Reduction of Ohio State Carbon Emissions Through Solar Panel Installation

by

Nick Brophy, Cameron Lucas, August Slawienski

Team 3
ENGR 2367.01H / Section 9750
The Ohio State University

Prepared for

Ohio State Energy Partners

2001 Millikin Road, Suite 200
Columbus, OH 43210

Abstract: In our contemporary society, there is a significant emphasis on nations, companies, and
institutions applying environmentally friendly policies to mitigate the negative contributions they
have on climate change. To combat its carbon footprint, the Ohio State University has
established a goal of becoming carbon neutral by the year 2050. Yet, a proposed power plant on
its Columbus campus will be fueled by natural gas, an energy source that boasts a high level of
greenhouse gas emissions, along with other harmful environmental effects. For this reason, Ohio
State should invest in other, more sustainable, energy sources concurrently with the construction
of this power plant. Such action would allow for OSU to avoid reliance on natural gas and
instead focus its efforts on establishing a sustainable energy infrastructure on its campus.
Therefore, we propose that the University adds 1,790 LG NeON® 2 BiFacial 400W solar panels
to its pre-existing solar panel display on the roofs of the RPAC and Physical Activity and
Educational Services buildings. The installation of these solar panels would take advantage of
currently unused space and be completely paid for by currently owned funds from Ohio State
Energy Partners. If implemented, the proposed solar panels would increase energy efficiency by
one percent, which would constitute an order of magnitude higher than the estimated cost of the
project. Additionally, the inclusion of solar panels would emphasize the University’s
commitment to its carbon neutrality goals and foster a sustainable culture on its campus.

March 23, 2021

 1

Introduction
Climate change is one of the most pressing issues to our contemporary society. For many
nations, including the U.S., there is a divide over the importance of addressing climate change
through political, social, or legal action. However, the science is definite: climate change is real,
and it will impact nearly all aspects of human life, including “human health, agriculture and food
security, water supply, transportation, energy, ecosystems, and others,” (Understand Climate
Change, n.d.). In short, the issues surrounding climate change are practically guaranteed to have
detrimental impacts on the world stage, unless immediate and significant action is taken to
counteract current adverse climate practices. One approach to offsetting a nation’s or
institution’s climate impact is to go carbon neutral. As the name suggests, carbon neutrality is the
reduction of carbon emissions so that the net climate impact of an institution is minimized, if not
completely diminished to zero. Institutions with sustainable practices earn offsets that represent a
balance between emissions and reductions; the end goal is to reach an equilibrium between
emissions and emissions offsets. This stance is seen as both “practical and affordable,” (Go
Carbon Neutral, 2020) since it is unrealistic to expect that a person or organization can produce
zero overall carbon emissions. That said, reaching carbon neutrality will take investments of time
and money, along with applications of new and cleaner energy technologies.

Finding appropriate alternatives to fossil fuels is thus the integral dilemma of attaining carbon
neutrality and tackling the issue of climate change. One alternative, natural gas has become
increasingly popular due to the benefits it has over more traditional fossil fuels (i.e. coal and oil).
According to Richard K. Lattanzio, “Natural gas is cleaner burning than other fossil fuels,
emitting, on average, about half as much carbon dioxide as coal and one-quarter less than oil…”
(2018). For this reason, natural gas is often painted as the future of sustainable energy sources. It
is true that natural gas is cleaner than both coal and oil, in addition to being “domestically
available” and “economically recoverable,” (Lattanzio, 2018). Such qualities make natural gas
not only an attractive alternative to fossil fuels, but also a realistic one.

Yet, natural gas remains an imperfect solution in terms of limiting greenhouse gas emissions and
minimizing overall detrimental environmental effects. The fracking process to obtain natural gas,
for instance, results in the emission of methane, a greenhouse gas that is “34 times stronger than
carbon dioxide,” (Environmental Impacts of Natural Gas, 2014). So, despite the improvement
that natural gas brings in terms of cutting back on carbon dioxide emissions, its contributions to
the emission of methane significantly counteracts those advantages. Additionally, natural gas
production spawns other issues, such as “water management systems (both consumption and
discharge), land use changes, induced seismicity, and air pollution,” (Lattanzio, 2018).
Consequently, the increasing popularity of natural gas as an alternative fuel is worrisome to the
goal of carbon neutrality.

