Berea College
PAE-4: Sustainability Plan

A committee of faculty, staff and students was formed to develop the plan. In its final form, it was shared with the entire campus community through general faculty meetings and ultimately approved by the Board of Trustees in February 2011.

Gather baseline data on consumption, carbon. Develop learning outcomes, incorporate sustainability into existing courses and sponsor workshops for faculty. Provide training and orientation to staff to enable them to produce sustainability assessments to report to standing sustainability committee. Develop alliances and exchanges with larger community, serve as repository for information

Annual reports of progress will be provided to the Sustainability Committee

The Sustainability Plan as adopted by the Board of Trustees of Berea College: Preface SOS II: Strategic Directions for Sustainability at Berea College1 The comprehensive state of our world’s environment – including climate change, population growth, decrease in biotic diversity, and overuse of the world’s natural resources – is worsening. These trends have been extensively researched scientifically and are indisputable. In 2005 the United Nations’ report of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment project, entitled Ecosystems and Human Well-being (2005), provided a five-year assessment of 24 basic natural systems worldwide (i.e., air-quality, fresh-water-availability, health of fish populations, ozone- depletion, etc.). That report concludes that 15 of the world’s 24 natural systems are in decline or are unsustainable. Further, the report identifies the impact of carbon emissions and fossil fuels on our atmosphere as the single most pressing issue. This is due to (a) the long-term consequences of the damage; (b) the extensive time required to enact effective solutions and responses (e.g. moving from coal to clean fuels); and (c) the additional extensive time for the affected natural systems (e.g. air, oceans, etc.) to recover. The scientific community’s deep concerns related to global environment and especially climate change (e.g. air, oceans, etc.) have now permeated the mainstream media. For example, Thomas Friedman’s book, Hot, Flat and Crowded: Why We Need a Green Revolution – And How It Can Renew America (2008), summarizes the pressing global-environmental issues that include climate change, population growth, decrease of biotic diversity, and overuse of the world’s natural resources. Friedman also focuses on the strong evidence for climate change and the human contribution to carbon emissions. Since the rise of the industrial revolution, CO2 levels have risen about 100 parts per million (from 280 to 387 PPM) and have been the main cause of a warming of the earth’s average surface temperatures that already has begun to have deleterious effects (e.g., melting of glaciers and permafrost at alarming rates). The SPC concurs with these findings when it urges Berea College to reduce not only carbon emissions but also to decrease use and increase recycling of all natural resources. The report from SOS II concludes that sustainability does not begin and end with climate change but includes the unsustainable use of all natural resources (see pp. 3-5). Friedman agrees when he says that those of us in the United States with slightly less than 5% of the world’s population use approximately 20% of the fossil fuels and natural resources (raw and manufactured) in the whole world and that this fact constitutes the clearest sign of the unsustainability of our current way of life. He continues to say that if all six billion people in this world achieved only a modest middleclass American way of life, it would take three earths to provide the necessary natural resources for support. He concludes, “We cannot afford any more Americas.” 1 This proposal from the SPC is an attempt to build upon the proposal made by the Subcommittee on Sustainability II (2007-08), co-chaired by Rebecca Bates and Steve Pulsford with Elaine Adams, Randy Adams, Ashley Cochrane, Tracy Hodge, Alice Hooker, Micah Johnson, Mario Nakazawa, Mike Panciera, Danielle Spencer and Ben Boggs (ex officio) as members. Even though this document is the work of three Strategic Planning Councils, it gives reference to the SOS II Report in a number of places and quotes liberally from that document. On September 23, 2008, the Subcommittee on Sustainability II (SOS II) report urged Berea College to make the issues of CO2 emissions and climate change central concerns for itself and the way our community thinks about sustainability for ourselves and others (see pp. 2-3). SOS II suggested that the College adopt the following goal: “Reduce Berea College’s consumption of non-renewable resources and ensure that Berea moves continuously toward the goal of carbon-neutrality by creating a Sustainability Committee that would design and oversee a Natural Resource Strategy” (p. 12). Sustainability for an educational institution like Berea College does not only entail studying and assessing ecological matters, but also requires creating an educational community that teaches and acts in sustainable ways. In this vein, the report from SOS II also recommended that the College “increase efforts to create a culture of sustainable behavior by educating our community about the global and regional