Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Jump to first page
1
Development and Implementation of a Development and Implementation of a Cleaner Technology Model in SchoolsCleaner Technology Model in SchoolsDevelopment and Implementation of a Development and Implementation of a Cleaner Technology Model in SchoolsCleaner Technology Model in Schools
December 9, 2002
Chaiyod Bunyagidj, Ph.DThailand Environment Institute (TEI)
WWW.tei.or.th
Jump to first page
2
OBJECTIVEOBJECTIVEOBJECTIVEOBJECTIVE
To implement Cleaner Technology (CT)
in schools.
Jump to first page
3
SITESITE
28 higher secondary schools; small, medium and large size.
Time FrameTime Frame
Sep. 2001 to Nov. 2002
SCOPESCOPESCOPESCOPE
Jump to first page
4
4 schools in Songkla
4 schools in Songkla
4 schools in 4 schools in Chon BuriChon Buri4 schools in 4 schools in Chon BuriChon Buri
4 schools in 4 schools in Chiang MaiChiang Mai4 schools in 4 schools in Chiang MaiChiang Mai
4 schools in4 schools inKhon KaenKhon Kaen4 schools in4 schools inKhon KaenKhon Kaen
12 schools in 12 schools in Central areaCentral area12 schools in 12 schools in Central areaCentral area
Jump to first page
5
METHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGYMETHODOLOGY
BenchmarkingBenchmarking BenchmarkingBenchmarking
CT PlanningCT Planning
Preliminary AuditingPreliminary Auditing
Detail AuditingDetail Auditing
Implementing CT OptionsImplementing CT Options
Post AuditingPost Auditing
Long Term Strategy Development
Long Term Strategy Development
6 steps of CT model for school was modified from
the UNEP model
6 steps of CT model for school was modified from
the UNEP model
Jump to first page
6
• School Management : cafeteria, shop, rest room, building, school area • Teaching and learning :
experiment in lab, training in plant, project method
• Extra Curricula : sports and game, youth camp/clubs, scout, field trip
• Community Participation : school committee meeting, traditional ceremony, alumni day, etc.
Major Activities in SchoolMajor Activities in SchoolMajor Activities in SchoolMajor Activities in School
Jump to first page
7
RESULTSRESULTSRESULTSRESULTS
• Audit FindingsAudit Findings
• Improvement ProgramsImprovement Programs
• Implementation ResultsImplementation Results
• Audit FindingsAudit Findings
• Improvement ProgramsImprovement Programs
• Implementation ResultsImplementation Results
Jump to first page
8
1 %
23 %
42 %7 %4 %
23 %
Electricity Chemicals Paper
Auxiliary Material LPG Diesel Oil
Benzene Oil
Cost of resource allocation using in schoolCost of resource allocation using in school
Jump to first page
9
• Electricity consumption is the most important environmental aspect in all participating schools.
• Other aspects : solid waste management, water consumption and use of other resources i.e. paper and chemicals.
Audit FindingsAudit Findings Audit FindingsAudit Findings
Jump to first page
10
• Poor practices in electricity and other resources by school staffs and students. • Lack of technical staff to maintain utility equipment.
Audit Findings Audit Findings (cont.)
