The Cost of Going Green

When the green movement first began in the later half of the 20th century, activists were focussed on getting the government to enact policy in promotion of environmentally friendly regulations.  As we have seen throughout this blog, the scope of these regulations have gotten narrower as we continue to progress towards a more sustainable world.  Just as states have taken their own measures regarding individual green initiatives, communities have taken action to do their part in becoming green.

Many communities have supported the creation of "Green Ribbon" K-12 schools, which follow a set of standards to reduce the school's environmental impact as well as provide an effective education regarding sustainability.  What this means for schools is making slight changes in day to day activities to create an overall greener environment for the school community.   This could be accomplished through efforts made in water conservation, energy conservation, solid waste reduction, and a number of other areas.  In addition to these changes, green schools must also create partnerships allowing the school to be active in the community and provide training to staff on sustainability.  One of the ultimate goals of Green Ribbon schools is to have a celebration of the school's environmental achievements.

To become an official Green School, schools must meet the guidelines set by the national requirements of the US Department of Education.  These requirements effect nearly every area of the school's operations, from administrative changes through the implementation of a Green Team to structural changes such as environmentally friendly building materials.  In addition, Green Schools strive to improve the wellbeing of students and staff through the making of Air Quality improvements, buying products with fewer toxins through an Environmental Purchasing Policy, or simply using more electronic devices in the attempt to reduce paper waste.

While the idea of being honored with the Green Ribbon is appealing both in the prestige of the award and the positive impact on the environment, making the necessary changes to infrastructure can be costly.  Many blueprints now account for the environment and are built to save energy, but the advanced features they include, such as heat reflecting roofs or automated light sensors, cost as much as 10% more in construction fees when compared to the standard school.

When green schools began to take off in the mid 2000's, the rising costs begged the question of if these features were worth it.  The Houston Independent School District built a green school from the ground up in 2007 with the hopes that significant cuts in energy costs could be made.  However when tested the school produced energy costs higher than anyone would have expected, causing some backlash for the idea.  

After these operational issues came to light, school boards across the country were forced to take a closer look at the operations of their green schools.  Under a study conducted by LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) companies such as Capital E analyzed the effectiveness of their systems within these new schools.  A number of factors demanded greener infrastructure in the first place, including rising energy costs, worsening power quality, increasing cost of water and the impact of water pollution, and growing pressure to cut air pollution.  Going green allows schools to address all of these problems, and was ultimately found to save the district money in the long run.

Capital E's breakdown found that on average, green schools cost about $4 per square foot more than the standard school.  The financial savings however were found to be about $70 per square foot, astronomically outweighing the construction costs.  While the Massachusetts schools for which the study focussed received only about $15 per square foot of these savings, it was still about four times as much as they invested.

Via Mother Nature Network

Green schools provide a way for communities to take the environmental challenges they face into their own hands by tackling the problems with solutions specifically geared to that area.  If a community suffers from increasing electricity costs, green schools provide an opportunity to cut these costs through energy saving options designed specifically for their needs.  In the average school lifespan of about 42 years, green schools use less than 33% energy and 32% less water than the standard school, effectively saving up to $100,000 a year as time goes on.  This provides school districts with greater budgets, allowing them to hire new teachers, buy new technology, and provide a better atmosphere for students and staff overall.

Reducing Our Carbon Footprint

In my last post, I discussed the progress that global leaders are making in regards to adapting to climate change and making appropriate adjustments to reduce harmful emissions.  While this progress that arose out of the Paris Climate Conference in 2015 did establish a goal percentage for which to reduce emissions, it did not clearly outline how these numbers could become a reality.  However, as one of the top producers of harmful emissions, it is crucial that the United States do whatever they can to actually meets these new guidelines.  Although many methods would be capable of achieving these goals, one of the most viable options is to reduce our carbon footprint through renewable energies.

A carbon footprint is defined as the total amount of carbon dioxide emissions and other greenhouse gases produced by an individual or, in the case of the global perspective, individual nations.  The reason for the stress on the importance of reducing these emissions stems from the fact that as more carbon dioxide is emitted, the more the balance of the atmosphere is thrown off.  This is where the name "greenhouse gases" comes from, as the gases allow more of the Earth's heat to become trapped.

Carbon emissions come from a variety of sources, including burning of fossil fuels for electricity, transportation, and industrial processes.  Electricity is the largest contributor, as coal must be burned to create enough energy to power almost every aspect of our lives.   (Think about it—could you go a day without turning on the TV, charging your phone, or simply turning on the lights?)  So if electricity causes such a large percentage of harmful carbon emissions, it seems that changing this process to burn less fossil fuels would ultimately reduce our nation's carbon footprint.

Graph courtesy of EPA

The US has been struggling to reduce our carbon emissions for years, but as the emphasis on environmental awareness increases, more and more federal regulations have been proposed to ensure we can follow through.  In August of 2015, the Clean Power Plan was proposed to give each state a target number by which to reduce their individual carbon emissions.  One of the many options proposed by the plan was the use of renewable energies.

Although the Clean Power Plan gives states flexibility in which actions they could take, renewable energy offers certain advantages over other options such as natural gases or nuclear power.  Renewable energy is generated from sources that are not limited in the way that fossil fuels are, making them an appealing option as a long term solution.  Because renewables generate energy from wind, solar power, biomass, or geothermal heat, they do not come with the worry that one day they will be used up completely.

Photo courtesy of Aaron

In regards to the Clean Power Plan, renewable energy may be most appealing as it would allow states to cut their carbon emissions substantially, while still being cost effective.  In fact, switching to renewables has many economic benefits in addition to its environmental advantages.  As a relatively labor intensive means of generating electricity, renewable energy as an industry creates more jobs per dollar invested than the traditional fossil fuel industry, while also creating more jobs in general for the economy.  Additionally, the industry promotes the support of local businesses as investment dollars are kept local by paying private landowners for providing a space in which to build wind and solar power plants.  This also creates an influx of property and income taxes, which ultimately benefit states and local communities.

When compared to the other options proposed by the Clean Air Act, renewable energy outweighs most in the long run.  Nonrenewable sources such as natural gas pose many problems, despite being cleaner than fossil fuels.  While natural gas allows the energy industry to meet the increasing need for electricity, it comes at a price.  Literally.  As the dependence for natural gas increases, customers must deal with spikes in the price for electricity.  Not to mention the fact that while burning natural gases puts less pollutants into the atmosphere, it emits a substantial amount of carbon dioxide.

At the end of the day, when states are considering which options to pursue, it seems that renewable sources are the most effective option to providing a long term solution.  Making these decisions puts states (and ultimately our nation) one step closer to reducing our carbon footprint.