Winter Term Adjustments to Reduce College Energy Use

To the Editors:

Climate change is not only an environmental issue, it is linked to economics and social justice issues that Oberlin College has traditionally been and is currently concerned with. By reducing energy use through efficient practices, Oberlin College can approach climate neutrality by the year 2020, while saving money in order to prevent further layoffs. Oberlin College is an inefficient institution. Instead of laying people off, the college needs to lay off energy use.
Oberlin College has a reputation as an innovative and forward-thinking institution. We believe that the current climate of economic instability presents an opportunity for the Oberlin Community to rise to the occasion and re-engage in its tradition of creative problem solving. Over the next 20 years, as resources diminish, coal and gas prices are expected to rise. In this projected economic climate, there is a greater risk in continuing to rely solely on these fuels than in adopting fuel sources and types of energy production with a longer payback time such as hydrogen fuel cells, photovoltaics, and gas-powered, combined-cycle generators.
The trustees have invested in Nancy Dye in the long term. This security in her position affords President Dye the opportunity to prove that she deserves her bonus by adopting aggressive efficiency measures that will both be good for the global climate and encourage a better relationship between the administration, college employees, and students.
Oberlin College could be making itself marketable to new students, setting an example for other colleges, universities and institutions, and providing its community with a secure and healthy work environment, if only the school would invest in its own energy efficient future.
According to the Facilities Manager, Keith Watkins, the college wastes the most energy and money over Winter Term, when most of the buildings on campus are open, but utilized by a fraction of the population and for a fraction of the time. If a certain number of students could declare that they will definitely not be in Oberlin for Winter Term when they make they request their dorms, they could be put into a single dorm that could be shut down over January. Only enough energy would be needed to keep the pipes from freezing. This energy reduction could save the school thousands of dollars in utilities costs and prevent hundreds of pounds of carbon emissions. This plan doesn’t require that most students decide on their winter term plans during the summer, it simply requires that a dormfull decide that they won’t live in Oberlin over January. The plan could be introduced incrementally, beginning with one dorm next year and if successful, increase based on interest. Students who decided to live in closed-down Winter Term dorms could be compensated with a fraction of the energy costs saved. Lindsey Baker and OSCA Environmental Concerns committee are studying the effects of such a shutdown this January in Old Barrows Co-op. The energy saved from this trial will help to gauge the usefulness of a campus-wide endeavor. The College has recently been faced with security concerns over a few students living in largely vacant dorms. Concentrating students in a fewer number of dorms is one solution. The ability to shut down a few dorms completely over Winter Term will also protect the personal belongings of students that have vacated for Winter Term. One of the greatest aspects of Winter Term in Oberlin is the sense of community that grows between students that stay. Concentrating the student body into fewer dorms for Winter Term will increase this sense of community and make it unnecessary to walk across the frozen campus to visit friends.
A less intensive Winter Term adjustment would involve opening the dorms and facilities closer to when Winter Term courses begin. Currently, dorms open on a Thursday, requiring energy Tuesday and Wednesday in order to heat up to living standards. If dorms were opened on the Sunday before classes begin, we could save three days worth of campus-wide energy use.
Proposals similar to these were made about 10 years ago, but students and faculty were opposed to innovations that would alter campus life to such an extent. Indeed, one faculty member we talked to was worried that student options would be reduced with these changes. Student and faculty input would be required to determine whether this trade-off between energy savings and flexibility would detract from academics. We argue that the cutbacks already implemented in departments such as Student Health are more detrimental to the Oberlin College community than the changes that we are proposing.
The New Science Center was a missed opportunity for the College to continue its innovations in green architecture begun with the Adam Joseph Lewis Center, but that doesn’t prevent the Science Center from benefiting from future innovations. In a brief discussion with Professor John Scofield, he suggested that the college could save energy by better fitting its classroom use with class size. If a small class doesn’t require the AV options of a lecture hall, it ought to be assigned to a smaller classroom, using fewer lights, heating and ventilation. For these adjustments to save energy, however, each classroom would require controls and sensors that could regulate HVAC requirements pertinent to its use. Scofield noted that this is one area in which the Lewis Center excels where the Science Center doesn’t. Thirdly, the Science Center would require an air compressor that responds to changes in classrooms needs, most compressors are either on or off. This is an also area where the Lewis Center could improve. This kind of efficiency improvement would require a larger initial investment but would save more money over a longer payback time. These long-term investments stem from the same type of reasoning as the investment made by the trustees in Nancy Dye.
There are many other areas where the Oberlin College campus could improve its energy efficiency. Lighting retrofits and improved insulation alone could save the college campus millions of dollars in utilities costs within 3-5 years according to a report completed by the Rocky Mountain Institute. Climate Justice, OSCA’s Environmental Concerns Committee, and a variety of other interested groups from student, faculty, and staff have begun work on initiating projects such as these around campus. Projects such as these should not be considered for their environmental benefits alone, but also in terms of their social impacts and economic innovation.

–Kathryn Saturley
College senior

–Jessica Milne
College senior