1 of 57

Wellesley College

Fossil Fuel Divestment:

Webinar on Recommendations Proposed by the Sustainability Committee

2 of 57

Sustainability is:

  1. About institutional choices and individual actions
  2. About joules, watts, and justice
  3. About accountability for aspirations

Wellesley: Decarbonization and Divestment

Justice, Peace, and Social Welfare

Without sustainability as a core lived value, how can we achieve excellence for all now and into the future?

3 of 57

“We move that Academic Council express its desire to take part in the College’s shared commitment to a fossil-fuel-free future by tasking the AY 2020-2021 Sustainability Committee with identifying a suite of concrete actions that the faculty body will take that will:

  • Be related to fossil fuel consumption by faculty in their roles at the College;
  • Be budget-relieving to the College by enough to meaningfully contribute to the estimated annual costs associated with any divestment decision made by the Trustees;
  • Be adopted by the faculty no later than September 2021”
  • March 2020 Academic Council Motion

4 of 57

Proposed Recommendations

5 of 57

Proposed Recommendations

  1. Plant-based Catering Default

Catering

6 of 57

Proposed Recommendations

  • Plant-based Catering Default
  • Mini Fridges
  • Water Fountains
  • Building Temperature Standards

Catering

Energy

7 of 57

Proposed Recommendations

Catering

Energy

Transportation

  • Plant-based Catering Default
  • Mini Fridges
  • Water Fountains
  • Building Temperature Standards
  • Parking
  • Faculty Conference Travel

8 of 57

Proposed Recommendations

  • Plant-based Catering Default
  • Mini Fridges
  • Water Fountains
  • Building Temperature Standards
  • Parking
  • Faculty Conference Travel
  • Feebate Carbon Charge Program

Catering

Energy

Transportation

Infrastructure

9 of 57

Faculty, staff, and student decarbonization project summary

Target area / Program

Stakeholder

CO2 (Metric Tons)/Year Saved

Cost Savings

Catering/Dining

Faculty/Staff: AC lunches�Student: 50% red meat reduction

0.087*

192

Negligible�$74,000

Transportation

Faculty: Conference travel

Students: Busing

135�70

$92,400�$116,838

Mini-fridges

Faculty/Staff: facilitate recycling�Students: conservation fee

2�21

~$500 $30,000

Hot water

Heating/Cooling

Community-wide

26

1,618

$8,397

$213,069

Total

2,064 MT CO2

(for context 2010 emissions baseline is 32,600 MT CO2)

$535, 263

*potentially higher if adopted for more events

10 of 57

Plant-based Catering Default

11 of 57

Lowering meat consumption and reducing food waste is one way our community can reduce our carbon footprint on campus

12 of 57

301 lbs

CO2 / year

Ordering 160 meat-based sandwiches every year at Academic Council

13 of 57

This is the equivalent of driving from Boston, MA to Baltimore, MD

[332 miles]

Baltimore MD

Boston

14 of 57

Catering Savings (from just one event- AC meetings): 0.1 MT CO2

Total Savings (so far): 0.1 MT CO2

We are recommending that food ordering practices are modified to a “plant-based” catering default, where individuals still have an option to request meat-based options if needed.

Proposed Recommendation

15 of 57

Mini Fridges

16 of 57

Mini-fridges are both cost- and carbon-intensive, so we should look into ways of recycling as many as possible

17 of 57

Running 100 mini fridges an entire year

26,300 kWh / year

$2,500 / year

7 MT CO2 / year

18 of 57

Per fridge the emissions are about 154 lbs CO2 / year, which is the emissions equivalent of driving from Wellesley to Albany, NY.

[173 miles]

Albany

NY

19 of 57

Three Policy Options:

20 of 57

Three Policy Options:

  1. Total mini-fridge ban with certain exemptions

21 of 57

Three Policy Options:

  • Total mini-fridge ban with certain exemptions
  • $30 “conservation fee” to offset the monetary social cost of the fridges

22 of 57

Three Policy Options:

  • Total mini-fridge ban with certain exemptions
  • $30 “conservation fee” to offset the monetary social cost of the fridges
  • Opt-in program that discourages mini-fridge use and incentivizes recycling

23 of 57

We recommend that the community consider recycling their mini-fridge through the Office of Sustainability if it is underutilized.

