Carbon Emissions Data Report Provides Updates on Race to Zero
My Green Lab, a non-profit organization promoting sustainability in science, has released a report produced with carbon emissions data provided by Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), and with support from the UN High Level Climate Champions team.
The My Green Lab study analyzes data from 226 publicly-listed companies and 147 privately-held companies to produce a comprehensive profile of the carbon emissions of the biotech and pharma industry—this includes a comparison of this emissions profile to other industry sectors. According to My Green Lab, the report tracks the industry’s progress since 2015 and evaluates alignment with achieving the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement. Data and analysis presented for a given year refers to emissions occurring in the previous year.
“The Carbon Impact of Biotech and Pharma: Collective Action Accelerating Progress to the UN Race to Zero” is an update to My Ggreen Lab’s 2021 study, which was the first to quantify Scope 1 and 2 as well as Scope 3 emissions across the full value chain of the Biotechnology and Pharmaceutical (Biotech and Pharma) industry.
The GHG (Greenhouse Gas) Protocol Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard classifies carbon emissions into three different Scopes, divided by direct and indirect emissions. Scope 1 includes direct emissions from owned or controlled sources. Regarding indirect emissions, Scope 2 includes carbon emissions from purchased energy consumed by the reporting company, and Scope 3 includes all other indirect emissions upstream or downstream in a company’s value chain.
Organizations working toward a common goal
A number of collective action initiatives are being pushed by the world’s largest pharma companies, which focused on details such as supplier requirements, renewable energy purchasing, API manufacturing, and green lab Standards such as My Green Lab Certification. The goal is to spur emissions reductions across the pharma and biotech value chain—in particular, for Asia-Pacific-based companies that have the highest carbon intensity but have not set zero carbon targets.
My Green Lab is building a global culture of sustainability through science through a number of initiatives, in addition to their My Green Lab Certification program. The ACT label, similar to nutrition labels, shows how products “rate” in sustainability-related categories, which is a useful tool for lab planners working with lab stakeholders to design a facility around efficient equipment. The Freezer Challenge and Ambassador program, among other initiatives, stress the importance of working with lab users and management, along with equipment and service providers, to furnish a lab with the most energy efficient systems and protocols.
Another organization focused on physical facilities is the BuildingToCOP coalition, which unites leaders from across the construction/building sector who are utilizing the potential of the built environment (buildings, infrastructure and cities) in accelerating the transition to a net zero future. BuildingToCOP asks businesses and sub-national governments to join the Race to Zero by working toward the following goals:
All countries include full building decarbonization targets, concrete policies and measures, and related implementation mechanisms in their NDCs.
One thousand cities and at least 20 percent of the largest built environment businesses by revenue committed to the UN’s Race to Zero.
The sector’s stakeholders unite behind a single voice and ambition towards shared goals: By 2030, 100 percent of new buildings must be net zero carbon in operation and embodied carbon must be reduced by at least 40 percent, and by 2050, all new and existing assets must be net zero across the whole life cycle.
I2SL (International Institute for Sustainable Laboratories) has established the Labs2Zero program, offering information about how to make labs more efficient while reducing emissions. I2SL hosts the Laboratory Benchmark Tool (LBT), a free online tool developed by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory which stores data from participating buildings. There are plans to offer an emissions scorecard by 2024, in order to compare a lab’s greenhouses gases to other laboratory facilities in the database which fall under similar operations and climate zones.
Reducing emissions through thoughtful lab design
Laboratory facilities consume massive amounts of water and energy when compared with a typical office space. As labs (biotech and pharma in particular) are a significant contributor to global climate change, it is crucial for them to be part of the global climate solution. Progress can be made through sustainable laboratory design, construction, and renovation efforts—this includes flexible design and equipment selection, innovating lighting choices, and careful analysis of metrics in order to determine the best course of action when building a new lab or renovating/retrofitting an existing space.
