green light program university of south florida[1]

8/9/2019 Green Light Program University of South Florida[1]

1/15

Green Light ProgramUniversity of

South Florida

Group 2: The Green BullsAna Chirino

Michael Convery

Kayla Hernandez

Viviana Hernandez

Mohamed Jaoui

ENC 3250: White Paper Project Summer 2010

Professor: Francis Tobienne

2010

Admin

[Type the company name]

8/2/2010


2/15

Contents

Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 2

Executive Summary.............................................................................................................................. 3

The Meaning of Going Green .................................................................................................. 3

Green Light Program ............................................................................................................................ 4

Green Standards & Goals .................................................................................................................... 6

Christian Wells Associate Professor, and Director, USF Office of Sustainability ............................ ....... 9

Going Green Challenges.................................................................................................................... 14

Conclusion ........................................................................................................................................... 14


3/15

Have you ever bought organic products?Are

you part of any green organization? Do you

recycle? Do you buy biodegradable products?

How does going green make a difference for

you? These are some of the questions asked,

triggering an awareness of how various

choices impact the environment.

According to Max Loodlin, author of an Ezine

article, A green form of energy is not green inthe sense of a color, but rather in the sense of

contributing to the environment. Going

green is a different lifestyle. It is a way to

positively impact our environment based on the

actions and behaviors we implement today. It

is an approach that starts at home, changing

from the use of traditional or regular methods

and moving toward environmentally friendly

products.

Consumers can transition from not recycling at

all, to having a lone recycling bin, to recycling

papers, bottles, cans, and buying

environmentally friendly products, appliances

and light bulbs. In addition, driving a hybrid

car pooling, living in a house made of recycledgoods, maintaining a vegetarian diet are al

incremental changes in the going green

process. There are several simple ways

consumers can implement a going green

lifestyle, including changing their bill delivery

method from mailed to online statements.

Executive Summary

There are few ideas as misunderstood and readily embraced as the idea of going green. Whatdoes it mean? Why is society pressuring companies to challenge themselves and becomemore responsible? Universities are a center of knowledge and a breeding ground for ideas.What happens when a university undertakes a mission to revamp its infrastructure in effort to

green its campus? The University of South Florida has made such an effort. Through readingthe Office of Sustainabilitys documents, interviewing its leader, and evaluating the universitythrough its Green Report Card, a picture can be gleaned. The university is making asignificant effort to meet a series of environmental goals. One tool in the universitys arsenalis the Green Light Program. Through a reduction in the power needed to light its classrooms,recycling, and energy control, the university seeks to make a positive impact on theenvironment and the future. In this paper, we discuss what going green means, the GreenLight Program, the standards set forth, and we interview the director of the Office ofSustainability.

The Meaning of Going Green


4/15

Many companies have embraced the idea of

greenly operating their businesses. Some

companies have placed recycle bins for

papers, bottles, and cans at work; they also

buy biodegradable cleaning products, and

avoid buying products that adversely affect the

environment. One of the convenient ways

companies can contribute to a greenenvironment is encouraging employees to not

print emails. In fact, some companies

frequently add a footnote stating, Consider

your environment before printing this email.

However, for some companies going green is

just another marketing tactic to generate

revenue.

Consumers can feel confused or overwhelmed

unsure of what it means to go green or how to

contribute to the movement. Some companies

use the term Greenwashing, referring to the

practice of making untrue claims, falsely

labeling a product as being green. According to

Paul Hawken, activist and author, the news

media and marketers are for turning

environmentalism into fashion a nd distractingfrom serious issues.

The green movement within companies and

consumers has a tremendous impact on our

environment. By continuing to perform these

actions several resources are protected and

pollution of our environment is kept at lower

levels. However, going green is a persona

decision that each individual has to consider.

For a university, going green can involve many factors. There are green house gases to reduce,

transportation infrastructure to develop, building impacts to minimize, and waste management

mandates to issue. A university is a microcosm of society. The changes enacted at a university level

can be experimented with, tweaked, and then disseminated to civilization as a whole.

