Congratulations are in order to the University for getting the new Earth and Planetary Sciences building LEED certified. LEED certification means that the building has a much smaller environmental footprint than other buildings. Certification is cheap, costing only a few thousand dollars, and the energy efficiency of the EPS building further decreases its upkeep cost.
Unfortunately, the EPS building is pretty much the only major environmental project undertaken in the year since the conclusion of the Sesquicentennial Environmental Initiative. The Initiative-much touted last year-was supposed to “shape the University’s educational programs, research and operations as they relate to the environment and become one of the defining interdisciplinary programs at the Washington University.” There was a year of environmental colloquia and prominent speakers. In sum, it generated lots of talk but little action.
The University installed some new recycling bins outside, but without much publicity, meaning many students aren’t taking advantage of the bins and others are contaminating them with unrecyclable items. Meanwhile, Dining Services has increased waste by bagging brownies, cookies, and other treats. This is in addition to the tons of solid waste created every year because campus eateries mainly use disposable plates and cutlery.
The University needs to start implementing plans that will reduce its environmental footprint.
Let’s start small, by replacing the recycling bins-which are awfully similar to the trashcans-with receptacles more readily identifiable as recycling bins. Next, ERes needs to be scrapped, since it results in students printing out two or three copies of each archived article. It is far less wasteful to print a coursepack that students won’t lose, or better yet, charge students a per-page printing fee to penalize wasteful printing. Also, cutting down a bit on Admissions’ copious promotional mailings would save trees.
More ambitious steps would involve implementing some of the principles used in the EPS building elsewhere on campus. The EPS building, for example, utilizes hardy plants that don’t need to be watered. Every spring, the University uses countless liters of water shoring up its manicured green spaces for visiting students. Hardier plants could dramatically cut water consumption, saving the University money while saving the environment. On the same vein, retrofitting existing buildings with efficient heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems like the EPS’ would cut energy use.
Ultimately, eco-friendliness will require a cultural makeover. The University needs to move away from a culture of consumption. Reusable plates, cups and silverware should replace the disposable varieties in all central eateries: Bear’s Den, the Village and Mallinckrodt. When the Metrolink expansion is finished, the University should negotiate unlimited ride passes for students to encourage them to use mass transit rather than drive. Finally, the University could provide incentives for driving more fuel-efficient cars, further promoting a culture of environmental responsibility. A modest step along these lines would be giving free parking to staff, students and faculty who drive hybrids.