Re-Designing and Re-Imagining a Sustainable Pomona College for the 21st Century
Today, humans are playing a game of Russian roulette with the planet’s climate, as anthropogenic emissions threaten to push CO2 levels higher than they were even 20 million years ago. Though CO2 levels were once far higher than they are today, the ecosystems that support humans have either evolved in or adapted to present conditions. While our species has proven to be adaptable (at least in the short term) through the use of technology, the roughly seven billion people living on the Earth today depend on natural systems far more than we can fully grasp or understand. Current projections predict that the global population will reach nine billion before 2050. As climate change intensifies, it will put more and more stress on the ecosystems upon which this growing population depends. It is clear that human societies will be forced to confront harsh realities in the 21st century as “cheap” energy and abundant resources become scarcer.
For the past 800,000 years, up until around 1750, atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have oscillated between 180 and 280 parts-per-million by volume.[i] Since the start of the Industrial Revolution, CO2 levels have risen exponentially, to the current level of 387 ppm— conditions last experienced as far back as 15 to 20 million years ago. During this period, average temperatures were between 5.4 and 10.8 °F warmer, sea levels were 75 to 120 feet higher, there was no permanent sea ice cap in the Arctic, and neither Greenland nor Antarctica had significant amounts of ice. The episodes of cooling and glacial expansion that took place at the end of that time period correspond to the dramatic lowering of CO2 levels to those characterizing the Earth’s atmosphere until recently.
But what exactly are the effects of climate change, according to scientists who study the phenomenon? A recent MIT study projects, based on its Integrated Global System Model and business-as-usual scenarios, that there is a 90% chance that CO2 levels will reach between 495 and 574 parts-per-million by 2045, and between 716 and 1095 parts-per-million by 2095. This corresponds to a predicted increase in average surface air temperatures of between 2.5 and 4.3 °F by 2045 and between 6.3 and 13.3 °F by 2095.[ii] These findings suggest that the icecaps will melt, global sea levels will rise dramatically, weather patterns and local climates will become more extreme, and even locust swarms will intensify, increasing famine in vulnerable areas at a rate much faster than was previously expected. Countries like the Maldives, an archipelago in the Indian Ocean that is on average 1.5 meters above sea level, will be particularly vulnerable to increases in both global sea levels and the frequency of extreme weather events like tsunamis.
Many individuals have made the connection between man-made emissions and climate change, and have been motivated by the threat of disastrous consequences to do something about it. Currently, a vast array of individuals, groups and organizations across the world are doing their best to fight deforestation, increase energy efficiency, and replace carbon-intensive energy sources with renewable ones like solar and wind, all in order to mitigate the effects of global warming. This December, delegates from a majority of the world’s nations will meet in Copenhagen in order to draft a new international climate protocol to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which expires in 2012. The original protocol was ratified in 1997 by 184 countries, with the notable exception of the United States.
Though progress is being made in boardrooms and legislatures across the world, and the Obama Administration seems to be taking a more proactive role on climate change, the political process is slow and easily bogged down by special interests. Climate change, on the other hand, demands immediate action if humanity is to avoid catastrophe.
In this context, what are our responsibilities as students, and what should the responsibilities of an educational institution like Pomona College be? How can we best reduce our contributions to global warming and other environmental issues?
Starting to cut down on one’s own individual carbon footprint is, in fact, quite simple, and is not a matter of personal deprivation. Turning off the faucet while brushing one’s teeth, using natural light by opening window-shades instead of using electric lighting while there’s still daylight, doing work in already-lit areas and unplugging appliances when you aren’t around are all easy ways to use less energy. In general, examining one’s daily routines and consumption habits is a good method of finding ways to consume less while getting the same utility. For example, carrying a ceramic mug or jar during the day and to snack for coffee, alcohol and other drinks can easily cut down on a huge amount of paper and plastic waste, while providing an arguably more enjoyable drinking experience.
There is, however, only so much that can be done on an individual level. The next question that the students, faculty and staff at Pomona College must ask is: what is the proper course of action for our community to take in light of the present situation?
Over the past couple of years, Pomona has indeed raised awareness of environmental issues on campus and taken several steps, both tangible and intangible, towards becoming more sustainable. On April 20th, 2007, President Oxtoby signed the President’s Climate Commitment, which commits Pomona College to becoming carbon neutral at a self-imposed target date. In July 2008, Pomona hired Bowen Close, our current Sustainability Coordinator and director of what became in May 2009 the Sustainability Integration Office. And between November 2008 and May 2009, the Sustainability Action Fellowship, a group organized by Close but composed of students, drafted a Sustainability Action Plan for the College that will be brought to the attention of Pomona’s trustees for review this coming May.
