Skip to main content

Table 3 Normalized carbon footprint (CF) performances. The lowest yearly CF each found for constructed area, per capita, and per expenditures (see Fig. 3 a–c) is set to 1.0

From: Carbon footprinting of universities worldwide: Part I—objective comparison by standardized metrics

University A
CF performance [kg CO2e/m2]
normalized to 1.0 for the best performer
B
CF performance [Mt CO2e/capita] normalized to 1.0 for the best performer
C
CF performance [kg CO2e/1000 $] normalized to 1.0 for the best performer
Overall normalized CF performance
(A + B + C)
overall carbon performance rank
ETH Zürich, CH 1.00 1.53 1.00 3.53 1
U Talca, Chile 1.29 1.03 1.82 4.14 2
U Lüneburg, Germany 1.92 1.00 1.63 4.55 3
TU Johor Bahru, Malaysia 1.20 2.59 3.20 6.99 4
U Cork, Ireland 3.03 2.04 2.16 7.23 5
UAM Mexico City 1.37 1.42 4.50 7.29 6
UCB Birkenfeld, Germany 2.36 1.36 3.79 7.51 7
King's College London, GB 4.28 1.74 1.51 7.53 8
U Potsdam, Germany 4.19 1.37 2.30 7.86 9
NTU, Singapore 2.13 4.66 2.48 9.27 10
U Tongji Shanghai, China 2.40 4.67 3.80 10.87 11
DeMU Leicester, GB 4.43 1.44 5.06 10.93 12
UM College Park MD, USA 3.80 5.84 3.92 13.56 13
U Melbourne, Australia 5.50 3.64 4.67 13.81 14
U Mankato MN, USA 6.06 3.97 4.75 14.78 15
KU Leuven, Belgium 3.26 3.97 8.58 15.81 16
U Cape Town, RSA 2.83 3.92 9.55 16.30 17
Yale U New Haven CT, USA 3.71 11.19 2.16 17.06 18
U Brisbane, Australia 6.11 5.10 6.59 17.80 19
U Pittsburgh PA, USA 7.67 6.34 7.43 21.44 20
  1. The CFs reported for all universities (see Fig. 3) are related to the best performer in each category (without offsets). The overall performance is summarized from A-C, also shown in Table 1, and results in an overall performance rank. The best possible score of a university would be a 3.0 (A + B + C). These data are plotted in Appendix: Fig. 7 below. Mt = metric tons
\