Green Light Program

With the advent of the going green mentality and its dissemination from homes, to companies, to the

media, the University of South Florida has joined in the movement. The movement from a traditional

energy model to the newly unfolding green paradigm can involve a varying array of transformations.One such transformation, the University of South Florida implemented, is the Green Light program.

The university is seeking to lower both its environmental impact and trim its prodigious utility costs.

The Green Light Program is designed to assist the university in moving forward with these goals.

Through upgrading existing lamp technology, reducing lamp usage, and building a smarter power

grid, the University of South Florida is moving toward

reshaping its energy policies and its image.

Forty-six thousand students enter USFs campuses

yearly (usfweb3). Small incremental changes in the

lighting costs necessary to service those students can

have tremendous effects. One of the first tasks

developed to promote energy efficiency was the

replacement of older T12 fluorescent lamps with

the newer F32 T8 model. Buildings over four

thousand square feet are further being upgraded

to a F28 lamp (acad.usf 8). T12 lamps came into

service during the energy crisis shaping the 1970s.

They offered only a marginal advantage over existing

Studies have shown that

by replacing the standard

T12 light bulb with the

more efficient T8, the

University can save an

estimated 40 percent in

energy costs.


5/15

technology. Because of the prevalent energy concerns of the day, they were readily put into service.

The ballasts utilized in the T12s were designed for lower output lighting. They cannot harness the

power of the T12 lamp. This leads to a reduction in the amount of light emitted triggering the

installation of further energy consuming lamps. In addition, T12 lamps operate ten degrees hotter

than comparable bulbs causing increased air conditioning costs (History and Problems of T12).

Electric lighting accounts for twenty-five percent of the costs associated with operating a building

(foodservicewarehouse). As increased building construction fills out the universitys campus, one ofthe best ways to control costs and reduce the schools environmental footprint is to manage lighting.

T8 lamps emit more light at less cost. Studies have shown that T8 blubs can reduce costs by forty

percent when compared to T12s. Beside utility cost reduction, T8 bulbs last longer, running at higher

outputs for a 24,000 hour life versus T8s estimated 20,000 hour life span. The upgrade does not

come without its costs. The choice to move from T12s to T8s costs around twenty dollars per lamp.

According to Food Service Warehouse, the payback period on the swap is anywhere from five to

seven years. Currently, ninety-five percent of all campus fixtures have been switched to the T8

model. Over 120,000 lamps have been replaced (greenreportcard).

Beyond upgrading lamps, the university is also making several other efforts to reduce the impact oflighting costs on campus. Low cost lamps may do wonders for utility bills and secondary energy

usage costs, but the impact of these changes would be stifled if efficient lamps were left running

needlessly. One of the key elements of the Office of

Sustainabilitys plans to go green was the installation of

motion sensing light switches in classrooms. These key

switches eliminate the chances of lights running indefinitely in

empty classrooms. Changes have even affected vending

machines. Modified machines, using motion sensing

technology, have been installed across campus. Ninety

percent of vending machines on campus have been converted(acad.usf 8). It is estimated that ninety percent of all

classrooms have been fitted with motion sensing switches.

Fifty percent of all conference rooms seating more than four

hundred people have seen similar upgrades.

Recycling of lamps is another key initiative. Fluorescent lamps contain mercury, a toxic metal that

causes a variety of birth defects and health hazards. Bulbs are recycled with Frontier Lighting, a

Clearwater based company (acad.usf 10). Opponents of fluorescent bulbs argue that the mercury

content of the lamp poses too high a risk to the environment. However,

the electricity needed to generate a comparable amount of light out ofan incandescent bulb will cause a power plant to emit 7.6 more mgs of

mercury. The increased mercury derived from the additional electricity

outweighs the additional mercury content of the fluorescent lamps

(environment.about).

Another effort pioneered by the universitys Office of Sustainability is

the retirement of older street lights with LED models (acad.usf 13).