With the issues surrounding natural gas, it is difficult to conclude that it is a sustainable long-
term solution to climate change. In fact, as Thomas N. Russo contends, “There are signs at the
federal, state, and city levels that natural gas has no place in the future decarbonized energy
world,” (2019). Instead, natural gas should be viewed as a transitional—not a permanent—
energy source. With its benefits, natural gas is arguably better than its predecessors of coal and
oil; but, with its drawbacks, natural gas is an unsustainable foundation to build energy systems
off of. Because of this dynamic, natural gas “can act as a bridging energy source in the
 2

transformation of energy systems from a fossil-based to a renewable energy supply…” (Gillessen

et al., 2019). In order to successfully act as a bridge fuel, however, there needs to be sufficient
plans for and implementation of more sustainable energy practices. Without such action being
taken, natural gas will continue to dominate the energy industry, much to the environment’s
detriment.

Current Problem
In order to address its contributions to greenhouse gas emissions and, subsequently, climate
change, Ohio State has established goals for carbon neutrality. In the University’s own Climate
Change Action Plan, it testifies that “Achieving climate neutrality will require aggressive
reductions, avoidance, and neutralization in existing and future greenhouse gas emissions,”
(Bakshi et al. 2020). Based on this statement, it would be expected that OSU has taken drastic
action to ensure the complete offset of its carbon footprint; though, this is unfortunately not the
case.

A proposed power plant that will be built on Ohio State’s campus is predicted to result in a “25%
improvement in energy efficiency,” (Ghose, 2019). However, this power plant will be fueled by
natural gas, which presents a concern for the University’s sustainable actions and goals. Ohio
State plans to become carbon neutral by 2050, with a 55% reduction in emissions by 2030 (Ohio
State’s Path to Carbon Neutrality, 2020). The overall improvement in energy efficiency that the
natural gas power plant will provide may contribute to these goals on paper. But, the negative
ramifications of natural gas production yield concerns over this power plant and its impact on
Ohio State students, faculty, and the rest of the planet. Due to the significant energy
contributions it will give the University, the plant will be a large investment in Ohio State’s
energy infrastructure. With the power plant not yet under construction, it is thus an investment
being made for OSU’s future moves towards sustainability. Keeping the idea of natural gas fuel
as a “bridge” to renewable energy sources, this suggests that the University should consider the
ways to best leverage the proposed plant. Instead of relying on the power plant as a long-term
solution, Ohio State should begin planning for the move towards even more sustainable solutions
concurrently. This would allow OSU to begin taking steps now towards renewable energy that
will likely need to be taken in the future regardless. Therefore, in implementing such actions,
OSU will:
• Avoid becoming reliant on the natural gas-powered plant, which is unlikely to have
longevity as a sustainable source of energy
• Get a head start on necessary steps toward creating a renewable-based energy
infrastructure that will allow it to achieve its carbon neutrality goals

Ultimately, however, the University has yet to implement such action concurrently with the
construction of the power plant. The failure to do so causes issues with the current and future
prospects of Ohio State’s sustainability goals.

In order to appropriately address the carbon emissions crisis Ohio State faces, the University
must recognize where the majority of its emissions stem from. These emission trends are shown
in detail in Figure 1 below.
 3

Figure 1
Ohio State University Carbon Emissions by Source for 2019

Note. Graph provided by Ohio State Climate Action Plan (Bakshi et al. 2020). Green line
represents the cumulative percent of total emission.

