Project evaluation and ranking is one of the most important parts of a mitigation plan. This section discusses techniques and methods for undertaking these tasks.
Typically, GHG emissions reduction projects are compared – and can be listed in a chart in your plan – on this basis:
- Initial project cost
- Dollar savings (if any)
- Payback, return on investment (ROI), net present value (NPV), or internal rate of return (IRR)
- Carbon reduction
- $/MTCO2e (emissions reduction efficiency)
There are, however, many other considerations which weigh in project selection decision-making. These include:
- Project life cycle costs/benefits including consideration of maintenance costs/savings; impacts on safety, health, comfort, or productivity; capital improvement, etc.
- Availability of funding from various sources including campus budgets, borrowing, incentives from government and utilities, and grants from foundations
- Relationship to other possible energy saving or GHG emissions mitigation measures and opportunities for synergy
- Interaction with state or regional GHG mitigation initiatives (e.g. the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative which affects fossil fuel power generators of 25 MW or greater in 10 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states)
- Potential to scale upward
- Transferability to other projects, schools, or the wider community
- Project lifespan
- Academic and research impacts
- Public relations value
- Organizational capacity to undertake and manage the project
- Alignment with campus capital development plan, strategic, and other plans
- Stakeholder support and enthusiasm
Some of the above decision-making criteria don’t lend themselves to quantified data. But comparative information could be captured in a comprehensive matrix that could rank projects on the relevant criteria. Conceivably, most or all of the above decision-making factors could be considered in a comprehensive lifecycle analysis of prospective carbon mitigation projects and measures.
