Supporting Information - Our Environmental Performance
Air travel data - domestic & international (1995/96 to 2003/04) |
  |
Domestic Air Travel
Year |
Kilometres |
Kilometres
per FTE |
Kilometres per FTE versus 1995/96 |
1995/96 |
1277 |
3.7 |
100% |
1996/97 |
1547 |
4.2 |
114% |
1997/98 |
1477 |
4.1 |
112% |
1998/99 |
1547 |
4.7 |
127% |
1999/00 |
1588 |
4.7 |
127% |
2000/01 |
1397 |
3.9* |
105% |
2001/02 |
1765 |
4.4* |
119% |
2002/03 |
1657 |
4.0* |
109% |
2003/04 |
1963 |
5.1 |
138% |
*these figures are based on the amount of travel per FTE worked out monthly and cumulated, previous years figures based on total travel divided by the number of FTE’s at the end of the financial year
International Air Travel |
|
Year |
Kilometres |
Kilometres
per FTE |
Kilometres per FTE versus 1995/96 |
1995/96 |
3400 |
9.8 |
100% |
1996/97 |
3400 |
9.2 |
94% |
1997/98 |
3380 |
9.4 |
96% |
1998/99 |
3430 |
10.4 |
105% |
1999/00 |
3450 |
10.1 |
103% |
2000/01 |
3280 |
9.3* |
95% |
2001/02 |
4442 |
11.2* |
114% |
2002/03 |
4204 |
10.2* |
104% |
2003/04 |
3774 |
9.8 |
100% |
Note: Accurate figures were not available for 1996 /97 and 1997/98, and are estimates based on total amount spent.
*these figures are based on the amount of travel per FTE worked out monthly and cumulated, previous years figures based on total travel divided by the number of FTE’s at the end of the financial year, this causes a change in the FTE km’s for the 2000/01 year.
Electricity Use (1995/96 – 2003/04) |
|
Year |
FTEs |
kWh |
kWh
per FTE |
kWh per FTE versus 1995/96 |
1995/96 |
346 |
3171 |
9.2 |
100% |
1996/97 |
369 |
2510 |
6.8 |
74% |
1997/98 |
358 |
2380 |
6.6 |
73% |
1998/99 |
331 |
2350 |
7.1 |
77% |
1999/00 |
340 |
2350 |
6.9 |
75% |
2000/01 |
369 |
2250 |
6.1 |
67% |
2001/02 |
4011 |
2362 |
5.9 |
64% |
2002/03 |
4131 |
2316 |
5.6 |
61% |
2003/04 |
3891 |
2386 |
6.2 |
67% |
1 Figure based on average number of FTE's throughout the year, previous years figures are based on number of FTE’s at the end of the financial year.
Motor Vehicle Travel (1995/96 – 2003/04) |
|
Year |
Kilometres |
Kilometres
per FTE |
Kilometres per FTE versus 1996 |
1995/96 |
1320 |
3.8 |
100% |
1996/97 |
1420 |
3.8 |
101% |
1997/98 |
1220 |
3.4 |
89% |
1998/99 |
1100 |
3.3 |
87% |
1999/001 |
1020 |
3.0 |
79% |
2000/01 |
1040 |
2.8 |
74% |
2001/02 |
992 |
2.5 |
65% |
2002/03 |
968 |
2.4 |
62% |
2003/04 |
890 |
2.3 |
60% |
1 this figure includes an estimate for employee claims and corporate travel
Paper Use and Recycling, 1996/97 to 2003/04 |
|
Year |
Total
paper usage |
Usage
per FTE |
Total paper recycling |
|
tonnes 1 |
(% of usage) |
|||
1996/97 |
13.9 |
38 |
1.8 |
(13%) |
1997/98 |
13.2 |
37 |
3.9 |
(30%) |
1998/99 |
10.6 |
32 |
6.0 |
(57%) |
1999/00 |
12.1 |
36 |
7.0 |
(58%) |
2000/01 |
11.6 |
31 |
12.4 |
(107%) |
2001/02 |
13.7 |
342 |
15.1 |
(110%) |
2002/03 |
13.5 |
332 |
20.1 |
(150%) |
2003/04 |
12.0 |
312 |
26.5 |
(220%) |
1 Recycling includes other paper such as magazines and fliers
2 Includes printed stationery, previous years are copy paper only
Sustainability Groups |
|
We have sustainability groups at 3 of our larger sites. These groups meet regularly to discuss issues of sustainability, with a specific focus on improving site sustainability. Our staffroom website has a Sustainability Page, which gives information on our performance against sustainability targets (presented graphically), being more energy efficient, reducing rubbish, being more sustainable at home, and links to bus timetables. In addition each Sustainability Group has its own web page on which minutes of meetings and newsletters can be posted.
Over the last year activities of the group include a skip audit in Hamilton, working on a zero waste strategy (with Good Earth Matters) in Palmerston North, and a travel survey of all sites in Lincoln.
The groups are entirely voluntary, and members are encouraged to include sustainability group activities when setting objectives and targets for the year with their team leaders.