As the green, cumulative, emissions line in Figure 1 demonstrates, 73 percent of the Ohio State
University’s CO₂ emissions result from electricity generation in 2019 (Bakshi et al. 2020).
Additionally, the black bar in Figure 1 shows purchased electricity, heat, and steam accounted
for over 40 percent (264,718 tonnes CO₂e) of total greenhouse gas emissions (Bakshi et al.,
2020). Emissions from electricity are those that the University has the greatest control over and
any electricity generated by renewable sources will directly reduce these emissions. If Ohio State
desires to meet its desired goals of 55% reduction in emissions by 2030, addressing emissions
from electricity remains the most promising solution.

Proposed Solution
This program intends to reduce Ohio State’s CO₂ emissions contributing to global climate
change. Additionally, the program should inspire greater sustainability among the Ohio State
community and the surrounding area. This program will construct an array of solar panels
located on Ohio State’s Columbus campus to directly address emissions generated from
electricity consumption. The finished array will include a sign showcasing the University’s
action on combating climate change and will be published through media outlets and the
sustainability institute of Ohio State.
 4

Solar Panels
Ohio State had 367 solar panels installed in 2014 located on the RPAC’s roof that generate about
116,000 kW hours annually (Ohio state solar array Update, 2015). We plan to add 1,790 LG
NeON® 2 BiFacial 400W solar panels total to the roofs of the Ohio State University RPAC and
Physical Activity and Educational Services buildings. These panels in total represent a 716-kW
solar array which will more than septuple the solar energy generated directly by Ohio State. This
project will require 40,722.5 square feet of unused roof space as each panel is 22.75 square feet
in size (LG Business Solutions, 2021).

The NeON® 2 BiFacial 400W panels will first be ordered from LG’s website directly
considering the size of the shipment. We will purchase these panels using a portion of Ohio
State’s CAPEX fund which sets $24 million dollars aside for creating solar energy infrastructure
(Bakshi et al., 2020). We will install LG NeON® 2 BiFacial 400W panels because of the long
warranty, reliable electricity production, and durability of the panels. LG guarantees a 25-year
warranty on these panels and guarantees they will produce at least “95.9% of their labeled
output” after 25 years (LG Business Solutions, 2021). The large upfront investment by Ohio
State must be reliable over the long term and LG provides this through these guarantees. Further,
these panels have a much higher than average 5,400 Pa rating which nearly doubles the industry
standard wind protection rating of 2400 Pa (Svarc, 2021). These panels must function through
the rough weather of Ohio’s four seasons, and the durability provided ensures this outcome.

The Ohio State University has a few potential issues with installing solar power on its campus.
First, Ohio State lacks a large number of buildings with south facing roofs. This poses a slight
issue as solar panels set up in the Northern Hemisphere should point geographically south to
maximize energy production (What direction should solar panels face?, 2020). Additionally,
many roofs on historical buildings prevent the installation (Bakshi et al. 2020). Furthermore,
solar panel aesthetics may not match with University landscape architecture. Despite these
potential setbacks, the Physical Activity and Educational Services building and RPAC facility
roofs mitigate these obstacles. The flat roofs enable any orientation of the panels; moreover,
pedestrians will not see the panels from the ground which preserves any architectural aesthetic
the University may wish to maintain. Therefore, Ohio State Energy Partners (OSEP) will place
the panels on top of the RPAC and Physical Activity and Educational Services building roofs to
ensure efficient electricity generation as well as address the presented potential issues. These
panels will face geographically southward at a 40° angle to maximize solar power efficiency.
OSEP will install these panels given the 50-year lease they hold on building OSU’s energy
infrastructure (The Ohio State University, 2017).

This construction will add a capacity of 716 kW to Ohio State’s solar energy production. These
panels should generate at minimum 822,333 kW hours of energy annually (Ohio state solar
array Update, 2015). The University will not need to purchase this electricity each year and will
cut annual emissions as a result.

Publicity Initiative
The effects of this program will reach beyond calculable numbers. It is true: the plan’s main
benefit is the reduction in carbon emissions and the pollution they create. However, this plan is
 5

also meant to be a major, actionable step by Ohio State towards their goal of net carbon
neutrality by 2050.

