From Director Steve Mital, here. Apparently it’s not just about the Urban Farm, which is more popular with our students than Duck Athletics.
From Director Steve Mital, here. Apparently it’s not just about the Urban Farm, which is more popular with our students than Duck Athletics.
Good for them on the transparency. But browsing this report, I am struck by how that office is focusing on at best second and third order sources of energy waste. These projects are all simply noise when compared to the effect of able-bodied faculty, staff, and students insisting on driving to campus (and beyond!). The carbon footprint of UO should be radically reduced by the simple act of raising the cost of parking on and near campus 10-fold.
Check out page 47 of the report to see the emissions sources. Commuting accounts for about 8% of total annual emissions.
The Oregon Model for Sustainable Development is significant. It requires that all new constructions be 35% more energy efficient than required by code, achieve LEED GOLD certification, and meet its remaining energy needs by conserving an equal amount of energy from existing buildings. It’s a growth management plan. It won’t eliminate emissions; it just prevents them from rising even as campus is growing. Still it’s a good step forward.
We made a 3.5 minute video that succinctly describes the UO’s emissions challenges. If after watching it, you feel your time was wasted I’ll buy you a cup of coffee. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y8a2T0oeAWw
We are always trying to find emissions reduction projects and the funding to implement them. Right now, we’re installing UO’s first wind turbine at OIMB. It’s second order, but has other benefits. We’re also trying to increase the size of the revolving loan fund used to finance campus energy saving projects.
self-correction… Commuting represents 8% of energy used, but because of its carbon intensity, it’s emissions impact is greater than 8%. I don’t have the exact figure with me, but it’s about 12-14% of emissions.
Would the carbon footprint of the UO be significantly reduced if air travel were replaced by surface travel (when possible) and if electronic communication replaced travel when feasible?
I’d have happily taken a train to and from my latest professional gathering, had the dean been willing to absolve me from teaching for a week.
Depends on what “when possible” and “when feasible” mean. Travel has become central to the modern research university. This is an area where our aspirations (“sustainability” and “global institution”) collide.
The rec center has bikes: http://outdoorprogram.uoregon.edu/bikes