Malten resigned from his position last summer.

The director of sustainability is responsible for advocating for the integration of sustainable principles and practices into campus operations, procedures and activities.

The University’s sustainability initiatives are well known. They include the cessation of the sale of plastic water bottles on campus and Campus Sustainability Day, which was held on Oct. 20, 2010.

Will Fischer, a member of class of 2010 and a current employee in the Office of Sustainability is not surprised that the committee has not found a replacement.

“There is a high bar, and we are looking for someone with past experience and higher education ability. They [the search committee] are going to make sure they’re hiring someone with the experience that they feel is necessary to do what they need to do, and as of yet, they have not found that person. We have an interim director of sustainability, and she’s been doing a good job. I think we have a series of great programs this semester that set a very high bar,” Fischer said.

The Office of Sustainability is continuing to carry out its duties. Deborah Howard, a higher education attorney who worked in the office of Hank Webber, executive vice chancellor for administration, has been serving as interim director since September.

The office will institute three programs this semester.

The first, a sustainability pledge, begins next week. It is an online poll with a series of pledge items aimed at reducing environmental costs.

The second program is called “Recycle-mania.” In February and March, students will compete to recycle more than other colleges and universities.

The inaugural Green Cup competition will also take place from March 21 to April 22. For this event, the South 40 residential colleges and the fraternities will compete against each other to conserve energy. The fraternities will compete for a $500 prize, and the residential colleges will compete for a cookout.

The results of the Green Cup will be published online, and students will be able to see how their actions make a real environmental impact.

While the Office of Sustainability continues to operate, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Operations Steve Hoffner is leading the search.

“We are continuing the search nationally and looking [for] the best possible candidate,” Hoffner said.

The committee hopes to find a replacement by the end of this semester.

The committees, which started meeting at the beginning of the semester, are Energy & Climate, Buildings & Grounds, Dining Services, Transportation and Purchasing & Materials Management.

Matt Malten, assistant vice chancellor for sustainability, said that this part of the initiative is comparable to projects at similar research universities with medical schools, and that it involves evaluation of practices such as turning off lights and raising the heat in classrooms.

“We’re doing a full parametric analysis trying to figure out if it’s achievable,” he said. “It’s not just how much energy we use. It’s also what fuel sources we use. [It] depends on how successful we are in educating individual energy consumption behavior on campus.”

Groups of two or three University administrators head each of the committees, which also include technical experts in each field and student representatives. Malten sits on every committee, as well as the Sustainability Operations Leadership Council (SOLC), which oversees the group.

The Energy & Climate committee, which focuses on the University’s power use, aims to reduce the University’s greenhouse gas emissions to 20 percent lower than the 1990 level by 2020.

In order to meet these aims, the University will switch from a high-energy pressurized steam distribution system to a low-energy depressurized system, along with swapping its fluorescent light bulbs for more efficient ones.

“It’s not just what we’re planning to do in the future, but we’re collecting data on what we’ve done in the past,” Malten said. “Our data shows that in all of our construction projects since the mid-1990s, we’ve had dramatic increases of energy efficiency.”

The University’s green student groups have demanded carbon neutrality from the administration for years. Junior Lee Cordova, former president of Green Action, said that although the University will not be eliminating its carbon footprint, he appreciates the administration’s commitment.

“[Reducing emissions is] not necessarily a daring goal, but it would be very exciting if that’s something we could do,” Cordova said. “The University has stayed relatively conservationist, considering the level of growth we’ve had.”

The Buildings & Grounds committee focuses on ensuring that every new building on campus will be LEED certified at the silver level. According to Malten, while the University may attempt to reach a higher LEED level on some buildings, silver makes the most sense for buildings on a college campus.

“Universities have achieved LEED Silver as a minimum, because we design our buildings to last 75 to 100 years,” he said. “We’re trying to look hard at ‘has there been anybody able to make the case that achieving LEED Gold is possible as well?’”

Cordova said that from Green Action’s perspective, having all buildings certified LEED Platinum would be ideal, but that he understands LEED certification is one of many factors considered when planning a building.

“LEED certification is important, but a building has a lot of needs,” he said. “The DUC would be more efficient without the huge windows in the atrium, but they kind of define the space.”

The third goal, as proposed by the Dining Services Committee, is to purchase all food from within 150 miles of campus by 2015. While Cordova said that this is not one of Green Action’s top priorities, monitoring food remains important since it plays a large part in students’ lives.

The Transportation committee aims to reduce by 10 percent the number of individuals commuting to campus solo by car by 2020. While this initiative faces a setback because of pending Metro cutbacks, Malten is confident that the administration can reach its goal through increasing bicycle use and walking.

“A significant part of the population lives a mile and a half from campus,” he said. “How do we get people to bike to campus and walk to campus more?”

Cordova said that relaying this message to students is difficult, because fliers will be less visible for students who move out of Residential Life.

“For a lot of students, there’s no excuse for driving,” he said.

The final goal, steered by the Purchasing & Materials Management committee, is to recycle 35 percent more by 2012 and 65 percent more by 2020. Recycling is perhaps the largest issue for student groups, which have hosted events like “Recyclemania,” slated to be held again next semester, to encourage more recycling.

