6 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(12/10/15 2:29am)
This year, a US national security report labeled climate change as “an urgent and growing threat to our national security.” While climate change is a natural occurrence, there is much evidence to show that humans have greatly increased the rate of climate change. This increased rate is largely due to the increase of atmospheric greenhouse gases, released by human activity. Greenhouse gases essentially trap heat in the lower atmosphere, which contributes to a rise in temperatures. Climate change is a global issue, one that will affect every corner of the earth. The College has been one of many institutions of higher education to take a leading role in addressing climate change.
A Goal of Carbon Neutrality
On May 5, 2007, the Trustees adopted the Resolution on Achieving Carbon Neutrality by 2016. Carbon neutrality is defined as net zero carbon emissions, which requires that an institution “remove” as much carbon dioxide equivalent from the atmosphere as it emits.
In the resolution, the Trustees wrote that “a goal of carbon neutrality for Middlebury College by 2016, while challenging, is feasible through energy conservation and efficiency, renewable fuel sources, technology innovations, educational programming and learning, and offset purchases after all other feasible measures have been taken.” With 2016 right around the corner, it is time to consider where the College is on its quest for carbon neutrality, and what can still be done to further its environmental mission.
The Climate Action Plan (CAP), adopted in 2008, targeted heating and cooling, electricity, vehicles, college travel, and waste minimization as areas in which the College could reduce net emissions to progress towards carbon neutrality. At the time of the report, heating and cooling made the largest contribution to emissions at 89 percent, travel and vehicles came in a distant second at nine percent, and electricity and waste accounted for only one percent of emissions each. Since the CAP went into effect, the College has made strides to reach carbon neutrality and reduce emissions in each of these areas.
Waste
Emissions from decomposing waste comprised only one percent of the College’s total emissions in 2008. These emissions result from waste decomposing in landfills or being burned, both of which release greenhouse gases.
All of the College’s waste is already sorted in the recycling center, recycling as much as possible.
Recommendations to further reduce waste included integrating waste minimization and sustainable practices into the residential life system, and creating a service requirement for first-years in the dining halls or recycling center to develop an understanding of the waste generated by the College.
To address emissions from waste, the College has increased signage promoting sustainable practices on campus and conducted campaigns to raise student awareness about waste. However, the student body is still largely unaware of the College’s waste because the waste management is so far removed from students. Though educating the student body would be valuable, the low level of emissions from waste have, understandably, ensured that it is not a top priority.
Vehicle Emissions
Vehicle emissions and emissions from travel make up another nine percent of the College’s greenhouse gas emissions. Travel and vehicle usage are necessary for the function of the College, and so these emissions cannot be eliminated within the confines of modern technology. To reduce emissions from travel, the CAP advised increasing education about the impacts of travel, stressing videoconferencing as an alternative to traveling and upgrading the vehicle fleet to more energy efficient vehicles.
Since 2008, the College has seen an increase in greenhouse gas emissions from waste and air travel, but a decrease in emissions from mobile combustion (which include road vehicles and construction equipment).
In 2007, the College estimated that it generated 137 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCDE) due to solid waste. By 2014, that number had increased slightly to 153 MTCDE. Emissions from air travel increased more dramatically over this same period, from 1381 MTCDE in 2007 to 2346 MTCDE in 2014. Emissions from mobile combustion have decreased from 408 to 370 MTCDE.
In light of the increasing size of the student body, it is admirable that emissions from waste and mobile combustion have not risen significantly. Air travel is a much larger contributor to the College’s emissions, though, and yearly emissions have increased by almost 1000 MTCDE since 2007.
The College has certainly made progress since 2007, but student awareness about emissions is still lacking and emissions from air travel have increased dramatically.
Electricity
Emissions from purchased electricity accounted for only one percent of the College’s overall emissions in 2008. By 2014, this figure had risen to almost seven percent. This increase in percentage was largely due to a decrease in net emissions from heating and cooling. However, emissions from purchased electricity did rise from 676 MTCDE in 2007 to 864 tons in 2014.
Of the 22 million kilowatt hours of electricity the College uses each year, 20 percent is cogenerated on campus by turbines connected to the central heating plant. The remaining 80 percent of the College’s electricity is purchased from Green Mountain Power (GMP). This purchased electricity accounts for the greenhouse gas emissions from electricity, because the electricity the College purchases from GMP is not necessarily from carbon neutral sources.