LED lights are renowned for their long life span. Compared to other


6/15

light technology in the market, they are not the most efficient in terms of lumens per watt. The long

lifespan supersedes the reduced efficiency. LED street lamps last five to ten times longer than

traditional sodium or mercury lamps. This converts to a fifty to eighty percent cost savings. Further,

LED lights contain no environmental pollutants (sunlabob).

Another change was the installation of energy metering systems on many of the universitys buildings

(acad.usf 8). A thorough awareness of which buildings consume more energy can lead to efforts to

counter a buildings specific problems.H

aving an intense metering system can expose issues andflaws in sustainability efforts. Without meters tracking usage and raising red flags, engineers may not

be able to identify high consumption areas.

The university is attempting to reach farther than lighting upgrades and winning small utility cost

battles in its classrooms and research buildings. Underway is a project to forge the largest smart

energy grid in the Southeast. Solar power and biodiesel will work together to supply thousands of

homes with more environmentally friendly energy. Greenhouse gases will be reduced. Energy will be

supplied more reliably and efficiently. The system is built to better weather natural disasters. If

programs such as this were expanded nationwide, causing a five percent increase in the nations

energy grids efficiency, it would be the equivalent of removing fifty-three million cars from thecountrys roads (usfweb3).

Switching from out dated technology to more efficient lamps will generate a tremendous cost savings

for the university. Newer lamps with more longevity will reduce waste and mercury exposure.

Recycling programs can further curb the environmental impact of discarded tubes. Through careful

monitoring and upgrading the energy grid, long term costs can be planned for and reduced. Because

the costs associated with lighting a building composes twenty-five percent of the utility expense,

reducing the energy necessary to illuminate the building can make a powerful difference.

Green Standards & GoalsIn order to understand the University of South Florida's Green Lights programs opportunity to lower

costs and benefit the environment, it is necessary to understand its place in the sustainability effort of

USF as a whole. USF is an active member of two nationally recognized associations for sustainability.

The first being the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE)

and the second, the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment (ACUPCC).

The Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education was founded in 2005 to

help coordinate and strengthen campus sustainability efforts at regional and national levels, and to

serve as the first North American professional association for those interested in advancing campus

sustainability. Their mission statement is to empower higher education to lead the sustainability

transformation. We do this by providing resources, professional development, and a network of

support to enable institutions of higher education

to model and advance sustainability in everything

they do, from governance and operations to

education and research. The AASHE developed

a standardized instrument by which higher


7/15

education institutions measure their progress toward sustainability and achieve recognition.

The Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System (STARS) is self-assessment and rating

system, which institutions can benchmark their sustainability progress over time and compare with

others. Participants qualify for different levels of recognition based on level of accomplishment

(sourced from AASHE website). The overall goal of STARS is to help schools set and meet

sustainability goals while fostering information sharing about practices and performance among the

campus sustainability community. All schools that participate in STARS will receive positiverecognition. Schools that register now will be recognized as STARS Charter Participants. Being able

to claim a STARS rating can help an institution reap marketing

and recruitment benefits of sustainability leadership. USF started

participation in January of 2010, and will report their status by the

end of the year. Each STARS rating is an indication of

sustainability leadership. The STARS rating means an institution

has gone through a comprehensive process of collecting and

publicly reporting information related to their sustainability

performance. AASHE's aim is to have STARS recognized as the

consistent tool of measuring sustainability in higher education.Once USF completes, and submits their report, their STARS

ratings will be valid for three years. After three years, an

institution must submit a new report in order to claim a STARS

rating.

By signing the American College & University Presidents

Climate Commitment, USF has agreed to produce three clear and

tangible results. The most ambitious of the initiatives is the development of a comprehensive plan to

achieve climate neutrality. Climate neutrality is a momentous undertaking for any university, let alone

one as large as USF. For purposes of the ACUPCC, climate neutrality is defined as having no netgreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, to be achieved by minimizing GHG emissions as much as

possible, and using carbon offsets or other measures to mitigate the remaining emissions. Climate

neutrality may take several years to complete. The second initiative requires the university to initiate a

minimum of two out of seven tangible actions to reduce greenhouse gases while a finalized plan is

being completed. The final task, the university has agreed to complete, is to make all plans and

progress include a yearly greenhouse gases emissions report. This report will be made public to both

the university and the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education

(AASHE) for posting and dissemination.


