Applying a Zero Carbon Footprint Strategy to Improve Environmental and Energy Security

1.1 State of the art of the problem

The problem of ensuring the country’s energy and environmental security is a basic one. Humanity is trying to reduce the consumption of energy resources that are harmful to the environment. In addition, it is impossible to talk about a developed society without addressing the issue of improving the energy efficiency of buildings. The sooner the transition from energy sources that are inefficient in terms of generation and environmental impact takes place, the sooner the social situation will improve. These problems are common. The common problems are shared by established global practices that include certification of construction [1], decarbonisation of the economy [2, 3], diversification of activities in regions where minerals were extracted [4, 5], risk assessment and development of post-mining strategies for Eastern European countries [6, 7], and use of environmentally friendly materials [8, 9, 10]. However, there are specific problems that, in light of recent global events, are becoming urgent for many countries. These problems include military operations and the destruction of industrial energy generation capabilities. If at the beginning of the twenty-first century, the problems of military operations were local and covered the Third World, since 2014, and especially since 2022, these problems have become relevant for the countries of Europe and the Middle East. Given the geopolitical instability, it can be argued that the relevance of the study will remain. Our study has two dimensions. The first dimension covers the problem of ensuring the country’s energy stability, which requires reducing energy consumption by improving the energy efficiency of buildings. The second dimension covers the tasks associated with reducing the carbon footprint, thereby improving environmental safety.

Ukraine was chosen as the object of study. This is due to a number of factors:

1. First, active military operations are taking place on the territory of the country, which is destroying the energy infrastructure; in our opinion, the trend of increasing the share of “green” and “clean” energy sources will continue; in addition, there will be a transition from powerful thermal power plants, nuclear power plants to smaller, local, within a separate settlement, industrial facility [11, 12];

2. Second, based on previous studies [13, 14, 15], it has been established that it is currently possible to replace materials with more environmentally preferable ones that have a smaller carbon footprint; work [16] notes that both the conditions of Slovakia and Ukraine, the methodology for assessing the carbon footprint can be applied at the construction stage, and the available software [17, 18] will allow the development of safe building projects.

Our results can be scaled up and applied in the European Union. It is worth noting that not only in Ukraine are buildings inadequate in terms of humidity and air quality—a similar situation exists in other countries, including Portugal [13].

Since Ukraine entered the world arena as an independent state, the prevailing challenge for its economic system has been the urgent task of overcoming the high degree of energy dependence, which undoubtedly affects the overall economic and energy sustainability of the country. According to the Energy Strategy of Ukraine until 2035 entitled “Security, Energy Efficiency, Competitiveness” and the Zero Carbon Footprint strategy, the international level is witnessing a transformation of approaches to the formation of energy and construction policies. This transformation involves a shift from the outdated model of the energy sector and construction industry to a new approach that includes creating a competitive environment, an even distribution of opportunities for the development of different areas, and minimising the dominance of any single energy production or fuel source. This new approach places great emphasis on improving energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources, as well as on measures to counteract and adapt to climate change. These global energy development priorities are forcing Ukraine to face new challenges, while opening up new opportunities for finding and implementing innovative solutions in the field of energy production, transformation, supply, and consumption. This, in turn, necessitates the formation of a new energy policy adapted to modern realities.

Given the difficult geopolitical situation in recent years, in particular Russia’s aggression against Ukraine since 2014 and the invasion in 2022, as well as damage to critical infrastructure, there is an urgent need for a comprehensive analysis and research of issues related not only to energy security but also to achieving Ukraine’s energy independence, ensuring its energy sovereignty and sustainable development, as well as ensuring guaranteed human and civil rights and freedoms in the face of the above challenges. In the current context of the urgency of achieving a zero carbon footprint, the construction sector is a key player with a negative impact on the environment at all stages of its life cycle. Recent scientific studies indicate that the construction industry plays an important role in energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions worldwide [14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21]. This requires special attention and highlights the relevance of research on decarbonisation processes in this sector [22, 23, 24].