In the field of renewable energy, providing examples of successful sustainability projects helps
to promote future endeavors. Sharing successes, leading initiatives, and embracing sustainable
values are some actions that can genuinely promote people and organizations to act more
sustainably (Middleton, 2018). Ohio State is one of the country’s largest universities. It is
heavily in the public eye. The implementation of a 716-kW solar array would be a major addition
to the university, one for other universities to follow. Moreover, it would be proof that renewable
energy is something currently worth pursuing. Many organizations elect to push these renewable
energy initiatives off. Sometimes it is an issue of upfront cost, or a renewable system providing
less total energy than a nonrenewable one. Regardless, these organizations believe that it is more
effective to continue utilizing polluting energy sources rather than make the switch. Ohio State
University’s adoption of this program would be proof to these other organizations—be them
other colleges, manufacturing companies, or anything else—that the remedy for climate change
can and must begin now. There is funding for such programs. There are spaces ready to be used,
energy to be saved. Therefore, immediate implementation is the only plan that makes sense.

Some of these positive externalities can already be seen among the public. A study of consumer
preferences for solar energy found that people were “willing to pay a premium for policies that
encourage reduction in water consumption by fossil fuel” (Mamkhezri, Thacher, Chermak,
2020). Specifically, the researchers found that people would pay thirty-six percent above their
average electric bill in order to use more eco-friendly energy sources. This study shows how the
public is starting to rally behind the use of renewable energy. It is now our job to lead by
example, as a public and as a university, to bring this same focus to the forefront of current
policy initiatives.

Furthermore, the creation of a solar array will impact the students and public to view renewable
energy more favorably. Jamal Mamkhezri and others have found that favorability of solar energy
increases the closer an individual or household lives to the source (Mamkhezri, Thacher,
Chermak, 2020). Creating a well-publicized solar initiative will promote climate consciousness
among students as they live in close proximity to the establishment of this solar array.

Thus, a sign will be posted to continue to attract attention to the sustainable initiatives that the
University is conducting. The proximity to Ohio Stadium will amplify the effect among alumni
and visitors to campus. Additionally, stories in The Lantern and other local media outlets, along
with publications in OSU’s science journals, will boost exposure to the project.

Qualifications & Experience

Our team remains in a unique position to help address Ohio State’s emission and publicity goals.
We consist of three passionate students who desire to create a sustainable community at the Ohio
State University. This team understands the energy crisis facing the Ohio State University and
the United States as a whole. Thus, we wholeheartedly support Ohio State’s commitment to
reducing carbon emissions and promote the creation of photovoltaic electricity sources to
permanently solve the energy crisis. Over the past three weeks, our team has researched effective
methods to reduce emissions for the University. This research resulted in a tangible outcome that
 6

Ohio State may claim as a proper step towards reducing its carbon footprint. Each of us has taken
one or more environmental science courses focused on sustainability and solutions to climate
change. Additionally, one team member will declare an Environment, Economy, Development,
and Sustainability (EEDS) minor in the near future. This education and desire for action prepares
us to contribute to emissions reduction throughout campus.

Ohio State aspires to lead fellow universities in its sustainability through wide-spread publication
of sustainable initiatives (Sustainability Institute, 2019). Our team has direct relationships with
reputable media outlets, such as the Lantern, which will broadcast the clear step taken towards
net zero emissions.

Ohio State has expressed its desire to “empower Ohio State students to become leaders”
concerning the large issues facing the environment (Sustainability Institute, 2019). We are the
students Ohio State desires to empower. The University gains from showcasing its students’
activism on climate justice and contributes to an additional goal beyond emission reduction. The
University can continue to advance its image as an eco-conscious institution through its students.
Having students take charge of advancing the University’s mission will provide inspiration for
fellow students to live more environmentally conscious.

