Gathering the evidence: health and aged care carbon inventory study

Sharon Desmond; Jenny Smith; Jessica Hogg; Jo Walton-Hespe; Jo Gardner-Marlin

doi:10.1071/AH23129

RESEARCH ARTICLE (Open Access)

Previous Next Contents Vol 47(6)

Gathering the evidence: health and aged care carbon inventory study

Sharon Desmond ^A ^* , Jenny Smith ^A , Jessica Hogg ^B , Jo Walton-Hespe ^B and Jo Gardner-Marlin ^B

+ Author Affiliations

- Author Affiliations

^A Mercy Health, Level 2, 12 Shelley Street, Richmond, Vic. 3121, Australia.

^B Arup Australia Pty. Ltd., Barrack Place, L5 151 Clarence Street, Sydney, NSW 2000, Australia.

^* Correspondence to: SDesmond@mercy.com.au

Australian Health Review 47(6) 634-640 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH23129

Submitted: 29 June 2023 Accepted: 22 September 2023 Published: 10 October 2023

© 2023 The Author(s) (or their employer(s)). Published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of AHHA. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND)

Abstract

Objective

This study aimed to calculate the baseline carbon inventory of Mercy Health, a provider of health and aged care services in Australia, across emission Scopes 1, 2 and 3. The carbon inventory has clarified the baseline environmental impact, identified carbon hotspots and will inform emissions reduction interventions and a decarbonisation trajectory.

Methods

A hybrid carbon footprinting methodology was devised. Established carbon footprinting standards provided methodological guidance. A consulting firm with health service carbon accounting experience provided expertise, rigour and objectivity to the work.

Results

In the 2020–21 financial year, the carbon footprint of Mercy Health was 102.96k tCO2-e. Scope 1 emissions accounted for 11.07% (11.40k tCO2-e), followed by Scope 2 with 29.80% (30.68k tCO2-e) and Scope 3 with 59.13% (60.88k tCO2-e). The largest carbon impost group was Building energy (42.01%; 43.25k tCO2-e), followed by Food and catering (9.42%; 9.70k tCO2-e) and Business services (7.74%; 7.97k tCO2-e). Mercy Health’s Health Services, Aged Care and Support Services divisions contributed 49.16, 47.81 and 3.03% (50.61k, 49.23k and 3.12k tCO2-e) of total greenhouse gas emissions respectively.

Conclusions

Mercy Health’s Health Services division and Aged Care division each comprised around half of total organisation carbon emissions. Building energy dominated emissions, particularly electricity. The study discovered meaningful differences in the composition of carbon emissions in operational divisions of the organisation, indicating tailored interventions will be required to meet carbon abatement targets. The study demonstrates the benefit of conducting carbon footprinting within individual organisations, and the importance of studies within the Australian context.

Keywords: aged care, carbon footprint, environmental sustainability, health services, health services research, health systems, hospitals, sustainability.

References

1 Lenzen M, Malik A, Li M, Fry J, Weisz H, et al. The environmental footprint of health care: a global assessment. Lancet Planet Health 2020; 4: e271-9.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

2 Health Care Without Harm & Arup. Health care’s climate footprint: How the health sector contributes to the global climate crisis and opportunities for action. 2019. Available at https://noharm-global.org/sites/default/files/documents-files/5961/HealthCaresClimateFootprint_092319.pdf [accessed 4 May 2023].

3 Malik A, Lenzen M, McAlister S, McGain F. The carbon footprint of Australian healthcare. Lancet Planet Health 2018; 2(1): 27-35.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

4 Tennison I, Roschnik S, Ashby B, Boyd R, Hamilton I, Oreszczyn T, et al. Health care’s response to climate change: a carbon footprint assessment of the NHS in England. Lancet Planet Health 2021; 5: e84-92.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

5 Commonwealth of Australia Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water. Australian National Greenhouse Accounts Factors: For individuals and organisations estimating greenhouse gas emissions. February. 2023. Available at https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/national-greenhouse-accounts-factors-2022 [accessed 5 May 2023].

6 Climate Active. Climate Active Carbon Neutral Standard for Organisations. 2020. Available at https://www.climateactive.org.au/sites/default/files/2022-07/climate-active-carbon-neutral-standard-organisations.pdf [accessed 1 May 2023].

7 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Health expenditure Australia 2020-21: Summary. 2022. Available at https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/health-welfare-expenditure/health-expenditure-australia-2020-21/contents/summary [accessed 4 May 2023].