“There’s a lot of different groups working on recycling. It’s so dependent on student behavior,” Cordova said, noting an impending University-wide project aimed at redesigning the school’s recycle bins to increase their accessibility.

While the University hopes to reach these goals, Vice Chancellor for Administration Henry Webber stressed that the administration wants to be cautious when moving forward in this project.

“It’s an important step, but it’s not a giant step,” Webber said. “The truth is that achieving success in sustainability is going to be built on lots of small and medium-sized steps.”

Webber added that while he cannot promise total transparency on the process, he wants to get students involved.

“There may be at some point things that are confidential to the groups, but I don’t think secrecy is the idea here,” he said.

Cordova, while he encourages students to stay informed of the issues and push the University toward greater sustainability, said that these matters involve high-level processes, which require knowledge of how the University operates.

“If the average student wants to get involved in it, it’s going to be a little harder than just joining Green Action,” he said.

This is the second article in a two-part series about Washington University’s sustainability efforts.

With additional reporting by Kat Zhao

The $12 million initiative is part of the University’s $60 million effort to “advance education and research related to energy, environment and sustainability,” according to a press release from the Chancellor’s office.

Wrighton foresees both environmental and economic benefits to the University’s plan.
“Despite these difficult financial times, the University and these lead corporate sponsors realize that investment in such research will benefit the region and the world in the long run,” Wrighton said in the press release. “The knowledge and technology we will be able to create together will over time mean lower costs to customers and global environmental improvement.”

Through the initiative, the University hopes to conduct several studies, including those that explore the use of oxy-coal combustion, a new technology that replaces air with pure oxygen and potentially allows for a more cost-effective capture of carbon dioxide from the exhaust stream.

Richard Axelbaum, professor of energy, environmental and chemical engineering at the University, will head the initiative. Though coal does release carbon dioxide, the University’s use of coal technology, Axelbaum said, addresses global climate change without adding to greenhouse gas emissions, which has been blamed for global warming.

“There are various techniques that can be implemented to actually capture carbon dioxide and store it underground,” Axelbaum said. “There are large cavernous regions under the earth that can store large quantities of carbon dioxide.”

Some students, however, see problems with the project. Senior Lee Cordova, former president of Green Action, feels that the world’s power plants need to be cleaned up to allow for a positive environmental impact.

“I don’t know how much people realize how much coal is used around the world and in Missouri, that something needs to be done to research how to clean those up,” he said.
Cordova added that it will not necessarily be the University’s responsibility to maintain a clean coal standard but rather that the focus on energy and environmental consequence should be on Ameren, the Missouri and Illinois utility company.

“Basically the University has to buy what Ameren provides,” he noted. “I think it’s more of a question of [whether] Ameren is going to adopt this.”

Despite the controversy about the benefits and costs of clean coal technology, Matt Malten, the vice chancellor for sustainability, said that the initiative fulfills a short-term need and indicates a long-term commitment to clean energy.

“We believe that we are going to have to rely on a diversity of fuel sources,” Malten said. “[The initiative] would lower the carbon footprint for the campus. It says we’re dedicated to it and also dedicated to really addressing some tough global issues.”

Malten said that the initiative, which is now focused on research, could lead to the University’s use of clean coal as its main power source.

“One of the key components of it is we’re spending a great amount of time seeing if it’s feasible to put this facility on campus,” he said. “For practical application, we see it as a zero carbon energy source if we can accomplish it.”

In total, 24 research universities worldwide have signed on to the initiative.

Internationally, other countries have begun to rapidly develop coal technologies, including China, which is involved in the initiative.

“China is growing very rapidly, and they are building new coal power plants at the rate of one per week,” Axelbaum said. “China has expertise in this area as well, so by collaborating, we benefit from this interaction as well.”

Pointing to the abundance of coal—more than 150 years of reserves—in the United States, Axelbaum added that research should be dedicated to exploiting this natural resource effectively.

“The supplies of coal are really very large, so it’s not an extreme limitation like there would be on gas or oil,” Axelbaum said. “I’m all for as much alternative energy use as we can. It’s just that there are limits to what we can accomplish.”

But he added that the consortium will encourage efforts to produce clean energy through educational institutions.

“What happens is that we tend to hope there’s a very simple solution to the problem, and it is very complicated,” Axelbaum said. The consortium will make us a little more educated about what the challenges are that we face and chart the appropriate course to address the problem.”

With additional reporting by Ben Sales and Perry Stein

Though many factors contribute to increased temperatures, human activity is without a doubt a main factor in the warming. In its 1997 Special Report on the Regional Impacts of Climate Change (a report released, astonishingly, more than 10 years ago), the IPCC made it clear that “human activities (primarily the burning of fossil fuels and changes in land use and land cover) are increasing the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases, which alter radiative balances and tend to warm the atmosphere.” A majority of scientists and an increasing percentage of the population have come to accept the truth: We are in the midst of a climate crisis that we must mitigate.