In 2021, the Government of Ukraine began to fulfil its obligations under the Memorandum of Understanding on the Settlement of Problematic Issues in the Renewable Energy Sector of Ukraine, concluded in June 2020 following mediation at the Energy Community Dispute Resolution Centre between the Government of Ukraine and the National Energy and Utilities Regulatory Commission (NEURC), on the one hand, and the Ukrainian Wind Energy Association and the European-Ukrainian Energy Agency, on the other. The gradual repayment of debts to renewable energy producers that had accumulated in previous years has begun. At the same time, the NGO Antitrust League [25] attempted to recognise the feed-in tariff as illegal state support or as having been adopted in an unconstitutional manner [26].

The President of Ukraine joined the Global Wind Energy Manifesto at COP26 and committed to completely eliminate domestic coal consumption by 2035 [27] and to begin the gradual decommissioning of thermal generation starting in 2022, while the Government of Ukraine continued to focus all efforts on maintaining the outdated nuclear energy infrastructure and adopted the State Programme for the Development of the Nuclear Power Industry until 2026 [28]. This resulted in the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine supporting and the President of Ukraine signing the Law of Ukraine “On Amendments to Certain Laws of Ukraine on the Development of Energy Storage Systems,” which made it possible to make generation from renewable energy sources more stable through the construction of energy storage systems [29]. At the same time, renewable energy producers were forced to resist the initiative of some MPs to introduce an excise tax on electricity from renewable sources [30].

The large-scale war launched by Russia on the territory of Ukraine in February 2022 left the renewable energy sector in a state of anticipation and uncertainty. This situation was exacerbated not only by active hostilities, damage and occupation of energy facilities but also by the artificial creation of additional problems and challenges in the market by certain government agencies.

1.2 Analysis of the Ukrainian renewable energy sector on the eve of active hostilities

In 2019, Ukraine was recognised as one of the top 10 countries globally for renewable energy development, and in 2020, it ranked among the top five European nations in solar energy advancement. Furthermore, according to the 2019 Climate Scope rating by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (Bloomberg NEF), Ukraine improved its position to 8th place (up from 63rd) out of 104 countries regarding investment attractiveness for the development of low-carbon energy sources and the construction of a green economy. In 2021, Ukraine was ranked 48th in overall investment potential among 136 countries in the Bloomberg NEF ranking [31].

Beginning in 2019, investments in new renewable energy projects in Ukraine consistently surpassed those in fossil fuel projects. Over the past decade, international and Ukrainian investors in renewable energy have secured over USD 12 billion in foreign direct investment. By the end of 2021, foreign investors accounted for over 35% of the installed capacity in Ukraine’s renewable energy sector, highlighting the sector’s competitiveness and openness. Major international lenders and investors in Ukraine’s renewable energy sector include the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the Black Sea Trade and Development Bank, the American International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), the Federal Bank of Bavaria Bayern LB, the Investment Fund for Developing Countries (IFU), the Nordic Environment Finance Corporation (NEFCO), among others. As reported by the National Energy and Utilities Regulatory Commission (NEURC), by 31 December 2021, the installed capacity of the renewable energy sector in Ukraine reached 9655.9 MW, or 8450.8 MW excluding solar installations for private households (SPH) [32].

In 2021, only relatively active development was observed in the segment of home solar power plants (SPPs). During this period, their capacity increased by 426.1 MW, which is 36.4% of the total increase in renewable energy capacity commissioned in 2021. Thus, the total capacity of all residential solar systems reached 1205.1 MW by the end of 2021. In contrast, industrial solar power showed less impressive results. In 2021, the capacity of industrial solar generating plants increased by only 305.5 MW (26.1% of the total increase in renewable energy capacity commissioned in 2021). This is 3.6 times less than in 2020, when 1123.6 MW of new capacity was commissioned. Thus, the total capacity of the industrial solar energy sector as of the end of 2021 was 7586.3 MW (including home solar power plants) [33].