Until 2013, 70 percent of Vermont’s power came from nuclear energy, which is carbon neutral. Much of the rest of the state’s electricity came from hydropower, another source of clean energy. The Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, which supplied most of Vermont’s nuclear power, shut down in late 2014. The Entergy Corporation, which operated the power plant, cited economic reasons for closing the plant. Consequently, GMP has had to purchase electricity from other sources.
GMP predicts that only 55 percent of its fuel mix in 2015 will be renewable, coming from nuclear and hydroelectric sources. The other 45 percent will consist mainly of “system” power, which comes from various sources, including fossil fuels. In calculating carbon emissions from purchased electricity, the College must consider the ultimate source of its electricity.
Since 2007, carbon emissions due to purchased electricity at the College have risen by 188 MTCDE, nearly 30 percent. Though only a small contribution to the College’s overall carbon emissions, the College should continue to investigate ways to reduce these emissions. To help reduce net emissions from electricity, the CAP recommended conservation as well as investigating alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar power.
In 2012 the College installed a small 143kW demonstration solar system near McCardell Bicentennial Hall, which consists of 34 solar trackers. In total, the system produces about 200,000 kilowatt-hours annually: one percent of the College’s total electricity consumption. The system generates enough electricity to power Forest Hall.
Solar power is inherently renewable, and thus an excellent option to offset the College’s energy usage. However, current solar technology is not conducive to power generation at the scale necessary for the College. The College should continue to pursue conservation and other efforts to reduce overall electricity usage.
Heating and Cooling
The largest contribution to the College’s carbon emissions comes from heating and cooling. In 2008, heating and cooling constituted 89 percent of the College’s emissions. Most of the emissions came from the combustion of no. 6 fuel oil to heat and cool buildings; the College was burning about 2,000,000 gallons per year, which released 23,877 MTCDE in 2006-07. Another 2,009 MTCDE came from the combustion of no. fuel oil, and 623 from propane.
The CAP clearly stressed the need to use carbon neutral fuel sources to heat and cool the campus if the College is to reach carbon neutrality by 2016.
The College’s $12 million biomass plant, opened in 2009, was a major step toward reducing net emissions from heating and cooling the College. The biomass plant burns wood, which the College considers a carbon neutral fuel source because the same amount of carbon dioxide is absorbed by the trees as is released in combustion. The plant utilizes a process known as biomass gasification to combust woodchips, which is much more efficient than traditional methods of burning wood. The heat generated from this combustion is used to make steam, which is piped throughout the campus to meet the College’s heating and cooling needs.
While the net emissions from the biomass plant are zero, this does not mean it has no emissions. The emissions from the plant are somewhat lower than those from burning fuel oil, and emissions resulting from chipping and transporting the wood to the biomass facility are not factored into the assessment of carbon neutrality.
Unfortunately, the biomass plant is not large enough to meet all of the College’s heating and cooling needs. In addition to biomass combustion, the College still burns 640,000 gallons of no.6 fuel oil each year. To address this issue, the College is undergoing a switch to burning bio-methane instead of fuel oil.
The use of bio-methane was made possible by the approval of the VT Gas Addison Rutland Natural Gas Project (Phase 1). Bio-methane is chemically equivalent to natural gas, and is produced by the digestion of organic waste.
A spur on the new natural gas pipeline from Colchester, VT to the Addison and Rutland area will allow the College to easily transport bio-methane to campus. The bio-methane will be produced offsite, at a local dairy farm. The use of bio-methane to phase out fuel oil is very important because the College considers bio-methane a carbon neutral fuel, and thus its use will greatly reduce the College’s net emissions from heating and cooling.
The College has also made strides to reduce emissions from heating and cooling by improving building efficiency.
In 2007, a survey of buildings at the College indicated that 53 percent of the square footage on campus performed well below current energy code standards. Since then, the College has had two buildings receive Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum certification, and is seeking LEED Gold certification for Virtue Field House.
The College’s efforts have resulted in a 66 percent reduction in net emissions from stationary combustion sources, such as boilers, heaters and ovens, since 2007. From 2013 to 2014, the College emitted a net of only 8,996 MTCDE due to stationary combustion, as compared to 26,509 MTCDE in 2006 to 2007. However, biogenic emissions — those due to combustion of biologically based materials (wood) — from 2013 to 2014 were 21,658 MTCDE. This is not counted in the College’s assessment of net emissions from stationary combustion because it is considered carbon neutral. Though the College may exclude these emissions, the carbon neutrality of biomass combustion is disputed by many.