All across the United States, other colleges and universities are undertaking similar measures, but many of these efforts have been surface-level changes or quick fixes. Building to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) standards, for example, has led colleges and their architects to aim for high marks according to an imperfect grading system, a strategy that doesn’t necessarily result in the greenest buildings possible. Light retrofits, “energy-reduction months” and other efficiency methods are important first steps—analogous to “picking the low-lying fruit”—but they do not inherently change the infrastructure of these institutions in a substantive way.
In Natural Capitalism, Paul Hawken and Amory and Hunter Lovins describe this phenomenon, pointing out that institutions (including corporations and universities) tend to make each aspect of their buildings efficient only until they hit a cost barrier at which their investments are no longer paying off. While this is valuable, the three writers suggest that instead, if buildings as a whole are designed to be as efficient as possible, their builders can “tunnel through the cost-barrier” for each individual element of the building by thinking holistically—making a less energy and carbon-intensive building while saving money.
Similarly, Daniel Esty and Andrew Winston argue in their book Green to Gold that the threefold mantra of “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle” should be expanded to include two even more important concepts: “redesigning” and “reimagining” products and processes. They argue that these are actually the two most important concepts and should be weighted accordingly. Instead of reacting to what is already in place, these two concepts require and recommend that firms and institutions be more proactive on a larger scale, leading to more comprehensive solutions that render systems more sustainable and efficient and in the process increase profits by reducing waste and energy usage.
Perhaps the most ambitious example of this way of thinking can be found in the plans of Middlebury and Carleton Colleges to produce all (or a majority, supplemented with carbon offsets) of their electricity on campus by 2016 and 2020, respectively. Instead of just trying to reduce electricity use, both schools reimagined themselves as energy producers: Carleton by building a 1.65 megawatt wind turbine that produces 40% of its power and should reduce the college’s carbon emissions by ~1.5 million tons over the next 20 years, and Middlebury by building a biomass plant that runs on wood-chips.
Oberlin College’s construction of its Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies similarly demonstrates a refusal to merely mimic what has already been done. Instead of simply following LEED building codes, Oberlin redesigned what a building could be, with the help of green architect William McDonough. In the words of David Orr, the director of Oberlin’s Environmental Studies Program, the new center was intended to be a building that “gives more than it takes,” and that would help to “redefine the relationship between humankind and the environment.”[iii]
Oxtoby’s signing of the President’s Climate Commitment, the hiring of a Sustainability Coordinator and the College’s formation of a Sustainability Integration Office all mean that, in the short term, Pomona is demonstrably moving forward with sustainability. These early steps should be duly lauded. But if Pomona College hopes to become a truly sustainable institution, we will need to reimagine and redesign the college for the 21st century. To do this, it will be necessary as well to redefine what Pomona is by seeking ways to preserve what makes our community great while at the same time reducing our environmental impact. For just as the use of a ceramic mug can deliver a better experience and reduce one’s personal waste stream, making Pomona College more sustainable has the potential to not only reduce our negative impact on the world but also to render the educational experience it provides more useful and worthwhile.
The goal of this essay has not been to exhort the reader to drop everything and embark upon an environmental odyssey, but simply to clarify the far-reaching effects of our consumption habits and attitudes on the environment and other people, and moreover, to suggest that another path is open to our generation. It is up to us as students to act as responsible global citizens by getting involved however we can, whether it be by taking shorter showers, suggesting ideas to the Sustainability Integration Office, joining PEAR (Pomona for Environmental Action and Responsibility) at one of its weekly meetings at 8:30 PM every Tuesday in SOCA lounge, taking classes with an environmental focus, taking the sustainability pledge (http://pomonasustainabilitypledge.com/), or finding other ways to make our voices heard.
Most importantly, we need to remember that reimagining and redesigning are just as critical as reducing, reusing and recycling, if not more so. It is only by addressing these two essential and often overlooked elements that Pomona can hope to become “sustainable” in any substantial way.
[i] Tripati, AK; Roberts, CD; Eagle, RA. 2009. Coupling of CO2 and Ice Sheet Stability over Major Climate Transitions of the Last 20 Million Years. Science: 2009 Oct 8.
[ii] Sokolov et al. 2009. Probabilistic Forecast for 21st Century Climate Based on Uncertainties in Emissions (without Policy) and Climate Parameters. Report Series of the MIT Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change: January 2009.
[iii] http://www.oberlin.edu/ajlc/design_1.html
No comments:
Post a Comment