The wind energy sector remains the second largest renewable energy sector in Ukraine, after solar energy, in terms of total installed capacity. It should be noted that Ukraine’s wind energy sector has made the largest contribution to the country’s green energy development. Wind power plants accounted for 30.6% or 358.8 MW of the new renewable energy capacity commissioned in 2021. This is 2.5 times more than in 2020, when 144.2 MW of new wind power capacity was commissioned. Thus, the total installed capacity of the wind energy sector as of the end of 2021 was 1672.9 MW. Prior to the outbreak of the large-scale war, Ukraine had 34 wind farms or 699 wind turbines with an average capacity of 3.5 MW.

In 2021, renewable energy sources (RES) contributed 8.1%, equivalent to 12.8 TWh, of the total electricity production. Of this amount, 56% was generated from solar energy, 33% from wind power, nearly 8% from biomass and biogas, and 3% from small hydropower systems.

Overall, RES facilities generated 12,804 million kWh of clean electricity in 2021, marking an increase of 1941.9 million kWh or 17.8% compared to 2020 [34]. Specifically:

• Wind power plants produced 3866 million kWh, representing an increase of 614.4 million kWh over 2020, and accounted for 2.97% of total electricity generation.

• Solar power plants generated 7670 million kWh, a 4.8% increase from the previous year, with an additional 1065.4 million kWh.

• Small hydropower plants increased their output by 56.1 million kWh, reaching 276 million kWh, which constitutes 0.17% of the overall electricity balance.

• Biopower plants produced 992 million kWh, an increase of 206 million kWh compared to the previous year.

It is notable that 2021 was a significant year for the national RES sector, as on 11 May 2021, daily electricity generation from RES surpassed that of thermal power plants for the first time, with 79 million kWh produced by RES compared to 77 million kWh from thermal sources [35].

1.3 Study of the problem of energy poverty in Ukraine in the context of the threat to the sustainability and stability of Europe

Ukraine has suffered severe human and material losses due to the war, which has resulted in the destruction of civilian, industrial and military infrastructure. According to official figures, almost 1 million residential buildings, tens of thousands of non-residential buildings, and thousands of kilometres of roads, railways and bridges were destroyed or damaged. The construction industry suffered heavy losses and partially lost its raw material base and production. Ukraine was one of the top 10 countries in Europe in terms of installed power generation capacity and is the third largest gas producer, with the largest underground gas storage facilities in Europe. Extensive and reliable gas, oil and petroleum products transportation and electricity transmission systems connect Ukraine’s neighbouring EU countries and Moldova.

In Ukraine, about 70% of electricity is produced by nuclear, hydro and renewable generation [36].

Russia’s war against Ukraine has led to a global energy crisis, as well as to complex and unpredictable impacts on climate issues at the international level. One of the international consequences of this war was a conscious understanding of the need to develop energy independence for Ukraine and the EU. Ukraine, due to its large territory compared to other European countries, has significant potential for wind, solar and biomass energy production, and Ukraine’s connection to ENTSO-E opens up opportunities for exporting electricity from renewable sources, which will generate revenue and help reduce carbon emissions in the European Union.

Russia’s war against Ukraine has caused major changes in the global energy system. This situation has caused significant difficulties, such as high energy prices, and has led to policy changes in the European continent, with a focus on combating energy poverty. In the face of global challenges such as climate change, these countries are aiming to achieve a just energy transition and ensure that every citizen has access to basic energy services. These goals include minimising the level of energy poverty by 2030 [37].

Energy poverty is defined as the lack of access to modern energy services [38]. It is important to note that energy poverty should not be evaluated based on a country’s raw material potential or the availability of energy resources. Rather, it is fundamentally linked to the level of access to contemporary energy services. In essence, a modern and developed society should aim to utilise safe and efficient energy supply systems. The concept of “energy poverty” first emerged in the early 1990s [39]. Initially, it primarily referred to the insufficient capacity for heating and cooling within homes. However, perspectives on this issue have evolved over time. Currently, energy poverty is recognised as a complex systemic inequality, characterised by barriers to accessing affordable and modern energy services. This issue is challenging to quantify due to its dynamic nature, which varies over time and across different regions. Moreover, energy poverty now encompasses social and cultural dimensions, as it directly impacts the quality of life by affecting the fulfilment of basic human needs.

