AB0401 E-Learning Grace Xaveria, Li Mengzhu, Luke Chan, Kenneth Chen

1. Changing Our World:
Do we plant trees or create
online courses
Luke Chan
Kenneth Chen
Grace Xaveria
Li Mengzhu

2. Overview
Introduction
Scope 1
Scope 2
Scope 3
Alternatives

3. Introduction
Scope of
calculation:
•
Fiscal year
of 2010
32
teaching
weeks
•
Duration of
e-learning
week to be
discussed:
•
10
teaching
weeks
15
teaching
weeks
NTU
Reference University
5 teaching
weeks
•
NTU
• 25,728
• Ranking: 41
•
Erasmus
• 14,000
• School
Ranking: 92
‘E-Learning
reduces
carbon emission.’
‘Buying carbon
credits achieves
carbon neutral
target.’
Other Alternatives:
•
New school policies

4. Scope 1
Data collected:
Number of vehicles owned by school: 6
(Estimated based on NTU bus schedule)
Direct
transportation
sources
Types of vehicles owned by school:
Tong Tar Bus
Kilometer travelled by the all vehicles per
year: 432,000km
Emission factor: 90g/km
Research emission/kg
Scope 1
Direct transportation
sources
Education emission/kg
Total emmsion/kg
23328
15552
38880

5. Scope 2
Data collected:
Energy consumption in buildings of NTU:
50 kWh/m2/yr
Purchased
heat
Building area of NTU:
15014.96m2 *38
= 570568.48 kWh/m2/yr
Fuel mix: 80% Natural gas; 18% Petroleum product;
Emission factor of natural gas: 0.185; Petroleum
product: 0.245
Research emission/kg
Scope 2
Purchase electricity
Education emission/kg
Total emmsion/kg
65763.723
43842.482
109606.205

6. Scope 3
Employee/Stu
dent
commuting
undergraduates staying in hall
post-graduates staying in hall
total student population staying in hall
9200
3285.6863
12485.6863
total student population who don't stay in hall
19,381
2-way distance
travelled/person(km)
emission factor(kgCO2/km)
CO2
CO2 emisson/day
emission/person/day(kg) (kg)
CO2 emisson/year (kg)
average travelling time
50min
average travelling time by bus
18min
9.2
0.0132
0.12144
4672.88976
747662.3616
average travelling time by train
32min
52.4
0.073
3.8252
147189.8708
23550379.33
Scope 3
Commuting by bus
2803.733856
1869.155904
4672.88976
Commuting by train
88313.92248
58875.94832
147189.8708
paper consumption
41.29308
27.52872
68.8218
water consumption
61.257672
40.838448
102.09612
food wastage
89.32356
59.54904
148.8726

7. Campus Carbon Footprint
Research
emission/kg
Education
emission/kg
Total emmision/kg
23328
15552
38880
Direct transportation sources
Scope 1
Scope 2
Purchase electricity
65763.723
43842.482
109606.205
Scope 3
Communting by bus
448597.417
299064.9446
747662.3616
Commuting by train
14130227.6
9420151.731
23550379.33
paper consumption
41.29308
27.52872
68.8218
water consumption
61.257672
40.838448
102.09612
food wastage
89.32356
59.54904
148.8726
14668108.61
9778739.074
24446847.69
Emission per student
460.2914806
306.860987
767.1524676
Emission per employee
2218.407231
1478.938154
3697.345385
Total

8. Allocation of CO2 emissions in the
model
Education
40%
Research:
60%
• Data of NTU is not available
Reference to data from Erasmus University which has similar
ranking as NTU, thus we assume that both universities
conducts similar amount of research work

9. Benefit of E-Learning
160kg CO2 emission per average Singaporean per year
• Individual/Personal carbon emission
• (3.08kg CO2 emission per average Singaporean per week)
•
•
•
•
•
•
2 week of e-learning (1 e-learning per sem): 6.15kg of CO2 emission
4 week of e-learning (2 e-learning per sem): 12.31kg of CO2 emission
6 week of e-learning (3 e-learning per sem): 18.46kg of CO2 emission
8 week of e-learning (4 e-learning per sem): 24.62kg of CO2 emission
10 week of e-learning (5 e-learning per sem): 30.77kg of CO2 emission
12 week of e-learning (6 e-learning per sem): 36.92kg of CO2 emission

10. Benefit of eLearning
carbon emission/person/week(kg)
3.075
School population
38,479
Total personal carbon emission/week (kg)
118323
Total carbon emission/week if no eLearning being conducted(kg)
763964
Total reduction in carbon emission due to eLearning/wk (kg)
645641
No of eLearning weeks
Carbon emission reduction(kg)
5
3228205.326
10
6456410.652
15
9684615.977
Online learning can help school reduce carbon emission, thus
reducing the cost of buying carbon credits and can even help
school earn by selling carbon credits to external parties

11. Alternatives
Proposed
Alternatives
• Build in solar panel to generate electricity
• Design of school building to allow natural sunlight to enter classroom to reduce
lights needed to be switched on to brighten up classroom
• Create facilities booking system that ensures venue are allocated closely to
number of participants, to prevent powering up a big venue unnecessarily
• Set double-printing as the default function in school printers

12. Impact on Stakeholders
Stakeholders
• School: Cost saving, better reputation (opportunities to attract partnership with
environmental firms/environmental engineering experts)
• Students: E-learning more efficient for student staying far from campus
• Staff: On the short run, might require more time to develop online lesson
On the long run can re-use same material and hence do not have to be
physically present for classes, more time for research work
• National Environmental Agency: University reduction in emission may be
significant enough to improve environment around campus

13. Executive Summary
This presentation seeks to present the environmental impact of the activities
that our university engages in, which can be broadly classified into providing
education, research work as well as supporting activities, such as transport.
The presentation aim to discover the change that we can make if we were to
bring in e-learning, which cuts down on activities on campus that consume
energy. We will also discussed effects of purchasing carbon credits as an
alternative.
Our group also suggested alternatives ideas that can help our campus
become more environmentally-friendly and sustainable, in view of rising
energy cost.
Lastly we discussed the implication to the stakeholders of the university and
explored the possible impact to various stakeholders. While being a greener
university will allow us to become more cost-efficient and improve our
reputation on environmental efforts. We should also note that the quality of
education and support given to research work should not be compromised.

14. Reference
http://www.carbonindependent.org/sources_bus.htm
http://www.sustainapore.sg/pdf/iconicCutting
Edge.pdf
http://www.ema.gov.sg/media/files/facts_and_figures/fuel_mix/Fuel_Mix%2
0extracted%20from%20Singapore%20Energy%20Statistics.pdf
ENERGY MARKET AUTHORITY
http://www.ema.gov.sg/media/files/publications/EMA_SES_2012_Final.pdf
PERSONAL CARBON FOOTPRINT CALCULATOR
http://www.resurgence.org/education/carbon-calculator.html

15. Appendix A