This year’s My Green Labs report details the progress that has been made in sustainable science and research, while noting that Scope 3 emissions “continue to dominate.” The report cites companies in the Asia Pacific region in particular, which are often included in the Scope 3 emission of large US and European companies, as having most carbon-intensive operations and being slow to adopt zero carbon targets. The report demonstrates the need for an accelerated pace of accomplishments in order for the biotech and pharma industry to remain below the 1.5°C threshold established by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Jacob Werner, AIA, currently an associate principal with Ellenzweig in Boston, MA, talked with Lab Design News about how lab management and stakeholders can budget for a net zero project. “Invest in an early and comprehensive feasibility assessment, including human factors, engineering systems, and renewable energy opportunities. Studies of operational practice, like a thorough Laboratory Ventilation Risk Assessment (LVRA), can slash project energy demand by as much as half, with zero upfront cost. This is valuable for all facilities, but especially for projects with low energy or net zero goals,” he said. “A feasibility study of high-performance mechanical systems incorporating fully integrated whole-building design can substantially increase efficiency. Renewable systems analysis, by qualified specialist engineers, is critical to understanding the real cost versus benefit of complex geothermal, energy storage, and renewable energy systems. Conducting an early feasibility study to align the project goals and optimize scope, schedule, and budget can dramatically increase the chance of success for any net zero project.”
Kathryn Archard, AIA LEED AP BD+C, associate principal, and Susana Zelter, AIA, LEEP AP, associate principal, director of lab planning, both with ARC/Architectural Resources Cambridge, say they regularly work with clients who have made climate commitments aligned with the 1.5°C climate benchmark. They note that most of their institutional research and clinical lab clients include climate commitments in their overall and long-term strategic planning, and additionally they see both corporate and institutional clients responding to new state and local energy codes—"an important design factor in achieving carbon-neutral goals and benchmarks.”
As far as action items go, Archard and Zelter recommend some effective, attainable strategies in lab design to reduce carbon emissions. “While traditional sustainability strategies focus on reducing energy consumption, timely strategies for electrification of lab and research facilities will go a long way toward meeting carbon reduction goals. Components such as heat recovery chillers and geothermal wells will reduce reliance on traditional fossil-fueled energy sources, offer more flexibility to create net-zero-ready facilities, and reduce energy loads to help with long-term cost efficiency,” they say.
New Education and Research Building (NERB) at the University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School in Worcester, MA. IMAGE: ARC/Architectural Resources Cambridge
As an example, Archard and Zelter cite the 354,000 sf University of Massachusetts Education and Research Building in Worcester, MA. “Over the course of a year, the geothermal system will provide 88 percent of the building’s heat and 50 percent of its cooling, while greenhouse gas emissions will be reduced by 55 percent when compared to relying on the campus power plant for HVAC needs,” they add. “This initiative is projected to reduce the 9-story building’s carbon footprint by 1.660 tons annually.”
Lab designers and planners are often asked whether new buildings are more sustainable choices than renovated facilities. There are advantages to both, Archard and Zelter say.
“The advantage of new construction is found in our ability to consider a wider range of design strategies to reduce emissions. For example, we can research and design much more energy-efficient building envelopes and help the client make carbon reduction decisions on glass as well as the building's steel, concrete, and structural elements. There are also increasing options and opportunities with existing buildings, including our ability to harness the power of data and evidence-based decision-making to reduce emissions. Existing buildings, including lab and research spaces, will eventually need to be retooled to meet the evolving community and code emissions standards and respond to lifecycle obsolescence.”
Like the My Green Lab report, Archard and Zelter acknowledge that, while there is still a lot left to be done, some progress has been made in certain areas. “A benchmark analysis of labs built in the greater Boston area shows that the EUI (energy use intensity) of many lab buildings under construction today are half of those constructed 10 years ago,” they say. “In lab environments, we see that our clients take a purpose-driven approach to reducing their energy use and improving their carbon emission strategy. Carbon reduction measures are becoming important for their communities, employees, and investors.”
MaryBeth DiDonna is managing editor of Lab Design News. She can be reached at mdidonna@labdesignconference.com.