Addressing energy poverty is crucial for enhancing the quality of life and is a cornerstone for economic development. Ensuring access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all is one of the key goals of sustainable development [40]. This issue is being addressed not only by national governments but also by supranational institutions and organisations [41, 42, 43].

In 2022, the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) presented an opinion on tackling energy poverty and ensuring the sustainability of the European Union from a socio-economic perspective [44]. In this document, the EESC calls on EU countries to support a common approach to combating energy poverty, considering this phenomenon as a result of geopolitical, economic, environmental and social factors. The EESC also recommends the development of an EU strategy to ensure consumers’ right to energy and set targets for overcoming energy poverty in the long term.

One of the tools for implementing the European Union’s New Industrial Strategy is the introduction of a number of so-called “green alliances,” which include the European Raw Materials Alliance, the European Battery Alliance, the Clean Hydrogen Alliance and the Circular Economy Alliance. The main goal of these green alliances is to create an innovative, competitive and sustainable value chain in a specific area. In other words, these alliances are aimed at developing a specific sector of the economy—from research and raw material needs to production and consumption.

These alliances create the conditions for the implementation and financing of large projects that can have additional positive effects for both businesses and governments, as they use the knowledge of small and medium-sized enterprises, large companies, research institutions, and regional organisations to overcome barriers to innovation and ensure the integrity of public policy. In this process, Ukraine should actively participate and be a key player to create the necessary conditions for the development of a single energy-independent European space [45].

2.1 Analyse the legislative framework and institutional foundations for the application of life cycle assessment (LCA) in Ukraine and the EU

The initial step involved a comprehensive review of the existing legislative and institutional frameworks governing the application of LCA methodologies in Ukraine and the EU. This analysis included examining relevant laws, regulations, and policies that impact the implementation of LCA in construction projects. The goal was to identify any legal or institutional barriers and to understand the regulatory environment that influences the adoption of energy efficiency measures and sustainable practices in building modernisation.

2.2 Investigate the construction object for opportunities to improve its energy efficiency and increase compliance with modern environmental standards

Detailed inspections and evaluations were conducted on the selected construction object to identify areas where energy efficiency improvements could be made. This involved assessing the current state of the building’s energy systems, materials, and overall design. The investigation focused on pinpointing specific components or practices that could be upgraded to meet modern environmental standards, thereby reducing energy consumption and environmental impact.

2.3 Make a calculation for a real object using modelled energy costs, by individual parameters, using the One-Click Life Cycle Assessment software application

Utilising the One-Click LCA software, energy cost calculations were performed for the real object under study. This step involved creating detailed models that simulate the building’s energy performance under various scenarios. The software allowed for the input of specific parameters, such as building materials, energy sources, and operational practices, to accurately estimate the potential energy savings and CO₂ emissions reductions that could be achieved through proposed energy efficiency measures.

2.4 Draw conclusions and propose further possible steps to improve the energy efficiency of the studied facility by individual parameters

Based on the data obtained from the One-Click LCA simulations, conclusions were drawn regarding the effectiveness of different energy efficiency measures. The analysis provided insights into which specific interventions would yield the most significant improvements in energy performance and environmental impact. The research concluded with a set of actionable recommendations for further enhancing the energy efficiency of the studied facility, tailored to the unique characteristics and needs of the building.

By following this detailed methodology, the study ensured a systematic and thorough approach to evaluating and improving the energy efficiency of the construction object, providing a robust framework for future research and practical applications in sustainable building practices.

