In need of action for a sustainable campus

The Board of Trustees has postponed making a sustainable campus in Bloomington a priority, arguing in the Integrated Energy Master Plan that it’s not currently a fiscally responsible decision.

In doing so, it risks leaving behind a disgraceful legacy of inaction in the face of catastrophic climate change.

The IU trustees would surely disagree with this assessment. On page eight of the report, they acknowledge that, even if the new energy plan for IU follows “the most aggressive implementation program”, it will not only reduce carbon emissions on campus by 52 percent, but will still pay for itself in less than 10 years.

Among the plan’s tactics are encouraging students and faculty to turn off lighting fixtures and unplug electrical appliances when not in use, switching the University’s main source of fuel from coal to natural gas, updating the steam pipe system and renovating more than 100 buildings in which above-average amounts of energy are consumed compared to similar buildings around the country.

The trustees acknowledge the plan will take more than 10 years to fully implement. They further admit the switch from coal to natural gas might not be as sudden or permanent as we might hope.

Since “economic pressures remain strong to fire on coal whenever possible” , the University will “analyze gas and coal costs on a monthly basis to determine which fuel to utilize” , predicting to make the switch only when the federal government orders them to do so.

IU trustees considered renewable energy sources for the plan, but on pages seven and eight of the report decided against any implementation until the cost is driven down through government incentives.

Still, all of this seems like positive change on our part. That is, unless you’re one of the 5 million humans who die every year from climate change-related hunger, pollution and disease, or one of the staggering 100 million people predicted to die by 2030 from the same causes.

Considering these lost lives, what principles do the board members claim to practice when citing fiscal responsibility as their main focus in implementing their new energy plan? 

What can excuse their complacency in currently accepting this University’s large role in carbon emissions, which is contributing to a predicted human death toll equivalent to nine Holocausts or 30,000 September 11 attacks ?

Can you sit comfortably knowing your lifestyle is causing the death of children? It appears your heart is in the right place for a position on the Board of Trustees, then.

An honest person would fight against this awful future. But on page 98 the Board of Trustees agreed that, “as a leader among Midwestern Universities in sustainability awareness and education, IUB should be forward leading in its application of renewable energy.

“However, IUB must maintain a fiscally responsible focus as alternative renewable energy forms are considered.”

The trustees also confess multiple times that they’re waiting for incentives from the government before switching to renewable energies such as solar or wind power.

As to why, they cite that payback for implementing these energy sources could take anywhere from 12 to 40 years. 12-40 years of debt take precedence over the concern of 100 million lives and the future health of the planet.

If our University can’t look past short-term sacrifices to be an effective, principled leader in the face of this catastrophe, what institution can?

We ought to say shame on the trustees for not forcing substantial change onto Bloomington’s campus, shame on the IU Office of Sustainability for not protesting this during every step of this insufficient plan, and shame on us if we allow this insanity to continue.

--tydthomp@indiana.edu