ecological crisis and methods for reducing our impact.” This focus on creating a culture of sustainability speaks to the core of Berea as an educational community. We must consider ourselves teachers and learners of sustainability in all dimensions of campus life and practice. The report from the first SOS (December, 1998) placed sustainability within the context of the College’s Christian principles of social justice and a commitment to “plain living”: “Sustainability... refers to the capacity of individuals, communities, and societies to coexist in a manner that maintains social justice, environmental integrity, and economic well-being today and for future generations” (p. 3). Building upon this understanding of “sustainability,” the report from SOS II (September, 2008) linked sustainability and the College’s global-ecological responsibility to the College’s mission “as a model community in the 19th century and a sustainable institution in the 21st Century” (see pp. 8-10). Thus, it is our responsibility to reach out beyond our campus community to local, regional, and national communities to join hands in moving towards sustainability broadly understood. It is upon these combined understandings of sustainability as an extension of the College’s traditional values as well as a compelling contemporary necessity, that this proposal situates its vision, principles, and recommendations. Vision and Principles In its report, SOS-II characterizes sustainability as a moral imperative. A sustainability commitment is driven by the concern not to live at the expense of others: To live unsustainably—to consume resources beyond their rate of recovery, to impact ecosystems beyond their capacity to regenerate—is to live in a way that takes resources from others, elsewhere in the world, now and in the future. It is to live at a level of luxury, or with a carelessness, that must be paid for by someone else. (10) There is a danger that sustainability will be treated as a highly amorphous commitment. Amid competing institutional operations do we take the moral imperative of ecosystems decline so seriously that we are prepared to make very substantial tradeoffs and sacrifices, or do we only move gradually, as is convenient? How do we assess this commitment’s priority over/against our other commitments? Berea College Sustainability Plan 2 Citing Thoreau’s principle that it is not right to pursue one’s interests “sitting on another man’s shoulders,” and Bill McKibben’s dictum that we should not make ourselves wealthy at the expense of impoverishing the earth (cf. his Bangladesh example), SOS-II argues that Berea College’s commitment to sustainability should be as substantial, as radical, as defining of its residential experience as was John G. Fee’s utopian vision of the nineteenth century: “to live unsustainably is to live irresponsible, indefensibly, and against the historical commitments of Berea College to aid those most in need” (10). But it is difficult to express an intensity of commitment only in words. What degree of commitment is implied by an institutional goal to “seek ways systematically and continuously to reduce consumption of natural resources,” for example? Effective goals must be quantifiable and measurable. Neither SOS-II nor SPC were in a position to set numerical goals for Berea College’s future commitment to sustainability. SPC’s recommendations are about process, structures, and direction for setting and meeting such goals; in addition its language is intended to convey urgency and to set a standard of commitment proportionate to the tone of the SOS-II report and to our evolving understanding of the nature and extent of ecosystems crisis. The report from SOS II asserts that environmental “sustainability is the defining challenge of our time” and that “Berea College challenges itself to live up to its tradition of visionary and principled leadership by becoming a model of sustainability and stewardship of the environment.” To that end, the SPC adopted the Report’s vision of sustainability: The College’s ultimate goals must be (i) to become truly sustainable, that is to operate without negative physical impact on the lives of others in the world, and (ii) to have positive impacts on the world through education, through creation of a model sustainable community, and through practical engagement with other local sustainability initiatives. Essentially, Berea College should seek to become sustainable in terms of its institutional policies and practices, to engender a culture of sustainability that penetrates student, faculty, and staff cultures, and to embody a model of collaboration with local, regional, and national sustainability efforts. The Council agrees with the SOS II call for a cultural change and with the SOS assertion of sustainability within the context of the College’s Christian principles. In fact, the Council’s strategic vision of a sustainable Berea begins with its mission-focused understanding of sustainability as an expression of impartial love as understood in environmental and human terms. The SOS II Report implies several principles that the Council wants to make explicit. In so doing, the Council has identified the following core principles as embedded in the background, vision statement, goals, and recommended action of the SOS II Report as ones it supports: Berea College Sustainability Plan 3 1. To incorporate sustainability into all institutional policies, operations, and practices; 2. To move with deliberate haste toward the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions by the College community; 3. To create an institutional culture of sustainability that alters campus community behavior and sustainability goals with education as a core component in that process; and 4. To engage in reciprocal and complementary relationships with communities beyond the campus, serving as a model in all policies, operations, practices and behaviors to help educate, inspire, and support the efforts of others in the community. Core Goals In an attempt to implement the stated vision and core principles with respect to sustainability, the SPC recommends to the Berea College community five initiatives to minimize energy use, CO2 emissions, and natural resource consumption, all of which will also contribute to significant cost savings. This work is urgent in both practical and moral terms, so progress will need to be measurable and as rapid as possible. Timetables and assessment plans will need to be developed in the early stages of addressing each initiative. While the focus of this proposal is on permanent reduction of energy and other natural resources use, there is a real expectation of economic benefits to Berea College. Given this context, the SPC recommends the following five initiatives: 1. Systematically and continuously reduce consumption of natural resources directly (e.g., water, raw materials, etc.) and indirectly (e.g., manufactured goods). This goal aims to reduce Berea College’s “ecological footprint” broadly understood. Specifically, the College should seek to reduce its use of both energy and water, as well as its consumption of non-durable and disposable goods. Re-use and recycling also remain valuable aids toward achieving zero-waste in campus operations. This goal runs parallel to carbon- reduction, because the manufacture of all goods requires energy. To achieve this aim, the SPC recommends that the College: a. Gather baseline-data on consumption of raw materials (e.g., water-use) and manufactured goods (e.g., purchasing, facilities-repairs/renovations, production and disposal of food, etc.); b. Develop immediate and long-range plans for reducing consumption of raw materials and manufactured goods; c. Seek improvements and implement plans that will reduce the College’s overall ecological footprint; and d. Monitor results and revise plans and practices to achieve continuous improvement. Berea College Sustainability Plan 4 2. Immediately and continuously reduce Berea College’s consumption of non-renewable fossil fuels and CO2 production. In recent decades, the College has made significant progress to reduce its consumption of fossil fuels directly (e.g., energy-focused renovations and the new heat-plant) and indirectly (e.g., use of electricity). For example, the heat-plant currently uses approximately half of the natural gas that the old plant used in its last year of service. This goal urges Berea College to move as quickly and fully as possible toward significant and continuous carbon reduction. To achieve this goal, the College must achieve the following specific objectives, at a minimum: a. Gather baseline-carbon-data through an extensive survey of all College activities; b. Develop goals, policies, and plans for reduction of fossil fuel use and reduction of carbon-creation through College activities; c. Integrate plans with annual and long-term budgetary processes; d. Monitor results and alter policies and plans as needed to ensure maximum and continuous progress; and e. Develop a plan with timeframe for Berea College to become carbon neutral.2 3. Create a culture of sustainability through education of Berea’s community regarding global and regional ecological crises and methods for addressing this crisis. Since the establishment of Being and Becoming in 1996, the second pair of common learning goals has urged the College both “to understand the interconnectedness of our natural, fabricated, and human worlds” and “to understand the workings of our natural environment and the consequences of human interventions”3 The logical extension of those goals is to respond thoughtfully to threats to the natural world and the natural systems that sustain us. The most effective responses will require understanding and action by the whole community. As an educational institution, the College must first learn what it must know about local, regional, and global ecological challenges and then teach and act responsibly. A report from Oberlin College in 1999 states this concept succinctly: At one level, what has come to be called “greening” the campus is an attempt to operate the complex institutions with greater efficiency and thereby minimize costs. At a second level, [this effort] is an attempt to fulfill a moral commitment to minimize environmental impacts. ...At a higher level...greening of the campus can be seen not as an end but as a means to a larger end: the greening of minds. Its aim is to equip our students with the 2 This plan will be reviewed at least every five years for its economic and material feasibility. 