3.1 Green certification of Ukraine’s civil and industrial infrastructure based on the zero carbon footprint principle as a way to ensure Ukraine’s energy security in the post-war period

The environmental criteria used in certification and labelling systems are essential standards for assessing the life cycle and environmental benefits of construction projects. Systems such as BREEAM and LEED offer transparent and reliable standards that ensure compliance with the zero carbon footprint principle [1], which is vital for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction efforts.

Environmental certificates issued under ISO 14024 confirm the compliance of products or services with environmental criteria, supporting green procurement [46]. The EU Directive 2014/24 mandates the use of public procurement criteria to increase the market presence of environmentally certified products [47]. However, Ukraine is still developing its legislative requirements for the environmental safety of construction materials [48]. The introduction of comprehensive bylaws and regulations is necessary to ensure the safety of these materials throughout their life cycle.

Ukraine’s implementation of the EU Energy Efficiency Directive and the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive aims to bring the country closer to creating net-zero energy buildings [49]. The Law on Energy Efficiency in Buildings, introduced in 2018, aligns with Directive 2010/31/EU and mandates energy certification for new construction projects, promoting significant utility sector savings [50].

Adopting the ISO 15392 standard, which balances economic, environmental, and social aspects of construction, is crucial for sustainable development [10]. Moreover, the use of LCA software like One-Click Life Cycle Assessment ensures compliance with key standards (ISO 14040, ISO 14044, EN 15978) and provides a quantitative assessment of environmental impacts [51].

In summary, Ukraine’s legal framework is evolving to support energy-efficient and environmentally safe construction [47], but further development and implementation of detailed standards and regulations are essential to meet international benchmarks [20]. The adoption of advanced building certification systems and the identification of legislative shortcomings are crucial steps towards sustainable rebuilding efforts that align with global and European standards [52].

3.2 Features of LEED and BREEAM certification application

The LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) system, introduced in the United States in 1998, and the BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) system, established in the United Kingdom in 1990, are two of the most widely recognised global standards for evaluating the sustainability of buildings [53]. These assessment systems use formal criteria, categorised into several key areas, to evaluate buildings, with the highest level of certification awarded to those demonstrating optimal environmental performance.

LEED emphasises energy and water management, encouraging efficiency improvements and the use of eco-friendly technologies [54]. In contrast, BREEAM focuses on ecological aspects and environmental issues, assessing factors like energy efficiency, water use, material selection, and more. Both systems aim to enhance building sustainability and energy efficiency, boosting their competitiveness in the real estate market and aligning with increasing environmental demands and construction industry goals.

While LEED and BREEAM share common goals, they exhibit significant differences in their approaches and emphases. LEED’s rigorous standards focus on energy and water management, while BREEAM’s assessments delve into broader ecological considerations [54]. LEED-certified buildings undergo scrutiny from certification auditors during development, ensuring compliance from the outset. Conversely, BREEAM employs qualified professionals to conduct comprehensive assessments tailored to each building’s location and characteristics.

Practicality and adaptability also distinguish LEED and BREEAM. BREEAM certification accommodates various building types, including offices, malls, and residential complexes, demonstrating its flexibility across diverse construction sectors [54]. This adaptability reflects the system’s ability to meet varied industry needs and requirements.

In Ukraine, the implementation of energy efficiency measures, including the adoption of international environmental certifications like BREEAM, signals a proactive approach to sustainability [55]. Financial incentives, such as tax exemptions for companies engaged in green construction, further promote energy-efficient initiatives, positioning Ukraine as a burgeoning hub for sustainable building practices.

In summary, while LEED and BREEAM share common sustainability goals, their nuanced differences in approach and implementation cater to diverse building contexts and industry needs, driving advancements in global environmental standards and practices.

4.1 Description of the programme, modernisation objectives, and research object

The Higher Education in Ukraine project is aimed at reconstructing and rehabilitating research, teaching and support facilities owned by various state higher education institutions in Ukraine. The main goal of the project is to improve the energy efficiency of these facilities and provide other types of investment for the development of education that go beyond energy efficiency.