Budget
The capital for our proposed project consists completely of the photovoltaic panels that we will
be adding to the RPAC. As we are proposing an addition to the small amount of already existing
panels, we are fortunate to have a fairly good estimate of the amount of materials needed.

According to the initial numbers by Ohio State (Ohio state solar array Update, 2015), the
current array consists of 367 panels. We would like to make an increase of just under five times
the current area used, for an addition of 1,790 total panels. Furthermore, the NeON® 2 BiFacial
panels are 400 watts each, thus we are proposing an addition of 716 kW of power—
approximately six and a half times the current array.

Current numbers show that the average cost of a solar system in Ohio is $2,670 per
kilowatt (Matasci, 2021). This would give us a cost of $1,911,720. However, the US government
offers a federal solar investment tax credit for the implementation of solar energy. For a project
completed before 2023, this credit would allow for a deduction of twenty-six percent of the total
cost (The solar tax credit, 2021). Therefore, we predict the true cost for our system to be
approximately $1976 per kilowatt after the credit. Multiplied by a 716-kW system, this comes
out to a total of just $1,414,816.

We should note that this is an approximation for the cost of the entire solar array system: this
means that labor, installation overhead, and other costs are included. The following table
explains the cost breakdown both before and after the tax credit, and the chart shows proportions,
based on commonly sourced numbers (What do solar panels cost?, 2021).
 7

Table 1
Breakdown of costs of photovoltaic system in dollars, before and after the tax credit

Note. Net cost does not include cents and therefore the total is not exactly equivalent to the sum
of the factor parts.

Figure 2
Breakdown by percent of costs of a photovoltaic system

Note. Data supplied by (What do solar panels cost?, 2021). Operational costs consist of
transaction costs, markup, unit taxes, permit security, and others (Ulrich, 2016).

Conclusion
Understanding the effectiveness of a proposal compared to the effectiveness of the alternative, or
compared to the viability of implementing said proposal, is a necessity. Allow us to give some
perspective.

The Ohio State Energy Partners provided Ohio State University with over a billion dollars in
funding upfront, towards the university’s goal of achieving carbon neutrality. This upfront
payment comes with further support in funding 50 percent of the cost of approved projects with
OSU. Our proposal would cut emissions from Ohio State by about one percent (Bakshi et al.
 8

2020). To put this into perspective: this reduction costs barely one one-thousandth of the upfront
budget, while reducing one one-hundredth of the emissions. The cost to benefit is an order of
magnitude in difference, in favor of the benefits. It is also worth mentioning that twenty-four
million dollars of that budget was devoted specifically to solar energy, meaning this is money
being put to its intended use.

Expanding away from immediate costs, it is also important to remember the positive externalities
such a program will bring. Solar panels are renowned for their low maintenance cost. However
great the upfront cost may be, this system will pay for itself in the long run. The system itself
needs no more space; instead, Ohio State can simply utilize currently unused space. Most
importantly, the program also is a statement. Ohio State University has already told its students
and faculty that they want to fight climate change. But following through with this plan would be
action, not words, that show how Ohio State will fight climate change right now, when it is
needed most. Moreover, as Ohio State is one of the largest universities in the country, this would
be a message to all—not just those with immediate ties to OSU.

When one considers all the factors, this proposal is quite simple. The funds we request are
allocated for this exact instance. The benefits outweigh the costs. The positive externalities are
numerous; the negative, nonexistent.

