all business travel in order to calculate associated carbon emissions.

Conduct a new student and staff travel survey to measure progress made in achieving short-term modal shift targets.

Met

Student survey was conducted in November 2014; staff survey was conducted in April 2015.

The table to the right compares the modal split of respondents from the 2013 and 2014 student surveys and compares these differences against the short-term modal split targets which were specified in the 2013 Travel Plan.

There has been an increase of 2.35% of students walking to the University, while the total number of students travelling by public transport has decreased by 1.77%. There hasn’t been much change in the number of students cycling to the University (5.45%, compared to 5.52% in 2013).

Overall the results indicate that the modal shift targets are not being met and that measures to encourage more walking and cycling should be prioritised in order to meet these targets.

Staff survey A staff travel survey was conducted over a 7 week period from March to May 2015. A total of 635 staff members (out of approximately 1,800 total staff) completed the survey, representing a 35% response rate. This is an increase of 3.28% on the last survey in 2013 when 32% of all staff completed the survey.

79% of the respondents are situated mainly at the Northampton Square campus; 14% at Cass Business School (Bunhill Row); 3% at The City Law School (Gray’s Inn); and 4% at other sites.

33% of staff use public transportation as their main mode of travel to the University, with the Underground being the most popular form of public transport (24%).

22% of respondents either walk (10%) or cycle (12%) to the University.

The table on the right compares the modal split of respondents from the 2013 and 2015 staff surveys and compares these differences against the short-term modal split targets which were specified in the 2013 Travel Plan.

Student modal splits (comparing 2013 and 2014) Travel mode

2013 Survey

2014 Survey

% change

Short term target

Performance against target

Car

0.63%

0.32%

-0.31%

0%

0%

on target

Taxi

0.32%

0.06%

-0.26%

0%

0%

on target

Walk

18.50%

20.85%

2.35%

5%

-3%

on target

Bicycle

5.52%

5.45%

-0.07%

5%

-5%

short of target

Motorcycle

0.42%

0.38%

-0.04%

1%

-1%

short of target

Bus

15.25%

11.85%

-3.40%

-1%

+2%

exceeded target

Underground

37.59%

38.09%

0.50%

-5%

-5%

short of target

Train

21.87%

23.00%

1.13%

-5%

-6%

short of target

Public transport total

74.71%

72.94%

-1.77%

-11%

-9%

short of target

Public transport

Table 14: Analysis of student travel survey results.

Staff modal splits (comparing 2013 and 2015) Travel mode

2013 Survey

2015 Survey

% Short change term target

Performance against target

Car

0.43%

0.16%

-0.27%

0%

0.27%

exceeded target

Taxi

0.14%

0.16%

-0.02%

0%

-0.02%

short of target

Walk

8.45%

9.92%

1.47%

5%

-3.53%

short of target

Bicycle

9.31%

11.65%

2.34%

5%

-2.66%

short of target

Motorcycle

0.72%

1.26%

0.54%

1%

-0.46%

short of target

Public transport Bus

10.74%

8.98%

-1.76%

-1%

0.76%

exceeded target

Underground

26.22%

24.25%

-1.97%

-5%

-3.03%

short of target

Train

43.98%

43.62%

0.36%

-5%

-4.64%

short of target

Public transport total

80.94%

76.85%

-4.09%

-11%

-6.91%

short of target

Table 15: Analysis of staff travel survey results.

There has been an increase of 2.34% in number of staff cycling and 1.47% in number of those walking to the University, although this falls short of the 5% shortterm targets set for each mode of transport.

Public transportation has decreased by 4.09%, but again this falls short of the short-term targets set.

22% of the respondents for the staff survey walk to the University.

12%

of the respondents for the staff survey cycle to the University.