Fridge Savings: $559 & 2 MT CO2

Total Savings (so far): $559 & 2.1 MT CO2

Proposed Recommendation

24 of 57

Water Fountains

25 of 57

Using heated and chilled water tends to be another carbon intensive action our community partakes in throughout the day

26 of 57

99,965 kWh / year

$8,397 / year

26 MT CO2 / year

Chilling water for 119 units every year

27 of 57

Per water fountain the emissions are about 482 lbs CO2 / year, which is the emissions equivalent of driving from Wellesley to Richmond, VA.

[542 miles]

Richmond

VA

28 of 57

Proposed Recommendation

Water Fountain Savings: $8,397 & 26 MT CO2

Total Savings (so far): $8,956 & 26.1 MT CO2

We recommend that the community support a Facilities-led energy efficiency project to reduce chilled water by disconnecting chillers at water fountains and bottle filling stations across campus.

29 of 57

New Temperature Proposal

30 of 57

Heating and cooling buildings on campus is one of the biggest generators of carbon emissions

though it presents us with one of the

biggest opportunities for carbon reduction

31 of 57

22,960 dth / year

$ 213,000 / year

1,618 MT CO2 / year

Lowering the heating setting to 68 degrees would result in an 8% reduction in natural gas use

68

72

Our group is also continuing to analyze cooling savings

32 of 57

Per person on campus the average emission savings would be 742 lbs CO2 / year, which is the emissions equivalent of driving from Wellesley to Charlotte, NC.

[836 miles]

Charlotte

NC

33 of 57

Proposed Recommendation

Temperature Policy Savings: $213,069 & 1,618 MT CO2

Total Savings (so far): $222,025 & 1,644 MT CO2

We recommend that the community support a proposal for a new energy savings initiative to update campus temperature settings

34 of 57

Parking

35 of 57

Commuting & Transportation

Most of us commute to work by car. Public transportation is limited, so commuting by car is hardly a matter of choice for those of us who don’t live in walking or biking distance to campus.

36 of 57

Parking on Campus

37 of 57

Parking on Campus

  • A flat fee would create huge equity issues

38 of 57

Parking on Campus

  • A flat fee would create huge equity issues
  • A pay-as-you-park fee may disincentive some from coming to campus regularly

39 of 57

Parking on Campus

  • A flat fee would create huge equity issues
  • A pay-as-you-park fee may disproportionately affect staff who are required to be on campus more often

40 of 57

Parking on Campus

  • A flat fee would create huge equity issues
  • A pay-as-you-park fee may disproportionately affect staff who are required to be on campus more often
  • Fees may encourage more illegal parking activity (already a huge problem for us)

41 of 57

Parking on Campus

  • A flat fee would create huge equity issues
  • A pay-as-you-park fee may disincentive some from coming to campus regularly
  • Fees may encourage more illegal parking activity (already a huge problem for us)

42 of 57

Parking Data

Institution

Student Body Size (undergrad)

Campus Size (acres)

Campus Type

Average Student Fee (annual)

Average Faculty Fee (annual)

Swarthmore

1,594

425

Suburban

$100.00

$0.00

Pomona

1,717

140

Suburban

$120.00

$0.00

Washington & Lee

1,822

430

Suburban

$65.00

$0.00

Amherst

1,855

1,000

Suburban

$60.00

$0.00

Mount Holyoke

2,190

800

Suburban

$125.00

$0.00

Babson

2,350

370

Suburban

$125.00

$0.00

Wellesley

2,391

500

Suburban

$135.00

$0.00

Smith

2,600

147

Suburban

$150.00

$0.00

Oberlin

2,846

440

Suburban

$150.00

$0.00

University of Richmond

3,215

350

Suburban

$112.50

$0.00

Brandeis

3,688

235

Suburban

$143.00

$0.00

Mean

2,388

440

-

$116.86

$0.00

Median

2,350

425

-

$125.00

$0.00

43 of 57

Proposed Recommendation

Parking Policy Savings: N/A

Total Savings (so far): $222,025 & 1,644 MT CO2

Our current recommendation is not to include a faculty parking fee in our portfolio of divestment actions and that other options, such as visitor parking fees, are further explored

Will add photo of parking garage

44 of 57

Faculty Conference Travel

45 of 57

In FY 2019, per faculty member the average emissions are about 7.63 MT CO2/year, which 35% higher than our faculty peers at Middlebury

Based on: Fiscal year 2019 data

46 of 57

$92,400 / year

135 MT CO2 / year

We travel all over the globe, and for 2019 the estimate of total faculty miles traveled is 4,000,000

47 of 57

It is imperative to support faculty conference travel generously. Instituting a general fee for air travel appears as a responsible measure to offset the tremendous carbon footprint associated with this type of transportation.”

Reimagining the way we travel for a more sustainable future

48 of 57

Proposed Recommendation

Travel Program Savings: $92,400 & 135 MT CO2

Total Savings (so far): $314,425 & 1,779 MT CO2

“For all faculty on term appointment (including assistant professors to all NTT faculty) the current program would remain unchanged, allocating $2,000/AY to conference travel. For tenured faculty the program would change to $3,000/2AY (permitting roll overs). In addition, all domestic flights would incur a $20 carbon fee while international flights would be charged $35.”

49 of 57

Internal Carbon Pricing Feebate Program

50 of 57

Peers with Internal Carbon Charge Programs

51 of 57

What is an internal carbon charge program?

“A tax (typical rates are around 1.25%) on department operational budgets diverts funds to fuel projects aimed at reaching carbon neutrality”

Possible Carbon Neutrality Projects

Facilities energy efficiency projects

Incentivize innovation in faculty scholarship and the curriculum

Or other initiatives that haven’t been researched yet

52 of 57

Proposed Recommendation

“We believe that when our community is ready, an appropriately designed internal carbon pricing program could lead to institutionalizing sustainability into our community’s DNA. We are proposing additional research on this project, however this goes beyond the original charge to the Sustainability Committee.”

53 of 57

Next Steps

54 of 57

Faculty, staff, and student decarbonization project summary

Target area / Program

Stakeholder

CO2 (Metric Tons)/Year Saved

Cost Savings

Catering/Dining

Faculty/Staff: AC lunches�Student: 50% red meat reduction

0.087*

192

Negligible�$74,000

Transportation

Faculty: Conference travel

Students: Busing

135�70

$92,400�$116,838

Mini-fridges

Faculty/Staff: facilitate recycling�Students: conservation fee

2�21

~$500 $30,000

Hot water

Heating/Cooling

Community-wide

26

1,618

$8,397

$213,069

Total

2,064 MT CO2

(for context 2010 emissions baseline is 32,600 MT CO2)

$535, 263

*potentially higher if adopted for more events

55 of 57

Engagement Opportunities

Proposal Feedback Survey (available in the Webinar Google Form)

Town halls (community wide invites to follow)

9 April 1:00-2:00 pm EST

14 April 10:00-11:00 am EST

56 of 57

To all the members of AC and for all those that we have collaborated with already - thank you. We have been asked to do much during times when there are many additional demands placed on us and yet as we have all affirmed -- a collective approach to decarbonizing our community is a task that is at the heart of our newly articulated vision for ourselves

Acknowledgements

57 of 57

Webinar Contributors

Narrators

  • Dan Brabander
  • Becky Belisle
  • Katie Christoph ‘21
  • Olivia Shehan
  • Marilyn Sides
  • Pinar Keskin

Webinar Collaborators

  • Thomas Nolden
  • Maya Collins ‘22
  • Caitlin Campbell ‘22
  • Sustainability Committee

Data contributors

  • Hive Interns: Deena Saadi ‘22 and Liz Zhou ‘22
  • Office of Sustainability Interns/Facilities Interns: Carrie Goeke-Morey ‘24, Michelle Zhao ‘24,Miracle Taanarwo ‘22 and Teresa Xiao ‘24
  • The Office of the Provost
  • Facilities Management & Planning
  • William Amidon, Middlebury College