In December 2017, the National Environmental and Energy Agency (NEFCO) signed a EUR 30 million loan agreement with the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine. The agreement provides financing for the Higher Education in Ukraine project. Ukraine, represented by the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Education and Science, is the recipient of the loan. The Ministry of Education and Science (MES) is the main responsible body for coordinating the project implementation. Universities and other public higher education institutions that intend to renovate their educational, research and ancillary facilities to improve energy efficiency and receive other types of investment for the development of education are the final beneficiaries of the project [56].

The National Environmental and Energy Agency (NEFCO) is financing the implementation of energy efficiency measures at Uzhhorod National University. The University receives a loan from the Government of Ukraine through the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine and the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine for two purposes:

1. Improving the energy efficiency of classrooms and dormitories;

2. Conducting research on the presence of hazardous materials in buildings, with a particular focus on asbestos.

The expected key outputs of the project include:

1. Quantification of energy-saving potential as a result of cost-effective energy efficiency measures;

2. An improved policy and institutional framework for managing the reduction and disposal of hazardous materials such as asbestos, lead and/or mercury.

It was planned to carry out major renovation works in the following classrooms to modernise them:

• Dormitory No. 4, 12 Universytetska Street;

• Academic buildings A, B, C, 14 Universytetska Street, A-B;

• Academic building D, 14 D Universytetska Street.

The project involved the modernisation and implementation of energy efficiency measures across three buildings at the University, specifically the educational and laboratory buildings A, B, C, and D (referred to as BAM), as well as student Dormitory No. 4. The total budget for the project was UAH 153,749,396, with Uzhhorod National University contributing UAH 25,624,899 as part of the funding.

The project includes the modernisation of three buildings/structures. As part of the main component of the project, an environmental and social assessment was carried out and an Environmental and Social Management Plan (ESMP) was developed, which includes the identification of measures required to implement modern methods of reducing the volume and disposal of hazardous materials during the energy efficiency works. Attention is focused on the main hazardous materials, such as asbestos-containing materials (ACMs), which can be loosely or firmly bound, lead-based paints (LBPs) and compact fluorescent lamps containing mercury (CFLs).

Due to Russia’s full-scale invasion, the European partners were forced to suspend the project. Three educational institutions in the western region—Uzhhorod National University, Ivan Franko National University of Lviv and Vasyl Stefanyk Precarpathian National University—received partial funding of 20% of the contract amount.

4.2 Results of environmental screening of buildings to be modernised

The information obtained in the course of the environmental screening will allow us to offer recommendations for reducing carbon dioxide emissions and modernising buildings.

As part of this project, monitoring visits were carried out by environmental experts from the State Higher Educational Institution “Uzhhorod National University” and environmental experts from NEFCO (Northern Environmental Financial Corporation). The purpose of these visits was to check the environmental condition of the buildings and assess the basic conditions of waste management in accordance with international standards.

Experts from Uzhhorod National University, acting as the responsible environmental experts for this project, used their scientific and practical knowledge to conduct research and assess the environmental condition of the sites to be monitored. NEFCO’s experts, in turn, contributed to the process by adhering to international standards and requirements in the field of ecology.

All the monitoring visits and environmental assessments carried out provided an objective picture of the project’s environmental impact and allowed us to develop appropriate recommendations for improving environmental performance in accordance with the defined standards.

4.2.1 Environmental screening of asbestos-containing materials (ACM)

Environmental experts conducted a visual inspection of critical areas, such as attics/technical floors, individual heating points, basements and technical rooms.

During the visual inspection, the experts examined the condition of each site in detail, paying attention to various aspects such as the presence of possible sources of contamination, compliance with environmental standards, the degree of wear and tear on equipment and the general appearance. The results of this review have been systematised and presented in Table 1, which provides a detailed analysis of the environmental condition of the critical sites.

Table 1.

Categories of asbestos-containing products identified during monitoring inspections (Source: Authors).