36

Cycling initiatives Most of the University’s travel plan initiatives include measures to support cycling and encourage more students and staff to cycle to the University. For 2014/15, these included: • Regular bike doctor visits offering a free cycle maintenance service were provided for all City cyclists •C ycle-to-work scheme – continues to be a successful benefit for staff, with consistent enrolment year on year: Year

Total number of participants

2014/15

24

2013/14

30

2012/13

24

2011/12

28

2010/11

41

Total

147

•C ycle Confident rides – a series of cycle-led rides, funded by Transport for London and delivered by London by Bike, took place at City from February to May 2015. The aim of the project was to encourage more students to cycle to the University. Bikes were provided for those who needed one and the tours included interesting and historical sites near the University •C ycle Hire road shows – City hosted Barclay’s Cycle Hire road show during Green City Week 2014 which provided information and sample bikes to show students and staff more about how to use London’s self-service bike-sharing scheme.

City also started working in 2014/15 with a local venture called Recycle Your Cycle which collects abandoned bikes to be refurbished and rebuilt by local prisoners and sold through charity partners enabling charities to raise funds for their particular cause. The charities get the benefit of a quality refurbished product that they can sell at a good profit. City donated around 10 bicycles to Recycle Your Cycle during 2014/15.

Carbon emissions associated with travel City’s carbon emissions associated with transport and business travel have reduced by approximately 20% this year over 2013/14. Transport-related emissions include the following forms of travel: • Scope 1 (direct emissions): includes emissions from vehicles owned or controlled by the University

• Scope 3 (indirect emissions): includes emissions resulting from academic, support staff and students travelling for business purposes and commuting to and from their home address or term-time residence to the University: –B usiness travel – Some modes of business travel are classed as mandatory reporting items for emissions (air, rail, hire car, employees’ own vehicles), whereas other modes are optional (public transportation, taxis). HEFCE have indicated that universities should make every effort to report emissions from optional travel modes where possible.

20%

Overall approximate reduction of City’s carbon emissions associated with transport and business travel for 2013/14.

ity receives Scope 3 emissions reports C from its primary travel agent, Key Travel, which includes CO2 emissions calculations based on actual flights and rail journeys booked*. The Key Travel data is used to extrapolate CO2 emissions data for travel which is not booked through Key Travel, but which is recorded as business travel spend on the University’s financial system (SAP).

–C ommuter travel – It is proposed that reporting of emissions from all modes of commuter travel is optional, but every effort should be made to report emissions and that the travel is recorded separately for staff and students. City does not currently report on emissions from commuter travel.

Transport (Scope 1) direct emissions from vehicles operated by City 2014/15 Vehicle

Total miles

CO2 emissions (tonnes)

Comments

Postal van (Ford Transit)

4224

1.39

Calculated using figures provided

by Ashwoods at 205 CO2g per kilometre

Sports van (Ford TDci)

3889

1.28

Calculated using figures provided

by Ashwoods at 205 CO2g per kilometre

Maintenance van (Ford Transit hybrid vehicle)

2143

0.58

Calculated using figures provided

by Ashwoods at 169.60 CO2g per kilometre

Total

10256

3.26

Table 16: Emissions from fuel used by the University fleet of vehicles during 2014/15.

2013/14 Vehicle

Total miles

CO2 emissions (tonnes)

Comments

Postal van (Ford Transit)

4706

1.55

Calculated using figures provided

by Ashwoods at 205 CO2g per kilometre

Sports van (Ford TDci)

4067

1.34

Calculated using figures provided

by Ashwoods at 205 CO2g per kilometre

Maintenance van (Ford Transit hybrid vehicle)

1809

0.49

Calculated using figures provided

by Ashwoods at 169.60 CO2g per kilometre

Total

10582

3.39

Table 17: Emissions from fuel used by the University fleet of vehicles during 2013/14.

37 Sustainability – Annual Report 2014/15

City University London Northampton Square London EC1V 0HB United Kingdom

Email enquiries sustainable_city@city.ac.uk

Telephone enquiries +44 (0) 20 7040 8053

www.city.ac.uk

Find out more, visit www.city.ac.uk/environment