8/15

In 2006, Provost and Executive Vice President Dr. Ralph

Wilcox hired Dr. Linda Whiteford (Professor of Anthropology)

to serve as Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs and

Strategic Initiatives, identifying campus and community

sustainability as one of the key target areas for development

and investment. In 2007 Dr. Whiteford convened aSustainability Initiative Steering Committee consisting of thirty

faculty, staff, and students from across the university, serving

on 14 different subcommittees engaged in a wide array of

sustainability initiatives on campus. In 2008 USF President Dr.

Judy Genshaft signed the ACUPCC during the first annual

Going Green Tampa Bay EXPO. In 2009 the Office of

Sustainability was created by Provost Wilcox to manage

USFs climate impact assessment, reporting, and to serve as

the sole point of contact for the universitys sustainabilityprograms and activities. (Excerpt from Implementation

Structurenarrative http://acupcc.aashe.org/ip/847/)

Of the seven Tangible Actions the University of South Florida

has reported and completed five. The university is responsible

for an estimated production of 257,566 metric tons of

greenhouse gases. (GHG Report) In the report It is

recommended that an Office of Sustainability be established

to develop policies and procedures that will assist with future

data collection and with implementing policies to help reducegreenhouse gas production at USF. (GHG Report)

By the year 2050, the University of South Florida will emit 80

percent less carbon dioxide than it did in 2007-2008 (ourGHG

baseline fiscal year). On the way to meeting this goal, USF

has three critical benchmarks: 10% reduction by 2015, 20%

reduction by 2025, and 50% reduction by 2040. Beyond 2050,

and with the aid of offsets (representing purchased RECs

[renewable energy certificates], carbon offsets [CRTs, or

USF Strategic Goals

10% reduction in All Emissions by 2015 relative to baseline emissions in 2009




[ ACUPCCS TANGIBLE ACTIONS ]

1. Establish a policy that allnew campus construction

will be built to at least the

U.S. Green BuildingCouncil's LEED Silverstandard or equivalent.

2. Adopt an energy-efficientappliance purchasing policy

requiring purchase of

ENERGY STARcertifiedproducts in all areas for

which such ratings exist.

3. Establish a policy of

offsetting all greenhousegas emissions generated by

air travel paid for by ourinstitution.

4. Encourage use of andprovide access to publictransportation for allfaculty, staff, students and

visitors at our institution.

5. Within one year of signing

this document, beginpurchasing or producing atleast 15% of our

institution's electricity

consumption fromrenewable sources.

6. Establish a policy or acommittee that supports

climate and sustainability

shareholder proposals atcompanies where our

institution's endowment isinvested.

7. Participate in the WasteMinimization component ofthe national RecycleManiacompetition, and adopt 3 or

more associated measures

to reduce waste.


9/15

carbon reduction tons], and increased carbon sequestration

through the expansion of a long-term Greenway project on

campus), USF will be climate neutral by 2070. (USF Climate

Action Plan)

Interview Paraphrased TranscriptInterviewer:Mohamed Jaoui

Guest: Dr. Christian Wells

Title: Director of Sustainability

Topic: The University of South

Floridas sustainability efforts.

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS:

Can you tell us a little bit about the

history of your department and

how it came into being?

In April of 2008 something happened

at USF that was really momentous in

its history. Students got together and

created this going green expo that

brought in and showcased local

green businesses and some research units on campus, just a

big exposition. And during that expo, the students, just

themselves, organized and got the president to sign The

American College and University Presidents Climate

Commitment. This is a big national movement to create

sustainability initiatives at universities; getting universities to be

held accountable for climate change and their role in climate

change.