The assessment was carried out by an asbestos specialist through visual inspection of suspected hazardous materials and sampling. Four samples (material samples) were taken to test the materials for asbestos content. All samples were analysed in the laboratory of a NEFCO partner in Vienna.

Product categories have been introduced to enable further assessment and identification of the asbestos-containing material (ACM) removal methods used.

Poorly bonded asbestos, often called “dust asbestos” or asbestos material, differs from other types of asbestos in its structure and asbestos content, which is higher than 25%. This material is composed of soft and loose asbestos fibres or asbestos dust, which can be exposed to the environment.

Because loosely bound asbestos has a high asbestos content, it is the subject of special attention due to its potentially negative impact on human health and the environment. The use and handling of this material requires specific personal protective measures to ensure the safety of workers and others who may come into contact with weakly bound asbestos.

Particular attention should be paid to health and safety requirements and the use of appropriate protective equipment such as respirators and protective clothing. In addition, measures must be taken to prevent the release of asbestos particles into the air and their entry into water or soil, which may occur during the handling or disposal of this material.

Protecting the environment from loosely bound asbestos involves proper disposal and consideration of its potential impact on the ecosystem. This may include appropriate waste disposal and treatment methods to reduce the risks of negative impacts on human health and the environment.

Based on an inspection of the buildings and sites, we identified possible sources of contamination, compliance with environmental standards, the degree of deterioration of equipment and general appearance.

4.3 Calculation of emission reductions СО₂

Table 3 outlines the estimated annual reduction in CO₂ emissions resulting from proposed energy efficiency measures for various buildings. The calculations were performed by CES Clean Energy Solutions and were included in the Environmental Assessment reports submitted in 2019. For Dormitory #4, the implementation of energy efficiency measures is projected to reduce CO₂ emissions by 387.48 tonnes per year. This reduction is significant, reflecting the impact of targeted energy-saving interventions in residential buildings. For educational buildings A, B, and C, these buildings are estimated to achieve a combined annual CO₂ emissions reduction of 493.23 tonnes. This higher reduction rate indicates the substantial potential for energy savings in educational institutions, which often have extensive and continuous energy demands. For educational building D, the estimated annual CO₂ emissions reduction is 320.5 tonnes. This value underscores the effectiveness of the proposed energy efficiency measures tailored to the unique energy consumption patterns of this facility. The total estimated annual CO₂ emissions reduction for all the buildings combined is 1201.21 tonnes. This aggregate figure highlights the cumulative impact of the energy efficiency measures across multiple facilities, contributing significantly to the overall reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. These reductions demonstrate the potential benefits of adopting energy efficiency measures in both residential and educational buildings. By implementing these measures, not only do we reduce environmental impact, but we also achieve cost savings and improve energy security.

The following CO₂ emission factors were used for the calculations, which are presented in Table 4. These factors represent the amount of CO₂ emitted per unit of energy consumed from various sources. The CO₂ emission factor for centralised heating is 0.260 kg CO₂ per kWh. This value reflects the emissions associated with the generation and distribution of heat in centralised systems, which often rely on fossil fuels. The CO₂ emission factor for natural gas is 0.220 kg CO₂ per kWh. Natural gas is commonly used for heating and electricity generation due to its relatively lower emissions compared to coal and oil. The CO₂ emission factor for electricity is 0.800 kg CO₂ per kWh. This higher value indicates the significant emissions associated with electricity generation, particularly in regions where fossil fuels are the primary energy source. Understanding these emission factors is critical for accurately assessing the environmental impact of energy consumption. By using these factors, we can quantify the potential CO₂ savings from energy efficiency measures and prioritise actions that yield the greatest environmental benefits.

A detailed analysis of the estimated CO₂ emission reductions provides important insight into the environmental impact of dismantling and retrofitting. Using data from tables such as the one above, we can develop and implement effective waste management and greenhouse gas reduction strategies. This approach not only helps to meet regulatory requirements but also advances sustainability goals by contributing to broader efforts to combat climate change and improve energy efficiency.