Jump to first page
11
Jump to first page
12
Jump to first page
13
Jump to first page
14
Jump to first page
15
Jump to first page
16
• Encouraging the participation of all school personnel• Collectives best practices• Data collection and evaluation
• Encouraging the participation of all school personnel• Collectives best practices• Data collection and evaluation
Improvement Programs (IP)Improvement Programs (IP) Improvement Programs (IP)Improvement Programs (IP)
The action plan was formulated
covering three areas :
The action plan was formulated
covering three areas :
Jump to first page
17
Warning Board
Don’t do …
Jump to first page
18
Jump to first page
19
Change
Take off some part
Jump to first page
20
28
11 1013
0
5
10
15
20
25
Electricity Water Paper Solid waste
Num
ber
of sc
hool
sDistribution of IP from 28 schools Distribution of IP from 28 schools
Jump to first page
21
More Efficient Resources Utilization
• Electricity consumption
• Water consumption
• Solid waste generation
• Electricity consumption
• Water consumption
• Solid waste generation
Implementation resultsImplementation results
Jump to first page
22
Comparison of electricity consumption Comparison of electricity consumption
before and after CT implementation for 28 schoolsbefore and after CT implementation for 28 schools
Comparison of electricity consumption Comparison of electricity consumption
before and after CT implementation for 28 schoolsbefore and after CT implementation for 28 schools
556,015
516,627
490,000
500,000
510,000
520,000
530,000
540,000
550,000
560,000
Before After
KW
-Hr/
mon
th 7.08 % Reduction
Jump to first page
23
Benefits from CT Implementation Benefits from CT Implementation Benefits from CT Implementation Benefits from CT Implementation
Save about :US$ 2,345 /month/ 28
schools
Save about :US$ 2,345 /month/ 28
schools
Environmental benefits :Reduced gas emission per month
CO2 29.54 ton, SO2 0.50 ton, NOx 0.95 ton
Environmental benefits :Reduced gas emission per month
CO2 29.54 ton, SO2 0.50 ton, NOx 0.95 ton
Reduced electricity consumption
39,388 KW-Hr/month/28
schools
Reduced electricity consumption
39,388 KW-Hr/month/28
schools
Jump to first page
24
14.2612.59
13.7
11.0812.09
11.12
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
KW
-Hr/
pers
on/m
onth
small medium large
Before
After
19.12 % Reduction19.12 % Reduction11.71% Reduction11.71% Reduction
8.02%Reduction8.02%Reduction
Comparison of electricity consumption indicator (Comparison of electricity consumption indicator (per person) ; Sizeper person) ; SizeComparison of electricity consumption indicator (Comparison of electricity consumption indicator (per person) ; Sizeper person) ; Size
(1 - 499) (500 - 1,499 ) (more than 1,500 )students
Jump to first page
25
Comparison of electricity consumption indicatorComparison of electricity consumption indicator
((per person) ; Locationper person) ; Location
Comparison of electricity consumption indicatorComparison of electricity consumption indicator
((per person) ; Locationper person) ; Location
14.3713.25
12.23
10.03
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
KW
-Hr/
pers
on/m
onth
Urban Rural
Before
After
17.99% Reduction17.99% Reduction7.79% Reduction7.79% Reduction
Jump to first page
26* Data obtained from 9 schools that had action plans for water conservation
426.12351.48
-
100.00
200.00
300.00
400.00
500.00
Lit
er/p
erso
n/da
y
Before After
17.51% Reduction17.51% Reduction
Comparison of average water consumptionComparison of average water consumptionComparison of average water consumptionComparison of average water consumption
Jump to first page
27
0.17
0.09
-
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Kg
./per
son
/day
Before After
Comparison of average solid waste generationComparison of average solid waste generationComparison of average solid waste generationComparison of average solid waste generation
* Data obtained from 13 schools that had action plans for solid waste management
Jump to first page
28
Organization Changes Organization Changes
• School administrators recognized that CT was a good management tool for cost and it did not disturb teaching process.
• School staffs learned that data collection and evaluation is crucial for improvement program.
• School staff as well as students aware and value of natural resources
• Several schools revised the working instruction to improve environmental performance
• School administrators recognized that CT was a good management tool for cost and it did not disturb teaching process.
• School staffs learned that data collection and evaluation is crucial for improvement program.
• School staff as well as students aware and value of natural resources
• Several schools revised the working instruction to improve environmental performance
Implementation resultsImplementation results
Jump to first page
29
DISCUSSIONDISCUSSIONDISCUSSIONDISCUSSION
Critical Success FactorsCritical Success Factors
- Management commitment
- Awareness, Correct knowledge and proper skills
- Participatory Approach
- Involvement of external parties
Critical Success FactorsCritical Success Factors
- Management commitment
- Awareness, Correct knowledge and proper skills
- Participatory Approach
- Involvement of external parties
Jump to first page
30
Conceptual framework for Conceptual framework for promoting CT in public schoolspromoting CT in public schools
- CT & EMS Integrated Schemes
- Self Implementation Approach
- Benchmarking Data Base
- Partners for Technical Support
Conceptual framework for Conceptual framework for promoting CT in public schoolspromoting CT in public schools
- CT & EMS Integrated Schemes
- Self Implementation Approach
- Benchmarking Data Base
- Partners for Technical Support
RECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATIONRECOMMENDATION
Jump to first page
31
Thailand Environment Institute (TEI)210 Sukhumvit 64, Bangchak Refinery Building 4,
Prakanong, Bangkok 10260, ThailandTel.(662)742-9641-50 Ext.797
Fax.(662) 742-9697-8
www.tei.or.thE-mail:[email protected]
Chaiyod Bunyagidj, Ph.DVice President
Jump to first page
32
The EndThe End