Our President Judy Genshaft signed that climate commitment in

2008 and that commitment comes with a number of

requirements. One of which is to create a Green House Gas

Inventory which inventories or audits the entire campus in its

operations; what green house gasses are we emitting into the

atmosphere, the primary one being carbon dioxide. The other

requirement is to come up with a long term action plan to

mitigate the adverse impact of those green house gas

emissions and then ultimately to stop them altogether which is a

big, big goal. With those commitments then the President works

with the Provost office to create an office of sustainability to

manage those commitments. Our primary mission in the

beginning was to create and submit this green house gas

inventory and to come up with a long term action plan to bring

Christian

WellsAssociate Professor, and Director,USF Office of Sustainability

Appointed as director in August of 2009,

Director Wells has been responsible for:

initiating the USF Office of Sustainability

as the single point-of-contact for

sustainable activities at USF;

USFs compliance with the American

College & University Presidents Climate

CommitmentCollege Sustainability

Report Card;

He also works closely with students,

faculty, staff and the USF Climate

Commitment Steering Committee to

coordinate university-wide initiatives In

support of USFstrategic goal of building

a sustainable campus environment.

Story written by Jacqui Cash, Academic Affairs


10/15

those green house gasses emissions down significantly. This office was created in August of last year

weve only been around a year we are about to have our one year anniversary.

What is sustainability, and what does it mean to be green, are the two interrelated?

The most common definition for sustainability that you might see is about meeting the needs of the

present, our social needs in terms of communities, economic needs, and our environmental needs.

Meeting our present needs in such a way that we dont compromise the ability of future generations to

meet their own needs. In other words, not using up all the resources, coming up with ways to live so

that we can continue to sustain and continue to prosper. Going green is part of the contemporary

sustainability movement that has more jargon. Often the term for going green is more about

environmental sustainability, and sustainability in general combines social, economic, and

environmental concerns.

Can you emphasize the goals and the achievements of the green light program?

Green Light used to be what the Department of Energy and EPA initiated as a sort of pilot to Energy

Star, you might have heard of Energy Star appliances, and Energy Star computers, and Energy Star

ratings. This is the precursor to Energy Star, and this is something that a program that USFparticipated in; that pilot phase. We started to buy appliances and buy electronics that met these

Green Light initiatives. That also included changing out light bulbs, changing the bulbs in parking

garages, stop lights, and so on. It was really headed up by the physical plant, which is a component

of our facilities management office.

You work in coordination with physical plant?

Very closely, yes. Now everything is getting to be Energy Star, where all new purchases made thru

the university are Energy Star.

There are multiple projects undertaken by the USF Sustainability office, but are they really

consistent with your vision or the mission of the Department?

Multiple projects? What do you mean by multiple projects?

We are basing our information on the website that you have. A lot of it said that you have

several projects in the works right now. One was the Green Light program and another being

the LEED Certification for new buildings. You have 3 new buildings that are being LEED

Certified as part of the Presidents Promise. It was one of the agreements that she agreed to

when she signed the Climate Agreement?

Yes, LEED Certifying is something that is certainly consistent with the long term climate action

strategy but it is not the only thing that we have to do, or it is not even something that we are required

to do. Any LEED certifying of buildings that goes on campus is because we want to do it and the

funding source for building the building allows it. There are some buildings and building projects on

campus for example where the funding comes from a private donor for example that does not want

money spent to LEED certify that building so it does not happen. There are other projects in which

USF has more administrative control over how funds get spent so we are able to LEED certify the

building. So really it often depends on the funding source, a lot of constraints.


11/15

Would the difference between commissioning and non commissioning, does that come into

play?

Sure. We encourage physical plant that is really in charge of commissioning buildings and finding out

ways to conserve energy in buildings, re-commissioning buildings and so on.

Would you be able to define how commissioning works in general terms?