Our Carbon Footprint
In 2014, the College reported gross emissions of 8,996 MTCDE from stationary combustion, 370 from mobile combustion, 864 from purchased electricity, 2,346 from air travel, and 153 from solid waste. This amounts to total emissions of 12,729 MTCDE. The College also included reductions of 10 MTCDE due to purchase of renewable energy credits (RECs), 550 from carbon offsets purchased, and 9,905 MTCDE from sequestration due to college-owned lands. In all, this amounted to a reported net emissions of 2,264 MTCDE.
The College’s many efforts, especially the switch to bio-methane for heating and cooling, will further decrease the net carbon emissions for 2016. If necessary, the College can purchase carbon offsets in order to meet its goal. In assessing its greenhouse gas emissions, the College employs a custom tool tailored to its needs. It is worthwhile to note that other methods of assessing emissions may yield drastically different results.
Carbon neutrality, though an important step for the College, is by no means an end goal. As 2016 draws closer, it is time to begin discussion of the next steps. The College should continue to demonstrate leadership by further reducing its environmental impact.
The College’s quest for carbon neutrality came about because of the actions of a dedicated group of students, faculty, and staff, who challenged the College to adopt an ambitious goal. Those students have long since left Middlebury and ventured into the world; now, it is our turn to take up the mantle, and push the College to new heights.
It is easy to look at the issue of climate change and give up because it is so daunting, but every great change begins with small actions. It is unrealistic to expect that everyone will consider the gravity of this issue and take action. I hope, however, that we will continue to consider the impact of our actions, from reducing the use of vehicles to turning out the lights. As you go about your daily life, take a moment to consider the following question: What can you do to live more sustainably? Every action, no matter how small, makes a difference.
(12/03/15 1:12am)
Beyond emissions from heating and cooling, travel and waste, the College must address emissions from purchased electricity in order to reach its goal of carbon neutrality by 2016. When the Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted in 2008, electricity purchases accounted for only 2 percent of the College’s total carbon emissions. By 2014, this figure had risen to almost 7 percent. Though this was largely due to a decrease in total gross emissions from heating and cooling, emissions from purchased electricity did rise from 676 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2007 to 864 tons in 2014.
The College uses about 22 million kilowatt hours of electricity per year. Of this energy, 20 percent is cogenerated on campus by turbines connected to the central heating plant. The steam generated by the plant (from biomass and fossil fuel combustion) drives turbines, which generate electricity. The steam is then piped throughout campus to meet the heating and cooling demand. The remaining 80 percent of the College’s electricity is purchased from the Central Vermont Public Service Corporation (CVPS). Because the combustion of biomass is considered carbon neutral, it is this purchased electricity that accounts for the College’s net carbon emissions from electricity usage.
When the College purchases electricity from CVPS, it cannot control the source of the electricity or whether it is carbon neutral. Until 2013, the vast majority of Vermont’s power (70 percent) came from nuclear energy, which is carbon neutral. Much of the remainder of the state’s electricity came from hydropower, another source of clean energy. Most of Vermont’s nuclear power came from the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, which shut down in late 2014. Due to this, utilities have since had to purchase electricity from non-renewable sources.
Green Mountain Power, which recently merged with CVPS, predicts that only 55 percent of its fuel mix in 2015 will be renewable, coming from nuclear and hydroelectric sources. The other 45 percent of its fuel mix will consist mainly of “system” power, which comes from various sources, including fossil fuels. In calculating carbon emissions from purchased electricity, the College must factor this in.
To help reduce net emissions from electricity, the CAP recommended conservation as well as investigating alternative energy sources, such as wind and solar power.
In 2012, well after the CAP went into action, the College installed a small 143kW demonstration solar system near McCardell Bicentennial Hall, which consists of 34 solar trackers. In total, the system produces about 200,000 kilowatt-hours annually, which is only one percent of the College’s total electricity consumption. According to the College’s website, the electricity generated by this system is enough to power Forest Hall throughout the year.
Though solar power could be used to offset the College’s energy usage, it is not currently feasible for large-scale power generation. Because of the relative inefficiency of modern solar panels, the College would need a huge solar system to meet its energy needs. This presents multiple problems, including the physical infrastructure of the system and energy storage.
In order to further reduce net emissions from electricity purchases, the College should continue to focus on reducing electricity consumption. Signs asking students to turn off lights when they leave the room have become increasingly prevalent on campus and help to encourage more sustainable practices. Despite these efforts, there is the sentiment that students are still largely unaware of the impacts of their lifestyle choices on sustainability.
