Now, a year into her continuing sustainability role, Carolyn can share some hard learned lessons about culture change, applicability, and going green.  As her collaborator on the original sustainability plan, I wanted to ask her a few questions about her adventures in sustainability at the K-12 school level.

Carolyn Anthon, Johns Hopkins graduate student.

Q: What have been your biggest challenges?

I think the most challenging aspect of our sustainability adventure at my school is changing behavior. Status quo is easy to maintain, and overcoming that – even with folks who are on board with the idea of sustainability – has proven quite difficult. Also, I found it challenging to get students involved. The change has to come from within in order to create buy-in and sense of ownership within the community. I could list more roadblocks and hurdles, but these are the two biggest things that come to mind.

Q: What were your easy wins?

The easiest win was creating a sustainability committee almost immediately after delivery of the sustainability plan. Following that, we’ve started a GOOS (good on one side) paper collection in several areas of the building to capture and reuse paper one more time before it hits the recycling bin. A group of students is currently campaigning to have a meatless lunch day once per week all year long in support of climate change and sustainability. Plus the school had already reached some of the low-hanging fruit, so much of what lies ahead is more challenging.

Q: How did staff, teachers, and students respond to “sustainability”?

This question makes me chuckle. In my naiveté, I didn’t realize that there would be so many different responses! Based on the survey we conducted before the sustainability plan, most folks really saw sustainability the same as recycling. Others saw it as being “green” or conserving resources. Once we began talking about it some more in the community, others began to see it as a long-term, never-ending effort to manage our resources in an efficient, financially responsible, and environmentally friendly way. The general response has been very positive – verbally – but the actions have yet to catch up with that spoken support. I’ve found that unless it’s easy or convenient to be sustainable, many just do whatever comes naturally to them. I fear I’ll always be pulling out compostables from the trash or telling people to be careful that they only have one plate for their lunch.

Q: Composting is a big action item for schools these days, what did your composting program look like?

Our composting program began spring 2012 with five pick-ups a week from Envirelation. I think we are very fortunate to be working with a company that takes ALL food scraps so no sorting or scraping is necessary. Envirelation also accepts waxy paper, such as dixie cups, paper napkins, and our compostable dinnerware and utensils. Waste stations adorn each lunch room with additional compost scrap pails in faculty lounges and the on-site kitchen. Our staff has been mindful of purchasing compostable-only materials for serving, so this year we’ve also replaced all fancy plastic cups used for campus events with a compostable option. Thus far we’ve decreased our regular trash pick-ups from five times to twice per week. I hope to see continued decrease as waste sorting improves.

Q: Hindsight is 20/20 they say. What do you wish you knew a year ago that could have helped you?

I wish I had a better idea of the structure for decision-making within my school. I also wish that I was more assertive and confident when delivering information. Without an official title, I’m just a volunteer advocate for a volunteer committee. Getting things done seems to get hampered by that trivial missing epithet. Finally, I really wish I knew how painfully slow the process of change would be. I think I would have been better prepared for the frustrations associated and appreciated the easy-wins much earlier.

Q: Do you have any advice for someone starting a sustainability program in their school?

I think the first thing you need to do after getting permission to start one is to establish buy-in. If you don’t already have a group of folks pumped-up about sustainability who are willing to share in the advocacy with you – and even if you do – go out there and get buy-in from the students, faculty, and staff. Connect their actions to reasoning for change. Show them the powerful photographs of Chris Jordan’s Midway series. Talk about the importance of the compost cycle to our agricultural process. Ask your community to think about one action that they could do to make a difference and have them each make a pledge. And realize that you’re not alone in the good fight, but that you will need a lot of patience and fortitude to persevere.

Carolyn Anthon, graduated from the MS in Environmental Science and Policy Program in 2012.

Jessica Riehl, will graduate in 2013 with an MS in Environmental Science and Policy.

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design

The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) governs the LEED rating systems which it describes as a “voluntary, consensus-based, market-driven program that provides third-party verification of green buildings.”

Now 13 years old, the LEED rating systems have been used to certify projects in 135 countries. LEED rating systems can be applied to a variety of building project types including home construction, commercial buildings, existing building operations and maintenance, community development and more. The program offers certifications at four levels (certified, silver, gold, or platinum) depending on how many rating “points” the project earns.

The specific green building requirements vary depending on the rating system a project applies under, but the main categories in which projects can earn credit towards certification include: sustainable sites, water efficiency, energy and atmosphere, materials and resources, and indoor environmental quality. Projects can also earn bonus credits for particularly innovative techniques, or for addressing environmental issues specific to their location.

LEED is frequently updated based on continued research and input from USGBC staff and volunteer committees. LEED Version 4 is next up and according to USGBC, is anticipated to include changes like new market sectors (for example, data centers), increased technical rigor (for example, life cycle analysis of materials), and streamlined services including an improved LEED Online platform for applicants.

Living Building Challenge

A relative newcomer, the Living Building Challenge was launched in 2006 as a standard available to the public. The Living Building Institute (LBI) was founded to administer the challenge and certified its first projects in 2010. The LBI describes the challenge as “the built environment’s most rigorous performance standard. It calls for the creation of building projects at all scales that operate as cleanly, beautifully and efficiently as nature’s architecture.”

The program offers three levels of certification (petals, net zero energy, or full certification). The challenge takes seven building performance categories into account including: site, water, energy, health, materials, equity and beauty. Projects must be operational for 12 months prior to being evaluated for certification so that the certification can be based on actual performance. The challenge includes 20 requirements, most striking of which include the requirement that the project be energy and water self-sufficient.

Example – Green Roof Anacostia Gateway courtesy of GarberDC via flickr creative commons.

As the New York Times reported this week, the Bullitt Center in Seattle claims that it will be the greenest commercial building in the world when it officially opens on April 22, 2013. The project is seeking Living Building Challenge certification and includes water-related features like a green roof, composting toilets, grey-water treatment, permeable pavement and green stormwater infrastructure, all in the name of protecting nearby Puget Sound. The building will use solar arrays to generate as much power as it uses, with strict metering for tenants.

While every green building rating system has its critics and proponents, these two seem to be continually raising the bar in building performance. Considering that buildings can take a significant portion of a country’s resources (39% of U.S. energy use goes to buildings (PDF)) and that there is a growing/modernizing world population, a continued effort to improve building performance will be critical to resource and environmental protection efforts in the future.

How “green” is your home or office? Have you ever worked with a green building rating system? We’d love to hear your thoughts on the pros and cons!

The EPA uses 0.1 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day as the accepted exposure level for oral consumption without recognized adverse effects.  Inhaling mercury vapor in significant amounts (greater than 0.025 mg/m3) can cause deficits in cognitive functioning, tremors, kidney damage and even death in cases of high exposure. If mercury is so toxic, why is it in a common household item?

When mercury vapor  is stimulated by electrical current, it produces ultra-violet light. When this UV light bounces off the phosphor compound painted on the inside of a CFL, it converts to visible light and the bulb glows. Mercury is the most efficient element known – no other alternative can achieve comparable energy efficiency, making it an essential component of CFLs.

image courtesy of http://www.climatechange.gov.au/what-you-need-to-know/lighting/resources/fs.aspx

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 set energy-efficiency standards for light bulbs that will come fully into effect by 2014. The law will require light bulbs to use 25-30 percent less power than incandescent bulbs use today – which means incandescent bulbs will be effectively phased out because they cannot meet these standards.

Currently over 670 million mercury-containing bulbs are discarded each year nationwide.  Where do they all go? The EPA strongly encourages the recycling of all fluorescent light bulbs, but only requires it for certain commercial and industrial waste, relying on states to enforce residential recycling. The easiest recycling centers for residential and consumer access are typically home improvement/hardware stores such as Home Depot and Lowes (check out Earth911.com for recycling locations near you). Unfortunately, many people are not aware of the importance of recycling CFLs, and instead just toss them in the trash.

Virtually all components of a fluorescent bulb can be recycled – including the mercury. By recycling, you’ll ensure that 99.98 percent of the mercury used in the lamp is recovered. But even in a state such as Maine, with progressive laws that prohibit mercury disposal in landfills, the estimated recycling rate is still very low. A 2009 study found that 79 percent of those surveyed didn’t know that recycling was a requirement. Of those who did know, 17 percent still disposed of CFLs in the trash.

As CFL use becomes more widespread due to federal regulations, it’s important that the general public is educated on the dangers of bulb breakage, safe cleanup, and proper disposal for spent bulbs. About 11 percent of the mercury vapor inside CFLs is released if the bulb is broken. If sent to a landfill, mercury leaches into the soil and groundwater, or is incinerated into the air.  If broken inside your home, mercury can contaminate your carpet and vaporize into the air. The EPA has detailed instructions for what to do – and what not to do – in case of a ‘mercury spill’ (i.e. CFL breakage) inside your home.  But unless the bulb breaks in a tiny closet, with you inside, and the door shut – the vapor should dissipate enough over time that inhalation isn’t a serious threat. Opening windows and vacating the room and/or building is the best way to ensure you aren’t breathing in significant concentrations of vapors.

While the amount of mercury in one CFL may be negligible compared to other sources of mercury we encounter, we must still consider the impact on the environment. Some argue that even in the worst-case scenario, the mercury added to the environment if every CFL bulb was incinerated would add only 0.12 percent to annual manmade mercury emissions in the U.S.  But considering the fact that current emissions are already significantly high enough to cause a public health risk via the food chain (think mercury-laden fish) then perhaps even a 0.12 percent reduction is worth the effort to educate the public and divert CFLs from the landfill.

How mercury enters the environment…where is the landfill in this equation?

Some potential solutions to CFLs-in-landfills are tougher regulations at the state or federal level to require recycling, better product labeling, and manufacturing standards that limit the amount of mercury used, as is already done in the U.K. Do you recycle your CFLs? Why or why not?

Despite the blessings of FDA and WHO that food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is safe, consumer are exercising their “right to know” and have made great strides in the fight to see labeling on grocery store shelves.Whole Foods Market stores in the U.S. and Canada will now follow suit with their European locations, requiring labels on all genetically modified food products by 2018. Ben & Jerry’s has already made a commitment to be GMO-free by 2014, and many states are proposing mandatory labels for genetically engineered food.

Is improved weather modeling in the forecast for the U.S.?

The nation’s capital and surrounding metropolitan areas effectively shut down on Wednesday, March 6 in anticipation of a severe snowstorm that left mostly slush. A professor of atmospheric science at the University of Washington in Seattle explains why the European forecasting system is more accurate than U.S. models, and weather forecasters admit that they could do a better job in communicating uncertainty along with their predictions.

Hot Mess: Spikes in temperature and CO2 pollution

Lots of climate change-related news this week, with evidence that carbon pollution is rising faster than predicted and new research showing that the abrupt U-turn in global temperatures over the past 100 years from cooling to sharply warming trends reflects an unprecedented shift over such a brief period of time.

Leftovers anyone? Remnants of the Manhattan Project looking for new home 

Amid concerns that leaking tanks of radioactive waste at the former Manhattan Project Hanford site in Washington state could potentially threaten groundwater supplies to the 4th largest river in the United States, lawmakers are  proposing to ship 3 million gallons of the toxic sludge to a repository in New Mexico. Not surprisingly,  environmental groups  are against accepting waste from Hanford at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) located in Loving, NM. In the meantime, cleanup efforts in Washington may be slowed by budget cuts.

Process tubes on the front face of the nuclear reactor in Hanford, WA. Creative Commons Image “Manhattan Project Hanford B Reactor Tour” courtesy of Redbeard Math Pirate on Flickr.

Climate-induced change in guidelines for energy efficiency

The EPA and U.S. Green Building Council announced this week that Puerto Rico would get its own set of guidelines, based on the tropical climate, for home energy efficiency. Plans for infrastructure improvements in the U.S. already take climate change into consideration, to ensure that they are capable of withstanding severe storms and high heat. Will mounting evidence of climate change result in changes to the USBGC’s code throughout the United States?