3 Being & Becoming: Berea College in the 21st Century, page 57 (1996; 2006 Revised) Berea College Sustainability Plan 5 analytical skills and practical abilities necessary to do the hard work ahead: stabilize climate, reduce population growth equitably, reverse processes of biotic impoverishment, restore degraded ecosystems, develop sustainable agriculture and forestry, and calibrate political institutions and economies to fit ecological realities. No generation ever faced a more daunting or exciting set of challenges and opportunities.4 To accomplish this aim, Berea College should:5 a. Charge the College Faculty with the assistance of the Dean of the Faculty and the appropriate committees with leading a process that will within the next two years: (1) develop learning outcomes for sustainability that can be incorporated into the Aims of General Education; (2) identify where emphases on sustainability can be incorporated and added to the curriculum; and (3) develop appropriate workshops and programs for faculty from all disciplines that support curricular changes that promote education about sustainability. b. Provide training and professional development for staff so that sustainability becomes an integrated part of the entire College culture. The College should design training to enable staff to produce sustainability assessments: the information in such assessments would become essential elements in reports produced by the standing Committee on Sustainability. c. Provide opportunities for and collaborate with students to devise sustainability education and incentives through residence life and student organizations. d. Actively and intentionally guide and engage students by providing opportunities for them to be involved in sustainability activities at all levels – curricular, co-curricular, labor, and institutional facilities – not only to enhance their educational experience but to foster ownership and leadership at Berea College and beyond. e. Charge People Services to offer educational orientations and programs and to investigate a system of incentives for members of the community to consume less energy at work and at home. Create formal and informal educational programs and opportunities to teach and engender more sustainable lifestyles and practices. 4. Share sustainable ideas and practices with both the community of Berea itself and the larger community beyond the campus in the process of extending the College’s educational and action initiatives. The commitments of the College to serve Appalachia and beyond certainly require the broadest possible collaboration of the College with the community. The expectation that the Compton Chair in Ecological Design will provide consultation and assistance in local greening 4 David Orr and Cheryl Wolfe, Oberlin and the Biosphere: Campus ecology report, page 9 of Preface (Spring 1998) 5 See SOS II Report, p. 13. Berea College Sustainability Plan 6 initiatives serves as one example of such education and outreach. The Energizing Kentucky initiative by the presidents of four Kentucky colleges and universities, including the president of Berea College, represents a second example of such educational outreach and service. This goal aims to combine the knowledge and practices of sustainability on the Berea College campus with those of a wider audience, in order to make a greater impact than the College alone can achieve. To achieve this goal the College should institute the following practices: a. Develop alliances/exchanges with officials of the city, county, and region to effect positive, ecological changes; b. Gather, serve as repository for, and disseminate information, and promote best practices about ecology and sustainability (e.g., through conferences, websites, etc.); c. Learn from successful initiatives already practiced by members in the local community, and support these efforts to enhance their effectiveness; d. Seek alliances with colleges, universities, businesses, and non-profit organizations to extend the core goals stated previously. 5. Draft a new commitment on sustainability (or revise the current seventh commitment on “plain living”) for the mission of the College, understood in ecological, economic, and human terms. When the College reviewed its mission in 1993, adding a Preface to the statement, and expanding the Great Commitments, the Committee to Review the Commitments (CRC) commented as follows about the phrase “plain living”: plain living is the rejection of artificially created wants, the ability to give up luxuries to remove clutter from our lives; conservation of our personal and the earth’s resources; and leading a quality of life characterized by contemplation, spirituality and Christian stewardship.... People electing “plain living” not only derive the individual benefits of a balanced, responsible life, but also produce the collective good of a less burdened environment. During the development of the College’s Workplace Expectations, the College translated “plain living” into contemporary vernacular as “sustainable living and working.” Given the increasing centrality of the second pair of learning goals in Being and Becoming, the College’s historic commitment to plain living, and the moral urgency of sustainability in local and global terms, we have arrived at the urgent and appropriate moment to embrace sustainability as a more central dimension of the College’s educational mission and operations. Berea