Higher ed going greener

Skepticism abounds when the term “going green” is loosely tossed around like heading in this direction will save the planet and pretty much all humanity. Businesses are slapping the ‘Green’ term on their products and marketing efforts so often these days that the tangible benefits of the movement has been reduced to a mere catch phrase acceptable to the pseudo environmentalists, overly smug Prius owners, and basic rubes. And yet, amidst the frenzied media push to reduce carbon footprints and build household shrines to hemp, people feeling the pressure of the economy’s recent turn to the dark side are finding the philosophy of conservation to be as much about saving money as saving the environment. More and more, our regional colleges are backing up this shift by demonstrating the savings that can occur when a community of any size makes the simple effort to cut back on wasteful practices. Recently, Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne sized up rising energy costs as part of his state’s budget challenges. With a wave of a ‘green’ wand he issued two executive orders and a directive on energy conservation aimed at lowering Idaho’s energy usage and ultimately cutting down on unnecessary spending. In heading the governor’s orders, the University of Idaho emerged as a mini-lab rat of sorts. Would that community be able to distribute enough power to all of their 143 buildings while meeting the stringent energy usage regulations? Would the costs of installing cutting-edge conservation equipment right from the pages of Popular Science sink the University’s ship? The answers are already starting to come in. After implementing a slew of Energy Saving Initiatives or, ESIs, UI reports to be saving nearly $400,000 annually on utilities. At that rate, college officials expect the cost of implementing the initiatives to pay themselves off in just under three years. Perhaps the most remarkable part of the school’s conservation efforts was that many of the ESIs turned out to be no-brainer ways to save energy instead of larger capital costs. For instance, instead of erecting fields of solar panels or perfecting cold fusion in the basement labs, for the most part they did all the common-sense things any person living on a tight budget might. Things like regulating thermostat temperatures, cutting power to unoccupied rooms, switching from incandescent to fluorescent light bulbs, and even turning off the lights in vending machines. The real guts of the work came in the way of the heating system that was converted from burning natural gas to wood chips. Pipes were also insulated to reduce heat loss. In essence, by simply identifying cheaper ways to run the college, UI is on track to pocket nearly an extra half million dollars per year, all because the state was having some trouble paying the bills and the Governor had the bright idea to cut unnecessary spending at the root of the economy’s problems: energy. Luckily, other schools are also sharing their green successes. The Princeton Review’s “Green Rating Honor Role” spotlights universities that are putting forth a substantial effort to loosen their dependency on mass consumption. The universities of Oregon and Washington made the list this year bringing home some well-deserved pride to the Northwest. Oregon in particular was included for involvement with sustainability studies, offering over 200 sustainability related courses while peddling a steady stream of funding into program growth. One goal of UO’s recycling program is to create “zero waste” communities, which if go as planned, would save money as well as resources. According to their website, “Instead of perpetuating our throw-away society, products would be designed using fewer material types that could be easily reused or repaired when they have outlived their usefulness.” To some, a society that produces zero waste might seem like the pipe dream of, well, someone at UO, as the rest of us continue to fill our landfills with near immortal parcels of waste. But Oregon’s recycling program is showing that they might be onto something. From 1999-2000, officials report saving $200,000 from recycling and waste reduction alone, a number that has been rising steadily since 1992. Along with the in-house savings, the school has various federal, state, and local grants available for being environmentally conscious. While the University of Oregon is helping to secure a tie between green business and good business, programs like these tend to start smaller, often with just a handful of active individuals. This fall, the National Recycling Coalition is looking for people like this eager to jumpstart conservation involvement at their respective colleges. Its “Recycle Mania,” an annual 10-week long competition now includes participation from more than 400 colleges around the country, hoping to see who can recycle more in a slew of categories. In 2008, the coalition reported recycling of 58.6 million pounds of refuse and an unprecedented level of environmental caring from college age-students. Washington State University placed fourth in the competition’s “Gorilla” category for the sheer weight of material collected. Curiously, the University of Washington failed to make the list in any category yet still enjoys a spot on Princeton’s prestigious environmental list. That kind discrepancy is ammunition for people who love to point out the obvious hypocrisies of Al Gore and denounce the green movement in its entirety as a load of leftist propaganda. But in the end, talk of propaganda or a green menace may not matter so much. If UI can pad its wallet in a tough economic year simply by getting their employees to turn the lights off when they leave a room, word will eventually trickle down that, despite popular belief, it really is easy being green. As more and more colleges begin to realize the vested interest in going green, we can expect to look back one day and wonder why it took so long to accept their models for the dumb genius of their necessity.