In the midst of an economic meltdown and a flawed health care system, it might seem easy to brush the climate crisis aside. But effects of the climate crisis will exacerbate these problems significantly and also cause immense suffering resulting from natural disasters, starvation and water shortages. The longer we continue to emit greenhouse gases, the more suffering our actions will cause. And the longer we fail to make substantive changes, the less ability we have to mitigate the crisis.

The next president must address the climate crisis in a serious fashion. He must reduce greenhouse gas emissions and engage in global foreign policy initiatives aimed at reversing warming. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions will require tough policy, but it is necessary for a stable future.

Washington University must also do its part to prevent the climate crisis. Superficial displays of token environmentalism, such as building merely one of many new buildings to the LEED gold standards but not including the building’s parking garage in that calculation, do not count as serious attempts to prevent climate change. Though Washington University hired Matt Malten as assistant vice chancellor for campus sustainability, the University has provided no evidence that this was more than a political move to create the appearance of environmental concern. According to reports from the University administration, Malten has spent the past year gathering data that is to help him create a plan for sustainability at the University. But either Malten is not serious about change or the University has not fully supported him in his efforts—he still has not released the promised plan.

The University’s attempts at sustainability parallel the United States’ half-hearted efforts to combat climate change by discussing the issue with other countries while refusing to make substantive changes. Both the University and the United States government need to take the climate crisis seriously, eliminate token gestures toward sustainability and implement ambitious policies in order to achieve results. The climate crisis has already affected us, and it will only cause more suffering. To Washington University and to the United States government: Stop playing with the climate crisis—we are entrusting you with our futures.

This staff editorial is the second in a four-part series featured in Student Life’s Forum section this week. Each editorial will focus on a national issue that finds its parallel on Wash. U.’s campus.

If the University were truly committed to stopping climate change and teaching its students how to deal with this generation-defining problem, it would not work toward that mission by making token efforts like phasing out water bottles, increasing recycling and building a marquee energy-efficient building.

When Wash. U. undertook construction of the Danforth University Center (DUC), if it were truly committed to environmental change rather than the appearance of a gold-standard LEED building, the university would have constructed one of the most energy-efficient buildings possible, which cannot occur when huge open spaces have to be heated. And if Wash. U.’s goal was to act with environmental responsibility, the University would not have named the DUC parking garage as a separate building that did not matter in the energy count for LEED certification.

Constructing buildings to a certain LEED standard is a nice token, but what does it say when the goal is to receive a certain environmental ranking rather than when the ranking is received simply as a result of creating a building with as much environmental responsibility as possible? Is Wash. U. committed to an appearance or is it deeply committed to a cause?

There should be no question. We should know that the University is as concerned with leading a real effort to environmental responsibility as it is with raising its U.S. News & World Report rankings.

As a side note, some have argued that a commitment to the environment will leave the University with fewer resources to attract both the country’s and world’s brightest students, and that both its national ranking and value as a university might suffer as a result. But, in the face of climate change, the university with the most value is the university that forces its students to challenge world problems critically and that also acts as a moral role model, giving its students a sense of what commitment is required to challenge that world problem.

The University’s role is to give its students the best education possible, and if U.S. News rankings mean anything, then they will follow that education. Contrary to what many seem to believe, a better education does not come from a better ranking.

How has the University educated students about climate change? The Freshman Reading Program did force some students to consider the issue, and validated it as an important one. But what happened when those students left the discussions? Most of them went back to dorms that are using significant amounts of energy due to the University’s almost continual demolition and construction, or into University buildings, which waste a significant amount of energy because the University keeps them freezing in the summer and sweltering in the winter.

Students who participated in the reading program or heard the Chancellor speak at graduation learned that climate change is a buzzword academic problem that needs to be solved, but they did not learn that they must be part of that solution and that they must act now. If Washington University, with all of its resources, cannot make the sacrifices necessary to be carbon neutral, how are students supposed to know that they themselves can?

Furthermore, what does it say when the University hires Malten as vice chancellor of sustainability, and he spends a year gathering data? Either the University is not willing to give Malten the funds to hire a large enough staff or willing give him the resources he needs to gather whatever data is necessary to start tackling the problem of climate change.

A year of talk and no action teaches students to approach climate change the same way fossil fuel companies approach the issue—yes, they are concerned and willing to make an improvement here or there, but ultimately they do not have the resources.

More likely, they do not have the will.

If the University wants to be on the cutting edge of education, it needs to be on the cutting edge of solving the climate crisis. This means instead of phasing in their plans for sustainability, like stopping sales of all plastic water bottles and asking students to carry bottles and fill them up, implement these plans now. It means looking at what temperatures we set our buildings at and moving them up a degree or two in the summer and down a degree or two in the winter to save energy. It means building all our new buildings to the highest environmental standards.

And last but not least, a serious commitment to environmentalism means reaching out to all students and telling them what they can do to make a difference and to urge their society to make a difference. It means equipping the student body, through example and by transmitting information, to deal with the real problems their generation will face.

Wash. U. is such a great university that has accomplished so many incredible feats. In the face of one of the biggest issues of our generation, we should see the University work to do no less than it has on so many other occasions.