Too many people still think of coal-powered energy as the standard—as the tried and true
method. But the sun has been powering planet Earth since day one. We finally have the
technology to properly harness this power effectively, and everyday this technology gets better.
This technology is cost effective, clean, and ready to be implemented, and Ohio State is looking
for a great new energy option. A clean energy option. This is that option.
 9

Reference List

Bakshi, B., Charles, M., Tufekci, S., Holley, C., Garrett, B., Gillund, T., Bartter, K., & Shelton,
M. (2020, April). Path to carbon neutrality: Ohio State Climate Action Plan.
https://si.osu.edu/sites/default/files/CAP_Final_04082020.pdf

Environmental Impacts of Natural Gas. (2014, June 19). Union of Concerned Scientists.
https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/environmental-impacts-natural-gas

Ghose, C. (2019, August 16). Ohio State Energy Vendor Proposes $393M Capital Plan,
Including New Plant and Pedestrian Bridge. Columbus Business First.
https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2019/08/26/ohio-state-energy-vendor-
proposes-393m-capital.html

Gillessen, B., Heinrichs, H., Hake, J.-F., Allelein, H.-J. (2019, October 1). Natural gas as a
bridge to sustainability: Infrastructure expansion regarding energy security and system
transition. Science Direct.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306261919310517

Go Carbon Neutral. (2020, September 21). David Suzuki Foundation.

https://davidsuzuki.org/what-you-can-do/go-carbon-neutral/

Lattanzio, R. K. (2018, November 18). Methane and Other Air Pollution Issues in Natural Gas
Systems. Congressional Research Service. Accession Number: 133619800

LG Business Solutions. (2021). LG400N2T-J5 400W High Efficiency LG NeON®2 BiFacial

Solar Panel with 72 Cells(6 x 12), Module Efficiency: 19.3%, Connector Type: MC4.
https://www.lg.com/us/business/neon%C2%AE-2/lg-lg400n2t-j5#

Middleton, P. (2018). Sustainable living education: Techniques to help advance the renewable
energy transformation. Solar Energy, 174, 1016–1018. https://doi-org.proxy.lib.ohio-
state.edu/10.1016/j.solener.2018.08.009

Mamkhezri, J., Thacher, J. A., & Chermak, J. M. (2020). Consumer Preferences for Solar
Energy: A Choice Experiment Study. Energy Journal, 41(5), 157–183. https://doi-
org.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/10.5547/01956574.41.5.jmam

Matasci, S. (2021, February 14). How much do solar panels cost? 2021 guide: Energysage.
Retrieved March 14, 2021, from https://news.energysage.com/how-much-does-the-
average-solar-panel-installation-cost-in-the-u-s/

Ohio State’s Path to Carbon Neutrality: University Accelerates Climate Action. (2020, April
15). Ohio State Sustainability Institute. https://si.osu.edu/climateactionplan

Ohio state solar array Update: Residential. (2015, April 22).

https://www.aepenergy.com/2015/04/22/ohio-state-solar-array-update/
 10

Russo, T. N. (April 2019). Challenges of Decarbonizing the US Natural Gas Industry. Natural
Gas & Electricity. Accession Number: 135896703

Sustainability Institute (2019, January 7). Strategic Plan. The Ohio State University.
https://oaa.osu.edu/sites/default/files/uploads/unit-level-strategic-planning/strategic-
plans/sustainability-institute-strategic-plan-2019.pdf

Svarc, J. (2021, March 11). LG solar Panels review.

https://www.cleanenergyreviews.info/blog/lg-solar-panel-review

The Ohio State University. (2017, July). Comprehensive Energy Management.

https://www.osu.edu/energymanagement/Fact%20Sheet%20-
%20Ohio%20State%20Comprehensive%20Energy%20Management%20Project%20-
%20July%202017.pdf

The solar tax credit: An energy tax credit for going solar. (2021, January 11). Retrieved March
16, 2021, from https://www.energysage.com/solar/cost-benefit/solar-investment-tax-
credit/

Ulrich, E. (2016, February 25). Soft costs 101: The key to achieving cheaper solar energy.
https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/soft-costs-101-key-achieving-cheaper-solar-energy

Understand Climate Change. (n.d.). https://www.globalchange.gov/climate-change

What direction should solar panels face? (2020, November 7).

https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/best-direction-orientation-solar-panels

What do solar panels cost? Residential solar price breakdown. (2021, January 23). Retrieved
March 15, 2021, from https://solaractionalliance.org/residential-solar-panel-cost/