I dont know the specific process. It is my understanding that you would hire an outside consultant orauditor to do an energy audit on a building, and determine what are the best and most cost effective

ways to increase energy savings, recapture energy thats being lost so and so forth so there would be

a list of things that you can do to improve the energy efficiency of a building so it varies tremendously

from building to building. Newer buildings like the Marshall Center has very few that you can

recommend doing although there are some things. And then there are older buildings like social

sciences or Cooper that are practically falling down anyway. Its cost effective to bulldoze them frankly

and several buildings on campus have been commissioned, and there have been some upgrades,

and updates, and things like that. That is certainly something that we can do more of.

Are there any setbacks that are impeding the implementation of any of these projects?

Money. Funding is always a tricky issue. There are some and that is ultimately the biggest stumbling

block, is funding. But there are still some individuals on campus within faculty, staff, students and

administration that still need to hear about what sustainability is and how those social, environment

and economic issues are all interrelated and they are still not quite on board with sustainability

initiatives or sustainability movement. We just need to increase awareness campaigns, education and

communication. The great thing about communication campaigns is that you can do a lot of talking

and visiting, meeting with people, and it doesnt cost any money at all. Thats what we have been

doing a lot of.

Campus wide re-lamping program is underway to replace F32 fluorescent lamps with F28

lamps for energy reduction. Is this the most energy saving light bulb in the market today? and

what if a new bulb enters the market right after finishing this re-lamping program, would it be

cost efficient to change them again?

Thats the challenge with sustainability and energy savings. Just when you complete a project, an

infrastructure, something better comes along. We face that all along. The re-lamping program does

not exempt from that. There are more energy efficient bulbs in the market, but they are not cost

effective. Within I think its either 3 or a 5 year period that we have to meet those initial first costs, its a

state requirement. We are not allowed to buy equipment or make improvements unless there is apayback thats under a certain period of time. Otherwise its considered an investment and the

university is not allowed to invest public funds. We have the best that we can afford. There is a

balance between being able to be sustainable and also being fiscally responsible for the university we

have to make sure we are covering our end on that dollar. In fact that is what sustainability means, its

integrating the economic constraints that you have, and the needs that you have economically with

what you need to do environmentally, and whats environmentally responsible, and what is socially

responsible too. Its trying to meet all those needs and see how all those things are interconnected.

How are old buildings being retro-fitted to meet the sustainable standards adopted by USF?


12/15

That goes back to the question on commissioning and it really depends on each building and when

the building was built. Its a very complicated process, but it used to be when a building was built there

were no funds allocated to maintain the building, and so all funding to upkeep the building, and to

make it more energy efficient would have to come out of physical plant, physical plants budget.

Nowadays, when a new building is built on campus, I think since the 2005 master plan, for a new

building to be built, it has to come along with a recurring budget of maintenance money to take care

of that building. So the newer buildings, buildings built in the past 5 years are so come with that

funding, and so its a little easier to maintain them, and continue to make them energy efficient, butthe older buildings have simply no budget allocated for that at all. Any upgrade projects have to be

special non recurring funds, funds that you dont get every year in the regular budget. So, those are

hard to come by. Not impossible, but just the subject of negotiation and finding the money. One of the

things that student government at USF has been doing is trying to come up with a Green Team. You

might have heard about the Green Team. There was a referendum to see what students thought

about it, and it would be tacking on a dollar per credit hour or something like that or maybe a dollar

per student on to tuition charges, and that extra dollar would go towards making buildings more

energy efficient, more sustainable.

What is USFs LEED rating? And why doesnt it meet the platinum standard of 80points orabove?

I think that now you can, I dont know if you can get a LEED rating for an entire business, district, or

group of buildings, I think its still per building. That really depends on the purpose of the building,

what its going to be used for, and where the funding comes from to build it, and it will also depend

whether or not when our new Tampa campus master plan goes into effect. I think its December of this

year. There is a policy in there that states that all new buildings on campus must be LEED certifiable,

in other words they must be built with LEED certification in mind. You cant require a building to be

LEED certified, but you can build it with that in mind, that you want to do that eventually some day. I

dont know yet what they set standard for. It could just be LEED bronze or something like that. Wejust have the one building that they are aiming for LEED gold, this new Patel Center; its just off of

alumni over here. I dont know the LEED certifiable standards of the new interdisciplinary science and

teaching building.