Since 2007, carbon emissions due to purchased electricity at the College have risen by 188 metric tons of carbon dioxide, nearly 30 percent. Though only a small contribution to the College’s overall carbon emissions, reduction of electricity usage or a shift toward renewable energy sources will help the College reach its goal of carbon neutrality by 2016.
(11/04/15 7:28pm)
The “million gallon question,” or more accurately, the “640,000 gallon question,” is one of the most significant obstacles in the College’s quest for carbon neutrality by 2016. According to the Climate Action Plan adopted in 2008, 89 percent of the College’s greenhouse gas emissions comes from heating and cooling buildings using a steam-based system. Although the opening of the biomass plant in 2009 reduced the College’s annual consumption of no. 6 fuel oil by roughly 1,350,000 gallons, there still remains 640,000 gallons per year required to meet the College’s heating and cooling needs. Given that this Vermont winter is unlikely to be significantly milder than last year’s (climate change doesn’t happen on that kind of time-scale), how can we either reduce or replace the emissions from burning all this oil?
In order to address this “640,000 gallon question,” the College identified two potential solutions in 2008: the construction of an additional biomass facility, and the use of biodiesel in place of fuel oil to generate steam.
An economic, environmental and social analysis of these two options revealed the construction of a new biomass plant as the better path. Economically, the CAP identified biomass as more affordable given the high cost of production of biodiesel. Biodiesel could also pose an environmental problem because greenhouse gases emitted during the production of the fuel (from fertilizers, irrigation and transport) might exceed those absorbed from plant growth. Furthermore, the growth of corn for biodiesel contributes to deforestation and rising global food prices.
However, a complete switch from fuel oil to biomass also has its own problems. A new biomass plant would be expensive. Energy generated using biomass also takes more time to come online and take offline compared to fuel oil. This makes it difficult to respond to changing demand for steam. Another issue was sustainably sourcing all the woodchips needed to replace 640,000 gallons of fuel oil. The College would also need to account for the greenhouse emissions of transporting the woodchips.
Then in 2010, a far better option was identified: bio-methane produced from cow manure. Originally, the gas would have to be produced offsite by manure digesters on local farms, trucked to a facility near campus, then piped underground to the central heating plant. The use of bio-methane to meet heating and cooling needs has many positive implications for the College’s environmental impact. Methane, or natural gas, has the highest ratio of energy to carbon dioxide output of any fossil fuel because it has the highest density of hydrogen-carbon bonds. In comparison to other fuel oils, combustion of methane releases about 25 percent less carbon dioxide. In addition, the purified gas contains fewer impurities, such as sulfur and nitrogen, than fuel oil, so burning it produces fewer pollutants.
With the construction of the VT Gas pipeline, the College will be able to pump bio-methane (which is chemically equivalent to natural gas) into the pipeline. The biomass plant would be connected to the larger VT gas pipeline, rather than a direct pipeline running from the farm’s digester. So while the biomass plant might not necessarily be burning all bio-methane all the time, the College would be paying VT Gas for all the natural gas it uses as if it were bio-methane. VT Gas would then pay the dairy farms for their bio-methane contribution.
However, the construction of the VT Gas pipeline is still controversial. It will be transporting fracked gas from Canadian tarsands. Fracking also has noticeable environmental impacts on water quality. Despite the controversy of the pipeline, its construction will have an immediate impact on the College’s goal of carbon neutrality by serving as transport infrastructure for the biomass plant.
(10/21/15 4:04pm)
The largest contribution to the College’s carbon emissions comes from heating and cooling buildings. When the Climate Action Plan (CAP) was implemented in 2008, heating and cooling constituted 89 percent of the College’s emissions. Most of the emissions came from the combustion of no. 6 fuel oil to heat and cool buildings; the College was burning about two million gallons per year, which released 23,877 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (MTCDE) in 2006-07. Another 2,009 MTCDEs came from the combustion of no. 2 fuel oil, and 623 from propane. The CAP clearly stressed the need to use carbon neutral fuel sources to heat and cool the campus if the College is to reach carbon neutrality by 2016.
The College’s biomass plant, opened in 2009, was a major step toward making the College carbon neutral.
