20 March 2008
Movement to Green U.S. Schools Is Gathering Momentum
Green schools are good for kids as well as the environment
Washington -- Faced with expensive utility bills and overcrowding, Blackstone Valley Technical High School in Upton, Massachusetts, remodeled and upgraded with large solar panels, light sensors and solar water heating arrays that are expected to save $160,000 per year in energy costs.
It is just one of hundreds of schools across the United States seeking to save money and create a healthier environment by going “green.” The trend is being propelled by growing interest on the part of teachers’ unions, school boards, parent-teacher associations and governmental entities from the local to the federal level.
“Embracing green, healthy and energy-efficient school buildings for our children and school staff is the right thing to do,” said Edward J. McElroy, the president of the American Federation of Teachers, a teachers’ union, on the enactment of the High-Performance Green Buildings Act in December 2007. The law authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to work with state agencies to address school environmental and siting concerns.
The American Federation of Teachers has launched an advocacy campaign in partnership with the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), a nonprofit organization representing various sectors of the building industry. “It’s tremendously urgent,” said Rachel Gutter, the USGBC school sector manager, in an interview. “We have the ability and technology to make healthy, safe environments for kids that also save energy,” she said, adding that the response from the educational community has been “tremendously positive.”
In November 2007, a new bipartisan caucus (support group) formed in the U.S. House of Representatives to raise awareness and promote the benefits of green schools.
In partnership with the U.S. Green Building Council, the caucus will work to raise awareness about the benefits of building “green,” said one of the founding co-chairs, Representative Darlene Hooley, a Democrat from Oregon who is a former teacher. “By using alternatives to toxic chemicals, pursuing green building and maintenance practices, changing resource consumption habits, serving nutritious food and teaching students to be stewards of their communities, we’ll help put future generations at the forefront of sustainable development,” she said.
School districts have been responsive to calls for greater energy efficiency. EPA's list of Energy Star Leaders has grown to more than 50 organizations, almost two-thirds of which are school districts. Energy Star was introduced by EPA in 1992 as a voluntary, market-based partnership to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through energy efficiency.
USGBC has established a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system specifically for primary and secondary schools. It emphasizes classroom acoustics, master planning, indoor air quality, mold prevention, energy efficiency and water conservation.
“The LEED system is like a report card,” said Gutter. “It’s the only national standard ... the only guideline people have for designing, building and operating a green school.”
WHY BUILD GREEN?
Gutter cited three practical reasons. “First of all, it’s about children -- healthy kids and a high-performance environment,” she said. A LEED-certified school has better lighting and temperature controls, a more comfortable indoor environment, improved ventilation and indoor air quality -- all of which promote higher student achievement.
Second, a green school becomes itself a teaching tool. “They’re learning about the environment every time they flush the toilet or look at the solar panels,” she said.
And then there is the financial payback: the average green school saves about $100,000 each year. A LEED-certified school uses 30 percent to 50 percent less energy than a conventional school and 30 percent less water, according to the USGBC. It also reduces harmful carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent, which is important in terms of what scientists say may lead to global climate change.
“The biggest challenge with any stakeholder group is the first cost,” said Gutter. “Some people have heard green construction is a luxury they can’t afford.”
In fact, new green schools built to LEED standards cost only 1.7 percent more than conventional schools, according to a recent independent national study, Greening America’s Schools: Costs and Benefits (PDF, 26 pages).
At present, only a very small fraction of U.S. schools are green, “but we are approaching a tipping point,” Gutter believes. Almost 80 have been certified, some 600 are in the process of certification, and an average of one new school applies for LEED certification each day. Some localities, such as Montgomery County in Maryland, require all new public buildings to be built to certified green standards.
But building new green schools should not be the only focus. “A lot can be done to green existing schools,” Gutter said. “Greening often means no new costs.” Lighting upgrades, for example, are common in public schools, and an effective way to reduce operating costs. Chicago is retrofitting all of its schools to LEED standards.
“When people know the cost, there are no opponents,” Gutter said.
There may be a wait, however, for a green contractor. “The demand for those who understand green building exceeds the supply,” she said.
