Methods & honesty notes
How the ranking works and where to squint
Method. Nine UC campuses were ranked from 1 to 9 on each of seven metrics from public data; the overall score is the unweighted sum of ranks, and the lowest total wins. It is simple by design: transparent, reproducible, and easy to argue with, which is the point of a ranking meant to spark competition.
Emissions is a composite proxy. The score combines Scope 1 to 3 emissions and renewable energy use per acre, using each campus's own 2023 sustainability report figures. It mixes units, so treat it as a rough intensity proxy that orders campuses, not a physical quantity. UCLA's small campus footprint of 419 acres is why its score is such an outlier.
STARS air & climate was normalized. Campuses reported under two different STARS versions, with sections worth 8 or 16 points, so scores were converted to percent of possible before ranking. That is why they are comparable.
Targets are set by each campus. The energy and water metrics measure each campus against its own goal; some 2025 water goals were approximated where no exact figure was published, as marked in the grid tooltips. The master ranking used absolute differences; this site displays percentages for comparison across campuses.
The framing is ours. "The Other Rivalry" is an editorial lens added to the original research. It is a way to make nine campuses take a real, sourced sustainability comparison as seriously as they take rank, football, and admit rates. The underlying data and methodology are unchanged from the original study.