Environmental Management System (EMS) |
|
The following are systems that we have in place to ensure sound Environmental Management:
Environmental effects
The Effects Register is a list of significant actual and potential environmental effects of our operations. It is updated annually, taking into account the potential impact of our activities, the regulatory requirements, and concerns raised by external parties. A simple environmental risk rating scale of low-medium-high is used to express the likelihood of an undesirable event occurring and the likely impact on the environment.
Project management
We use an Environmental Planning Form to ensure that environmental effects arising out of research activities are anticipated and appropriate actions are planned. The form is a checklist for compliance with legislation, application for resource and other consents, assessment of significant environmental effects, health and safety, and training needs. Included on the form are links to Standard Operating Procedures that have been drawn up by our Research Office. These Standard Operating Procedures cover many areas of our business, including compliance, and have been written to ensure consistency across the company.
Objectives & targets
We have detailed performance objectives, quantified where practicable, as targets. The objectives and targets are set at company wide and at regional levels and are collated in our operating plan. Some examples are reducing waste to landfill, reducing our carbon emissions and supporting the site-based sustainability groups.
Incident/ Complaint Reporting and Environmental Improvements
We have a system for reporting incidents and complaints, and for notifying areas in which we can make environmental improvements. This system is designed to feed back to, and improve, our environmental performance.Over the last year we had 4 incidents/ complaints forms filled in, one of which was non-compliances identified during our internal audit procedures, one involved an overseas organisation sending material which breached an import permit, one involved a small ethanol spill and the fourth involved power interruption to a freezer containing samples. We are unaware of any environmental damage resulting from these incidents.
Auditing & review, ISO 14001
Internal site and project audits are carried out six-monthly by the Environmental Coordinator to ensure that we comply with relevant legislation and meet our EMS requirements. A corporate functions audit is carried out annually by a Site Administrator to ensure that at corporate level the EMS is being adhered to. Findings from these audits are used to improve the way we do things, and in setting objectives and targets for future periods. The Environmental Policy is reviewed annually. Additionally, we review the EMS once every two years, assessing its overall effectiveness in delivering environmental objectives and targets and in advancing our protection and enhancement of the environment. These internal procedures complement our external ISO14001 Audits in ensuring that we meet the requirements of our EMS.
ACCOUNTABILITIES
Management
The EMS Management Representative is accountable to the CEO for the company’s environmental performance, reviewing the environmental policy once a year, and verifying that the company’s approach to matters such as application of resource consents and treatment of complaints by external parties is properly conducted. Matters relating to the Environmental Policy are discussed and approved at Senior Management level. In addition the Regional Managers, through their site administrators and research programme leaders, are responsible for implementing the EMS at the sites.
Staff
The Environmental Coordinator is responsible for the day to day running and maintenance of the EMS, including auditing functions as outlined above.
Everyone in Manaaki Whenua is responsible for ensuring that their work (in the field, laboratory or office) does not adversely affect the environment. Specifically Job, Team and Programme Leaders have responsibilities related to the Environmental Planning Process. Site Administrators also have specific responsibilities relating to the running of their sites.
COMPLIANCE & LIABILITIES
Compliance with environmental legislation
Six-monthly reporting to the Board of Directors, on compliance with statutory requirements has been in place since 1994. Compliance with the Resource Management Act and other environmental legislation is included. Our in-house legal advisor keeps track of developments and assists in ensuring compliance.
Environmental liabilities
We are not aware of any current or contingent environmental liabilities.
Progress to Targets |
|
Target 2004 : Complete quantification of chemical use
Achieved. We have a comprehensive list of all chemicals purchased. In addition, using the list of substances requiring tracking by the Environmental Risk Management Authority (ERMA) we have identified the “worst” chemicals that we use.
Target 2005: Reduce energy use by 15% (compared with 2000/01)
With our current progress it seems unlikely that we will achieve our 15% savings target. We may need to review our contract with the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA).
Calculating our CO2 Emissions |
|
Energy use and travel data is entered into the EBEX21® footprint
calculator. Emissions factors are used to convert the data into CO2 equivalents.
Factors for travel and fuel are based on widely used emissions data.
The electricity factor is calculated by EBEX21®,
and is based on the actual mix of electricity generation for a particular
year. Due to a time lag in availability of the generation information,
we often do not have the current year’s factor, so we use the factor for
the previous year to calculate electricity emissions. When the current
factor becomes available we recalculate our emissions for the year. This
year, the 2003/04 figure was available so has been used in all our calculations.
The EBEX21® Calculator converts
data into CO2 equivalents, and then
generates a report showing how much native forest would be required to
offset these emissions. Our estimates of carbon sequestration for a given
site are based on years of research by Landcare Research scientists.
See Hall GMJ, 2001: Mitigating an organization’s future net carbon
emissions by native forest restoration. Ecological Applications 11:
1622–1633 or land-use
change effects poster 
available
in the Greenhouse Gases section of our web site.
The number of tonnes of CO2 sequestered per hectare was revised downwards in 2003/04 in accordance with the latest scientific data that shows no net increase in soil carbon when the land use is changed from pasture to regenerated native forest. A figure of 3 tonnes CO2/ha/yr is based on an average annual sequestration rate assuming that the forest achieves an above-ground CO2 accumulation of 300 tonnes per hectare in 300 years (Hall 2001).
For more information see the EBEX21® website: www.ebex21.co.nz