Carbon Emissions in Nigerian University Libraries: A Comparative Analysis across the Six Geopolitical Zones

Abstract

Background: University libraries are among the most energy-intensive spaces within Nigerian academic campuses, operating extended daily hours and housing power-demanding equipment including server rooms, lighting arrays, reprographic facilities, and climate-control systems. Despite their substantial contribution to institutional operations, the environmental footprint of these buildings — expressed through institutional greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — remains poorly quantified across Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones. This study investigates carbon emissions in federal and state university libraries across Nigeria by examining energy-use patterns, emission sources, and the structural barriers hindering decarbonisation in these regions. Methods: Employing a concurrent (convergent) mixed-methods design, this study surveyed 24 university libraries — 12 federal and 12 state institutions, four purposively selected from each of Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones — between January and June 2025. Quantitative energy-inventory and Likert-scale barrier data and qualitative open-ended responses were collected concurrently and integrated at the interpretation stage. Data were collected through a self-developed energy-inventory questionnaire and structured facility checklists administered to a designated primary respondent (the University Librarian or deputy) at each library, supplemented by input from unit heads and maintenance officers where relevant. Emission sources were classified according to the GHG Protocol Corporate Standard across Scopes 1, 2, and 3, applying an operational-control approach to define the library’s organisational boundary. Results: Diesel-powered generators constituted the largest source of Scope 1 emissions in the sampled libraries, accounting for an estimated 42-68% of direct emissions, reflecting the combined effect of constant generator use and unreliable grid electricity supply. Fluorescent and incandescent lighting remained predominant in 79% of surveyed libraries, and air-conditioning units in 65% of facilities were older, higher-energy-intensity models. Descriptively large inter-zonal differences were observed — South-West zone libraries showed comparatively higher adoption of energy-saving technologies and on-site solar generation, whereas North-East zone libraries reported the most constrained infrastructure — although, given the small per-zone sample (n = 4), these differences should be interpreted as indicative rather than confirmatory. Institutional and financial budgetary constraints were the most highly rated perceived barrier to decarbonisation, followed by the absence of institutional energy policy and inadequate staff awareness. Conclusions: The findings point to the value of a coordinated national framework for integrating energy-efficiency standards into university library management, active stakeholder participation, and phased adoption of renewable energy technologies to reduce the carbon footprint of academic libraries in Nigeria, in line with the country’s Nationally Determined Contributions and Sustainable Development Goal 13. Because the sample was purposively — not randomly — selected, these findings should be read as an in-depth, geographically diverse case comparison rather than as statistically generalisable to all Nigerian university libraries.