There are two important questions when considering the biomass plant. How does it function, and how does this correlate to reduced net emissions? The College’s plant uses a process known as biomass gasification, where woodchips are superheated with a controlled amount of oxygen so that they do not actually combust. The resulting gas, called syngas (synthetic gas), is then combusted and the heat is used to make steam, which is piped throughout campus to heat, cool, make hot water and cook. This method of combustion is very efficient, and is carbon neutral because the same amount of carbon dioxide is released as is absorbed by the trees that are consumed in the process.
While the net emissions from the biomass plant are zero, this does not mean it has no emissions. The emissions from the plant are not significantly lower than those from burning fuel oil, but the biomass facility utilizes a filtration system to clean up the exhaust, removing 99.7 percent of particulates.
The emissions resulting from chipping and transporting the wood to the biomass facility are not factored into the assessment of carbon neutrality.
Another important aspect of biomass is where the fuel comes from. The College joined with the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry (SUNY-ESF) on a project to test the feasibility of willow shrubs as a source of wood chips for the biomass plant. Willow shrubs are fast growing, and could be planted on unused farmland to generate additional income for local farmers. After the first harvest in 2010, it was determined that willow shrubs are not an effective fuel source for the College’s biomass plant. The College continues to source their chips from logging operations within a 75-mile radius.
In addition to the use of biomass to generate steam, heating and cooling emissions can be reduced by improving building efficiency. When the CAP was assembled, a survey of buildings at the College indicated that 53 percent of the square footage on campus performed well below current energy code standards.
Since the report, the College has indeed made strides to improve the performance of its infrastructure. In 2008, Franklin Environmental Center at Hillcrest received Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Platinum certification, the highest possible certification. More recently, the squash center also obtained LEED Platinum certification, and the College is seeking LEED Gold certification for the new field house.
Unfortunately, the new townhouses being constructed in Ridgeline will not be required to be LEED certified. The College’s agreement with Kirchhoff Campus Properties, who is building the new dorms, does not require the company to seek LEED certification for the complex. Given the recent progress with the squash center and Virtue Field House, this is a disappointing step in the wrong direction for the College.
All of the College’s developments have contributed to a 66 percent reduction in net emissions from stationary combustion sources, such as boilers, heaters and ovens. From 2013 to 2014, the College emitted only 8,996 MTCDEs due to stationary combustion, as compared to 26,509 MTCDEs in 2006-2007.
Recent improvements have contributed to reduced net emissions and reliance upon fossil fuels, but have not solved the College’s heating and cooling problem. The biomass plant eliminated the need for one million gallons of no. 2 fuel oil each year, leaving another million gallons to address. What has the College done about the next million gallons of fuel oil and what can still be done? That is the “million gallon question.”
(10/07/15 9:36pm)
Two of the areas targeted by the 2008 Climate Action Plan (CAP) to help the College reach carbon neutrality were waste management and travel emissions. At the time of the plan, travel and waste accounted for 10% of the College’s greenhouse gas emissions. The CAP laid out a variety of recommendations for how the College could reduce emissions from these sources, including increasing public awareness and promoting conservation.
Since the CAP was adopted in 2008, the College has made progress in some aspects. How has the College progressed in waste management and travel? How it can still improve? Carbon Countdown examines.
The least significant contribution to greenhouse gas emissions comes from waste. Waste from the College decomposes in landfills or is burned, which releases greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. This source of emissions is responsible for only 1% of the College’s emissions. The College already sends all of its waste to the recycling center, where it is sorted and, if possible, recycled. In addition to these efforts, MiddShift — a College group advocating carbon neutrality — suggested, among other things, that the College integrate waste minimization and sustainable practices into the residential life system, and create a service requirement for first-years in the dining halls or recycling center to develop an understanding of the waste that is generated by the College.
While there have been campaigns to raise student awareness about food waste at the College, such as Weigh the Waste, during which volunteers collected and measured dining hall food waste before students cleared their plates on the carousel, sustainability is certainly not stressed in the residential life system. Overall campus awareness about waste management is minimal. How the College deals with waste is far removed from the student body; this does not encourage students to think about the waste they generate. Students may be aware of recycling and composting, but rarely go out of their way to help recycle or compost waste. The College manages its waste well, but still needs to increase awareness about waste and sustainability, and encourage the student body to think more about its impact.
Vehicles and emissions from travel account for another 9% of the College’s greenhouse gas emissions. As the CAP makes abundantly clear, these emissions cannot be fully eliminated within the confines of current technologies. Travel for academic, administrative, athletic, advancement, admissions, student services and visitor purposes will still be required, and will necessarily result in greenhouse gas emissions.
