The Board of Visitors’ commitment to environmental sustainability for new construction projects is a good start toward decreasing the University’s environmental impact. The University will not only be doing the right thing by becoming more sustainable, it will become more prestigious. A modern university should be a leader in sustainability efforts, and many competing institutions have been for some time. But seeking outside certification alone is not the most effective way to pursue this goal.
The Board’s goals include Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design certification for all new buildings. The U.S. Green Building Council, a non-profit organization, awards the certification to buildings that meet comprehensive standards ranging from water conservation to greenhouse gas emissions. This certification process is widely used and respected, and the University is right to seek the Council’s approval.
In the end, though, the University should not arrange its sustainability efforts around a certification process. In some cases, it might make sense, both financially and environmentally, to go beyond what is required for the certification process. Conversely, the University might find the certification would require steps whose costs outweigh their benefits. Certification is a fine target to shoot for, but the final decision has to depend on what makes sense for the University, even if that means forgoing certification.
After all, the point of sustainability is not to require the University to ignore its own interests in the name of altruism. Sustainable practices are sustainable precisely because they cut costs. If they do not, there is no way to ensure they will always be followed.
LEED certification might be out of the question for older buildings on Grounds. That does not mean the University cannot make some efforts toward reducing consumption.
Whenever it renovates a building, no matter how small the renovation, the University should consider whether changes can be made to make the building more cost-effective. Renovating buildings for the sake of sustainability is too expensive to attempt at once, but since renovations to buildings on Grounds are routine, sustainability goals can be incorporated into that process.
Students concerned about sustainability should note the responsibility to promote the cause does not rest solely with the administration. University Architect David Neuman told the Board he walked through McCormick Road dormitories and found students had turned on their fans on a 70-degree day. Yes, part of this problem is that the old buildings do not effectively circulate air and reduce temperatures, but part of it is that no one opened a window. If students are to demand sustainable practices from the administration — and they should — they must examine their own habits.
A Cavalier Daily editorial last year argued University President John T. Casteen, III, was right not to sign the American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment, because it held the University to a standard set by an outside source. For the same reasons, the University should not commit itself unconditionally to pursuing LEED certification on new buildings. Rather, it should resolve itself to pursue sustainability regardless of any outside standards.