College Sustainability Plan 7 Revisions in Governance The SOS II Report recommended that the College establish a new position of Vice President for Sustainability to lead and coordinate sustainability initiatives. This recommendation has been adopted through an administrative restructuring and downsizing approved by the Board of Trustees that includes a half-time Chief Sustainability Officer role for the Vice President for Business and Administration (with the new title of Vice President for Operations and Sustainability). This administrative position is designed to possess broad enough scope to lead the College in the tasks imagined by the above stated goals and initiatives and is empowered to work closely with College departments (e.g., facilities management), programs (e.g., SENS) and committees (e.g., AC and the proposed Sustainability Committee). The Chief Sustainability Officer is charged to oversee collection and analysis of sustainability data, to create additional plans to achieve core goals, and to monitor and recommend changes in approach to and direction of the College’s sustainability initiatives. The Chief Sustainability Officer will also serve as an outreach coordinator to work with the community in the creation of a culture of sustainability, and will have the capacity to identify and pursue external funding opportunities. It is expected that the work of the Sustainability Officer position will make substantial impact on carbon reduction and natural resource uses at Berea College while also bringing long-term financial benefits. The SOS II Report also recommended the formation of a high level Sustainability Committee. To that end: The SPC recommends that the Executive Council (EC) and Administrative Committee (AC) collaborate to create a new governance/action-group, the Sustainability Committee, which will provide a bridge between the system of shared governance by faculty, staff and students and the administrative system in decision-making for the College – especially the Vice President for Operations and Sustainability. The SPC recommends that the EC and AC to include the following principles and goals in their creation of a new committee: a. Membership would have equal representation of faculty, students, administrators, and staff with a least one from each of these groups having knowledge or expertise in sustainability; b. The Vice President for Operations and Sustainability will co-chair with a faculty member; c. The Committee will provide oversight across the institution for sustainability: a. Administrative offices (facilities, operations, etc.) b. Shared governance (curricula, COGE, etc.) d. The Committee will assist the Vice President for Operations and Sustainability in setting targets and monitoring progress towards reduced natural resource consumption; Berea College Sustainability Plan 8 e. The Committee will provide recommendations to the Faculty and AC to shape future sustainability efforts; f. The Committee will provide communication to the community on sustainability issues and initiatives; and g. The few remaining duties of the CEPC should be folded into the committee and the CEPC eliminated. Conclusion The world’s current rates of greenhouse gas emission and of natural resource consumption have created serious threats to the natural systems that sustain us. The world’s poor have not sufficiently shared in improved standards of living from unsustainable practices, yet they are often among the first to feel the effects of damage to ecosystems. Thus, the issue of sustainability has both practical and moral dimensions. Berea College’s core institutional values call us to make very strong contributions to solving these problems, by recognizing and acting upon sustainability as the defining issue of our time and as an undergirding issue of all aspects of our mission. Only if Berea College’s educational community is sustainable ecologically, economically, and in human terms, will we have a bright future to bequeath to others; only if we are sincerely committed to global sustainability will we have the right to bequeath our institution to others. This report was originally approved on March 12, 2009 by the 2008-09 Strategic Planning Council, but withheld due to the 2008-09 global financial crisis and the College’s focus on scenario planning. The 2009-10 Strategic Planning Council updated and revised the report during the spring 2010, and the 2010-11 Strategic Planning Council provided this final revision in the fall of 2010. The following three SPC groups developed and revised versions of this document. Drafted by the 2008-09 Strategic Planning Council Dreama Gentry, Daniel Huck, Chris Lakes, Jordan Moseley, Tashia Bradley, James Blackburn-Lynch, Ben Boggs (ex officio), Kathy Bullock, Miriam David, Carolyn Newton, Mike Panciera (co-chair), Jeff Pool, Steve Pulsford, Larry Shinn (co-chair), and Gail Wolford Revised by the 2009-10 Strategic Planning Council Tashia Bradley, Charles Badger, Randy Burson, Ben Boggs (ex officio), David Cooke, Miriam David, Dara Evans, Dan Huck, Holli Hudson, Mario Nakazawa, Carolyn Newton, Mike Panciera, Steve Pulsford (co-chair), Anna Rafferty, Larry Shinn (co-chair), Scott Steele, and Gail Wolford Final Revision by the 2010-11 Strategic Planning Council Stephanie Browner, David Cooke, Miriam David, Dara Evans, Sourabh