However, emissions from travel can be reduced, if not eliminated. The CAP details several strategies by which this can be achieved, including increasing education about the impacts of travel, stressing videoconferencing as an alternative to traveling and upgrading the vehicle fleet to more energy efficient vehicles, such as hybrid cars. It is important to note, however, that the College does not include travel of students studying abroad or faculty and staff commuting to work in its calculations of emissions due to these sources. Including these sources could dramatically change the assessment of greenhouse gas emissions due to travel.
Since the CAP was adopted in 2008, the College’s greenhouse gas emissions from waste and air travel have increased, but emissions from mobile combustion have decreased. In 2007, the College estimated that it generated the equivalent of 137 metric tons of carbon dioxide due to solid waste. By 2014, that number had increased slightly to 153 metric tons. Emissions from air travel increased more dramatically over this same period, from 1381 metric tons in 2007 to 2346 metric tons in 2014. Emissions from mobile combustion (which include road vehicles, as well as construction equipment) have decreased from 408 metric tons to 370 metric tons.
In light of the increasing size of the student body, it is admirable that emissions from waste and mobile combustion have held even or declined. Air travel is a much larger contributor to the College’s emissions, though, and yearly emissions have increased by almost 1000 metric tons since 2007. According to data from the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), this increase in emissions is offset by sequestration from college-owned land. While the College has made progress since 2007, student awareness about emissions is still lacking and emissions from air travel have increased dramatically. As the College approaches carbon neutrality in 2016, there is still much room for improvement in these areas.
(09/24/15 1:31am)
In February 2015, a U.S. national security report called climate change “an urgent and growing threat to our national security.” Over the past two decades, climate change has become an increasingly important topic in the United States and across the world. Researchers have demonstrated the far-reaching effects of increasing levels of greenhouse gases and have pointed to more extreme weather patterns, such as the California drought and Hurricane Irene in Vermont, as signs of what is to come if climate change is not addressed. As issues involving climate change have risen to prominence, colleges and universities across the country have begun to develop more sustainable practices and promote conservation on their campuses.
In 2004, the College joined other leading higher-education institutions when the board of Trustees passed a resolution to reduce emissions by eight percent from 1990 levels by 2012. Then, in October 2006, the Trustees approved funding for a new biomass plant which would help the college achieve the eight percent emission reduction. In response to this development, students and faculty began advocating a new, more ambitious objective for the College: carbon neutrality. Thus, in 2007, amidst growing awareness about climate change and the effects of greenhouse gases on our atmosphere, the Board of Trustees approved a resolution to achieve carbon neutrality by 2016.
What is carbon neutrality? The fancy term you hear tossed around so often means net zero carbon emissions, achieved by balancing emissions with carbon sequestration and, usually as a last-ditch effort, by purchasing carbon credits.
To reach carbon neutrality, the College developed a “Climate Action Implementation Plan,” adopted on August 28, 2008. Focusing on areas like heating and cooling, electricity and transportation, the plan detailed several strategies for the College to reduce its footprint and shift toward carbon neutral energy sources. One of these strategies includes the construction of the new biomass plant, which reduced the College’s dependence on #6 fuel oil, and pursuing opportunities for renewable energy sources. In addition to suggesting alternative energy sources, the plan calls for efficiency upgrades of campus buildings in compliance with LEED guidelines.
Since the plan went into effect in 2008, the College has made progress in its quest for neutrality. In February 2014, Jack Byrne, the Director of Sustainability Integration, released an update stating the College’s carbon emissions for FY13 were 50% below 2007 baseline emissions. Byrne attributed this progress to the biomass plant and “numerous energy efficiency projects the College has completed over the past several years.”
Despite the College’s progress, it is not the first institution of higher education to approach carbon neutrality — not even the first in the NESCAC. In 2013, Colby College announced that it had achieved carbon neutrality, thanks in part to its own biomass plant. Colby College joined the ranks of three other small colleges, including Green Mountain College in Vermont, that have become carbon neutral.
Carbon neutrality remains an important goal for the College. When the class of 2016 arrived, they were touted as the “Carbon Neutral Class.” During their orientation, students learned about carbon neutrality and were encouraged to get involved with the initiative. Now, with the 2016 deadline drawing close and the Carbon Neutral Class nearing graduation, it is time to reflect on where we are. What has the College done to reduce its carbon footprint? What can still be done to improve the sustainability of the College? Every other week, this column will explore answers to these questions and more. Will the College actually be carbon neutral by 2016? The Carbon Countdown will help you decide.