Jaron Reddy, UK & Ireland Manager, ENTRNCE
If carbon reporting is your responsibility, you work hard to avoid underestimating emissions or leaving out any emissions sources. But what if the real problem for your organisation is over-reporting? Oxford Brookes University recently found itself in this exact position. The university discovered this year that it has been overestimating its Scope 2 emissions by up to 39%.
It might feel like good news to know that emissions are lower than you thought. But this level of inaccuracy has serious consequences. Many organisations purchase carbon credits to offset emissions on the road to Net Zero – but if you’ve miscalculated those emissions in the first place, you could be wasting thousands of pounds.
Ironically enough, overestimating your carbon emissions can set back your decarbonisation journey. If your decisions are based on inaccurate figures for your carbon emissions, your Net Zero strategy may be less effective because you are focusing on the wrong interventions at the wrong times. This could lead to ineffective investment decisions and a slower journey to Net Zero in the long term.
How does overreporting happen?
So how does carbon reporting be so inaccurate when everyone is following the reporting protocols so diligently? It’s all about what methods are currently standard for reporting on your Scope 2 emissions (those from the electricity you buy). The Greenhouse Gas Protocol recommends a dual approach. This is reflected in the guidelines for various mandatory schemes such as Streamlined Energy and Carbon Reporting (SECR). Most companies therefore use two kinds of reporting: location-based and market-based.
The location-based method means using the average emissions from the grid in your area. This average is usually applied over an entire year, which means it doesn’t matter when you used the electricity. And it doesn’t matter how “green” your electricity supply contract is either.
The market-based method focuses entirely on your electricity supply contract, so a “100% renewable” tariff delivers zero emissions to report – on paper, at least. This is the case even though such tariffs don’t represent a direct link between buying energy and funding renewables.
You’d think that combining the two very different approaches would split the difference and deliver a number close to reality. But because they are both based on flawed reporting methodologies, you could still end up very far from getting a handle on your actual carbon emissions.
The “when” matters
The mix of energy sources in the electricity grid changes every half hour, which means it matters a lot when your energy consumption really happens. The location-based reporting method does not reflect the changing carbon intensity of the grid. At times of high renewable output, a kilowatt hour of electricity might produce 20g of emissions – the weight of a packet of Quavers – or even less. But at times of heavy fossil fuel use, it might be over 300g. The variability over the course of a year is a staggering 2,000%. Yet the reporting system treats every kilowatt hour as equal in terms of emissions.
To make reporting even less accurate, the data about the generators being used isn’t even up to date; it’s from a two-year-old list.
Oxford Brookes University discovered this when they began working with ENTRNCE. They used our Matcher platform to calculate their actual emissions based on half-hourly grid data, and discovered that they have overreported by up to 39%. Armed with this data, the university has an opportunity to adjust their decarbonisation strategy to reflect their “true” carbon footprint.
Opportunity cost
ENTRNCE works extensively in the public sector as well as with businesses, so we know this is a widespread problem. Oxford Brookes University is just one of many universities that could be under unnecessary strain because of overreporting emissions. Many NHS trusts are also likely to be overreporting. At a time when the public sector feels the strain of squeezed budgets, it is important that investment decisions are based on accurate data. Meeting your Net Zero commitments requires you to make the right interventions at the right time. For that, it’s essential to have accurate data – which the ENTRNCE Matcher platform provides.
Overreporting represents a huge opportunity cost that most public sector organisations can’t afford. We are joining many other expert voices in lobbying to change the official recommended reporting approach to something better. In the meantime, individual organisations can take control by finding a reporting method that actually works. The ENTRNCE Matcher takes your energy consumption in half-hourly bites and aligns it with the grid emissions for the exact same chunks of time. You then get the most accurate possible calculation of your emissions. Why not try our Quickscan service, which only requires us to access the data from your smart meter? Then you can find out your actual carbon emissions and, if you choose, get help on how to optimise your pathway to Net Zero. For a no-obligation test of the service, get in touch.
This article appeared in the Nov/Dec 2024 issue of Energy Manager magazine. Subscribe here.