How about funding? Is your budget consistent with other same size universities?

Thats a great question and I dont think its at this point knowable because more and more

universities of this size are implementing an office of sustainability, coordinator of sustainability, but

their budgets are not published, are not known. I dont know other peoples budget. Thats a great

mystery. You can tell whose better funded than others because of the staff that they have and theactivities that they are doing, but I couldnt put a dollar figure.

Along those same lines, do you have a sense of how USF compares to its peer institutions

when it comes to both quantity and quality of green research?

Well, I have a sense because there was a survey done by the Princeton guide to schools. They

surveyed about 650 schools and then chose 200 and something to highlight as being the greenest in

US, and we were one of those schools. So, we are in good company. Other schools are in good

company with us I should say. And with these new initiatives with the school of global sustainability


13/15


14/15

you about those issues. If you are not conversed in those issues, you are certainly not competitive as

someone else who is.

Going Green Challenges

In todays society thinking greener is thinking cleaner. A multitude of large corporations, such as

universities, are constantly pushing the envelope of greener technology. The University of South

Florida is no exception and is considered to be in the top 10 of greener universities. Each new school

year brings fresh ideas on greener initiatives specifically geared towards making universities more

energy-efficient. However, going greener does not happen over night. Many universities are facing

different obstacles and overwhelming challenges in order to provide its students greener living.

In a poll that was released on August 25 th, 2008 with attendees at the annual conference of the

Association for Information Communications Technology Professionals in Higher Education

(A.C.U.T.A.), two-thirds of American colleges and universities stated that their campuses are going or

have gone green. Out of the two-thirds of colleges and universities that stated that they have gone

green only 65 percent of them invested in greener technology, or either had initiated online

education programs about going green, or have implemented policies in order to reduce energy

consumption in order to help the environment. Of those schools that havent yet gone green, three-

fourths have at least looked into how to be more environmentally sensitive but are being held back by

budget limitations or other obstacles, ("eSchool News").

How to pay for energy-efficient equipment is an entirely different matter. Universities on a tight budget

may just laugh at the idea, even if the idea of becoming more energy-efficient can produce a profit in

a short amount of time. In the end it is unfortunately the students holding the bill to pay for such

equipment. For example, students at Central Oregon Community College voted last spring to

increase their $1.75-per-credit hour student fee by 25 cents in order to purchase renewable energy

(Makower).

Of the schools surveyed that have yet to go green, 72 percent state that due to the lack of funding,

the institution is being held back from pursuing greener, more efficient energy use. Another problem

that was reported by the survey was the fact that 32 percent of non-greener schools state that there

are difficulties in locating energy-efficient equipment, which will allow future cost savings. Amongst

the non-green schools, the biggest motivators to going green are cost, energy consumption and

savings, and a sense of environmental responsibility, ("eSchool News").

ConclusionThe University of South Florida has made a concerted effort to approach the need for reduced green

house emissions and a reduction of the schools environmental impact. In recent years going green

has become a battle cry for society and corporations. The university has delved down many of the

paths necessary to meet sustainability goals. Through upgraded lighting, monitoring energy

consumption, and moving toward alternative power grids, the University of South Florida has become

one of the most energy conscientious educational institutions in the nation. In the future the economy,

and other socioeconomic factors, may curb the schools ability to continue pursuing green goals.


15/15

Through increased education and social awareness, green lights may continue to illuminate

classrooms across campus going dim only when those rooms are unoccupied.

Images Source Cited

GreenLi. Google Images Web. 2 Aug 2010

"GreenRe."Helloky.com. Web. 1 Aug 2010.

.

green light program university of south florida[1]

Documents