Net-Zero Heroes? Climate Change Mitigation Efforts and Strategies across Australian Group-of-Eight Universities

Kate Melville-Rea and Stefan K. Arndt ()
Additional contact information
Kate Melville-Rea: School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne, 500 Yarra Boulevard, Richmond, VIC 3121, Australia
Stefan K. Arndt: School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne, 500 Yarra Boulevard, Richmond, VIC 3121, Australia

Sustainability, 2024, vol. 16, issue 7, 1-15

Abstract: Businesses are increasingly declaring their operations to be “carbon neutral” or “net-zero”. But how real are these claims? We investigated the climate mitigation efforts of the eight leading universities in Australia and discovered that the actual emission reductions lag behind the net-zero rhetoric. In the last ten years, most universities increased energy consumption, while reported emissions plateaued. The energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions of Group-of-Eight (Go8) universities were influenced by size and population growth, climate of the campus location, and energy efficiencies. The Go8 universities experienced, on average, a 25% increase in student numbers in the last decade, and most increased their energy consumption. However, Scope 1 (direct emissions) and Scope 2 (emissions from electricity consumption) remained stable for most universities from 2011 to 2019 and decreased on a per-capita basis, indicating some level of improved efficiencies. Almost all Go8 universities have net-zero commitments and aim to achieve this by similar measures: power purchase agreements (PPAs) for electricity consumption, and carbon offsets for remaining emissions. Most universities lack a strategy for direct or measurable targets regarding energy or emissions reductions along their value chain. Unlike the UK or other countries, Australia has no standardised emission reporting requirements for Scope 3 emissions (other indirect emissions). This has led to rudimentary and haphazard reporting, limiting comparability between universities. Only one university had a more complete Scope 3 inventory, and these Scope 3 emissions were five times greater than their combined Scope 1 and 2 emissions, indicating a potential for substantial under-reporting of emissions. This highlights the need for more rigorous, consistent, and sector-specific emissions accounting, especially on indirect emissions, and for an overhaul of net-zero accreditation.

Keywords: CO 2 e emissions; emissions reporting; energy consumption; greenhouse gas emissions; GHG emissions; carbon footprint; emissions inventory; direct and indirect emissions; carbon offsets; power purchase agreement; HEI; universities (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/7/2937/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/16/7/2937/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:16:y:2024:i:7:p:2937-:d:1368576

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().