8 Australian Government. Productivity Commission, Report on Government Services 2023, 14. Aged Care Services. 2023. Available at https://www.pc.gov.au/ongoing/report-on-government-services/2023/community-services/aged-care-services [accessed 4 May 2023].

9 Australian Government Clean Energy Regulator. The NGER Scheme. 2023. Available at https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/NGER [accessed 22 May 2023].

10 Mercy Health. Caring for People and Planet. 2020. Available at https://www.mercyhealth.com.au/wp-content/uploads/sites/61/2021/12/Mercy-Health-Care-for-People-and-Planet-online-1.pdf [accessed 22 May 2023].

11 World Business Council for Sustainable Development & World Resources Institute. Greenhouse Gas Protocol: A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (revised edition). 2015. Available at https://ghgprotocol.org/corporate-standard [accessed 4 May 2023].

12 International Organization for Standardization. Greenhouse gases – Part 1: Specification with guidance at the organisation level for quantification and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions and removals. ISO 14064-1:2018. 2018. Available at https://www.iso.org/standard/66453.html [accessed 5 May 2023].

13 International Organization for Standardization. Environmental Management – Life cycle assessment Principles and framework. ISO 14040-1:2006. 2022. Available at https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html [accessed 5 May 2023].

14 World Input-Output Database. The WIOD Project. 2016. Available at https://www.rug.nl/ggdc/valuechain/wiod/?lang=en

15 Climate Active. Technical Guidance Manual. 2022. Available at https://www.climateactive.org.au/sites/default/files/2022-08/Technical% 20Guidance% 20Manual.pdf [accessed 23 May 2023].

16 McGain F, Muret J, Lawson C, Sherman JD. Environmental sustainability in anaesthesia and critical care. Br J Anaesth 2020; 125(5): 680-92.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

17 United Kingdom Government, Department for Energy Security and Net Zero and Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy. Government conversion factors for company reporting of greenhouse gas emissions: Greenhouse Gas reporting conversion factors. 2022. Available at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/government-conversion-factors-for-company-reporting [accessed 26 June 2023].

18 HCWH & Arup. Global Road Map for Health Care Decarbonization: A navigational tool for achieving zero emissions with climate resilience and health equity. 2021. Available at https://healthcareclimateaction.org/roadmap [accessed 6 May 2023].

19 Burch H, Anstey MH, McGain F. Renewable energy use in Australian public hospitals. Med J Aust 2021; 215(4): 160-3.e1.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

20 State of Victoria Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Cutting Victoria’s emissions 2021–2025 Whole of Victorian Government emissions reduction pledge. 2020. Available at https://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/victorian-government-action-on-climate-change/Whole-of-Victorian-Government-sector-pledge-accessible.pdf [accessed 5 May 2023].

21 Nadolny A, Cheng C, Lu B, Blakers A, Stocks M. Fully electrified land transport in 100% renewable electricity networks dominated by variable generation. Renewable Energy 2022; 182: 562-77.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

22 Desmond S. Health service planning and sustainable development: considering what, where and how care is delivered through a pro-environmental lens. Aust Health Rev 2018; 42: 140-5.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

23 Rowe H. Thinking beyond EVs to decarbonise Australia’s transport sector. Climate Works Centre. 24 May. 2023. Available at https://www.climateworkscentre.org/news/thinking-beyond-evs-to-decarbonise-australias-transport-sector/ [accessed 22 June 2023].

24 Maggie Beer Foundation. Hungry for change: tackling food waste in aged care. 2020. Available at https://maggiebeerfoundation.org.au/news/hungry-for-change-tackling-food-waste-in-aged-care/ [accessed 25 May 2023].

25 Gynther A, Pearson F, McGain F. Nitrous oxide use on the labour ward: Efficacy and environmental impact. Australas Anaesth 2021; 193-202 https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.218018729128516.
| Google Scholar |

26 Seglenieks R, Wong A, Pearson F, McGain F. Discrepancy between procurement and clinical use of nitrous oxide: waste not, want not. Br J Anaesth 2022; 128: e32-4.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

27 Davies JF, McGain F, Francis JJ. Consensus on Prioritisation of Actions for Reducing the Environmental Impact of a Large Tertiary Hospital: Application of the Nominal Group Technique. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2022; 3978: 1-15.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |

28 Mortimer F. The Sustainable Physician. Clin Med 2010; 10(2): 110-1.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |

29 Mortimer F, Isherwook J, Wilkinson A, Vaux E. Sustainability in quality improvement: redefining value. Future Healthc J 2018; 5: 88-93.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |