Pioneer LogLewis & Clark College’s Student-Run Newspaper

Green energy fee not final step to sustainable campus

September 10, 2010

by Shelby Campbell

It used to be that students could pay an optional $20 annual fee toward offsetting Lewis & Clark’s carbon footprint.  According to the LC website, about 95% of the student body at the College of Arts and Sciences opted to pay that fee.  This year, however, the payment has been increased to $85 and is no longer voluntary, meaning that if one does not opt out of paying the fee, one will be charged automatically. 
The green energy fee goes toward the purchase of Renewable Energy Certificates (RECs), which allows electricity from renewable sources (wind, solar, etc.) to compete on the national grid with traditional energy sources like coal and nuclear.  The problem with RECs is that purchasing them does not mean that the energy we use is 100% green, but rather that the energy we use is guaranteed to be resupplied into the grid in the form of green energy.  So, though we pay an $85 fee, the electricity we use mostly comes from nonrenewable sources. 

Of course, I support our community’s effort to boost the feasibility of renewable energy. Coal is America’s most utilized resource for electricity production, even though coal is responsible for “a third of the mercury emissions in America, a third of our smog, two-thirds of our sulfur dioxide, and nearly a third of our planet-warming carbon dioxide,” according to National Geographic.  Unfortunately, coal is both abundant and cheap, which makes it a strong competitor in the energy market, especially compared to green energy sources like wind and solar, which cannot be stored but must be used immediately as they are produced. 

Obviously, using RECs is certainly better than not.  Yet, it is disheartening to see our school passing off its responsibility for a greener planet onto other institutions.  Rather than changing our habits of irresponsible energy consumption, we pay other companies to take on the responsibility for us. Rather than redesigning wasteful or outdated facilities, we let other companies “balance out” the difference.  Our new Green Energy Initiative does not mean that we are using less energy or greener energy.  In fact, we are using the same amount of unclean energy as we always have, but now we are essentially doubling our consumption by purchasing RECs. 

According to some people, the REC system is simply a way of alleviating our guilt as energy consumers without reaching the core of the problem—overconsumption.  As animals, humans were meant to rise and rest with the sun, allowing for productivity between the hours of sunrise and sunset.  There are places in the world where this is still the case, and innumerable other places where rolling blackouts prevent anyone from relying on electricity.  So, do you really need to blow dry your hair?  Here’s an idea: turn off the lights when you leave an empty room.  Turn the water heaters down a few degrees, because, really, who needs their water to be scalding hot?  Turn off your power strips when they are not in use.  Shut down your computer at night.  Purchase incandescent bulbs.  Turn off the window fan and trust that yes, your body will let you sleep even when its 100°F.  There are so many ways to reduce our carbon footprint, and I truly respect our initiatives as a community to do so.  However, I think LC has failed to take responsibility for our overconsumption, and we must recognize that simply increasing a Green Energy Fee does not make us a green community.