Garg, Dan Huck, Holli Hudson, Meta Mendel-Reyes, Mario Nakazawa (co-chair), Steve Pulsford, Larry Shinn (co-chair), Scott Steele, Elizabeth Vega, Judith Weckman, Gail Wolford, and Ben Boggs (ex officio) Approved by the General Faculty Assembly – November 11, 2010 Approved by the Berea College Board of Trustees – February 26, 2011 Berea College Sustainability Plan 9 APPENDIX A Carbon Neutrality and Berea College Clean Air - Cool Planet, (CA-CP) is a science-based, non-partisan, 501(c)3 non-profit dedicated solely to finding and promoting solutions to global warming. CA-CP has defined carbon neutrality as follows: True corporate carbon neutrality means there is no net increase of atmospheric greenhouse gases from the existence of the company. The process for achieving neutrality should begin with an inventory of the company’s entire carbon footprint and the setting of a clear boundary. The company should then embrace a neutralization strategy that prioritizes the avoidance of emissions, their reduction through energy efficiency, the replacement of high-carbon energy sources with low- or zero-carbon alternatives, and then the use of high-quality carbon offsets. CA-CP’s Forum for the Future developed the following hierarchy to inform discussions about institutional climate strategy. What Carbon Neutrality Does Not Mean Many people who have discussed this issue on campus and beyond misunderstand what “carbon neutrality” means. Here are a few things that carbon neutrality does NOT mean: • It does not mean an organization’s activities emit no carbon or zero emission—that is impossible. • It does not involve an institution’s investments—it is an accounting of physical carbon emitted or offset. • Neither sustainabilty nor carbon neutrality replaces any part of Berea’s mission—it is a clear expression of our mission’s plain living commitment in contemporary expression. The Carbon Management Hierarchy Actions at the top of the hierarchy are more transformative and lasting in terms of reducing a company’s emissions baseline 1. Avoid - Avoid carbon-intensive activities 2. Reduce - Conduct operations more efficiently 3. Replace - Replace high-carbon energy sources with low-carbon energy ones 4. Offset - Offset those emissions that can’t be eliminated by green energy or carbon offsets (usually purchased) Berea College has been actively seeking to manage its carbon footprint and move toward carbon neutrality for well over a decade. Beginning with intentional definitions of energy and renovation plans in the 1990’s, the College has focused on reducing carbon emissions through energy efficient construction and renovations, retrofits to reduce energy consumption, the replacement of its central heat plant, and educating its students and community to effect behavioral change. The results of these efforts to date have been striking. The largest part of the College’s carbon footprint, as calculated annually since 2008, is purchased electricity and fuel for heat. The College has calculated the BTU’s used each year since 1998-99 for coal, natural gas and electricity. In 1998-99, the College purchased an equivalent of 266.2 billion BTU’s of energy. In 2009-10, the total was reduced to 140.0 billion BTU’s. The greenhouse gas emissions inventories for the College have been calculated since 2008. The College’s total emissions have been calculated as follows: Berea College Sustainability Plan 2 Total Metric Tons CO2 TOTAL Excluding Forest TOTAL including forest as carbon sink Fiscal 2008 24,830 (2,374) Fiscal 2009 20,529 (6,663) Fiscal 2010 21,096 (6,096) Source: Berea College GHG Inventory: http://acupcc.aashe.org/ The Strategic Planning Council and the Administrative Committee have excluded Berea’s forest from its operating calculations for two reasons: (1) we wish to keep our forest as a valuable “carbon credit” option to sell in the future, and (2) there are real opportunities to reduce carbon consumption in our operations and we want our Berea community to focus on them. The planning that will continue the College on a path to carbon neutrality will require attention to each of the aspects of carbon planning – from a careful evaluation of operations and activities, to continued reduction/efficiency strategies, to seeking alternative (lower carbon) energy sources, and finally consideration of offsets (ours or those purchased from others). As recognized by CA-CP, given current technologies, it is impossible for most organizations to be truly carbon neutral without the purchase of offsets. However, the ongoing attention to the measurement and management of the carbon footprint, with the long-term goal of carbon neutrality is a manageable and responsible goal for any organization. For Berea College, the goal of carbon neutrality is an essential element in our commitment through word and example to simple and socially responsible living. For more information on what Carbon Neutrality means, the following presentation “Getting to Zero: Defining Corporate Carbon Neutrality” is an excellent summary of issues of definition and approaches to move toward carbon neutrality. http://www.cleanair-coolplanet.org/documents/zero.pdf Berea College Purchased Energy – BTU’s Total Energy Purchased Total BTU's in Millions 300,000 250,000 200,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 ‐ Total BTUs Linear (Total BTUs)