White Paper

The Quiet Revolution:

Sustainable Facilities
on Campus

James Simpson
Director, Higher Education Solutions

Johnson Controls, Inc.

Introduction
The power of the college and university campus cannot be underestimated. American
students have been activists from the 1930s, when the student-led American Youth Congress
lobbied against racial discrimination, to the 1960s, when groups such as Students for a
Democratic Society fought for a broad range of social and political causes. These efforts
were usually well-intentioned and sometimes successful, although along the way they often
resulted in conflicts with college administrations.
Now a new type of activism is underway on college campuses: The drive for sustainability.
The most popular definition of sustainability is derived from the 1983 United Nations
Brundtland Commission report: Sustainable development is development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their
own needs.1 Modern-day interpretations of the term often relate to behaving in ways that
enhance current and future social, environmental and economic resources commonly
referred to as the triple-bottom-line.2
Students are using campus environmental involvement to help them choose their educational
path. Some 66% of the 15,722 respondents to the popular annual college guide, The Princeton
Reviews College Hopes & Worries Survey, said that they would favor having information
about a colleges commitment to the environment and that it may impact their decision
to apply to or attend the school.Almost a quarter said it would Strongly or Very Much
contribute to their assessment of a school.3

Students are
using campus
environmental
involvement to help
them choose their
educational path.

The sustainability movement on campus is similar to past student campaigns in that it takes
many forms depending on the location and culture of the campus, and it seeks to change
the status quo through both creative and intellectual pursuits. It also is similar as the lessons
learned during a students four years on campus may well go beyond the classroom and help
define students lives after they graduate.
But the drive for sustainability is different in one major respect: In contrast to past student
activism, it often is being developed in collaboration with university officials; in fact, it may be
initiated at almost any level within an institution.
A student may seek to reduce her personal environmental footprint, so she starts a
green team within her dorm.
A facility manager may seek to save energy to stay on budget, so she looks to new
technologies that also reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
An admissions professional may be looking to differentiate the college to new
applicants, so he promotes the campus green aspects.
A professor realizes the job opportunities for engineering students in developing algae
energy systems at wastewater treatment plants and develops an internship program
with the local utility.
A college president recognizes the leadership role the school can play in the
community and commits to buying hybrid vehicles from a local auto dealer.
To be sure, many college communities over the years have had progressive faculty, staff and
administrators who agreed with students on the need for change and worked with them to
help achieve it. But more than at any time in the past, this revolution on campus requires the
understanding and involvement of everyone to succeed.
This is a movement that involves the entire campus. Students and administrators care deeply
about greening their campuses. Actions are taken by student groups and residential life to
encourage behavioral changes such as turning off lights and appliances or taking shorter
showers. The administrators assist with these efforts by supplying recycling facilities or buying

local or organic food. There is tremendous awareness at all levels of steps that can be taken
to lower the environmental impact of the campus, says Melissa Gallagher-Rogers, Manager,
Government & Higher Education Sectors, U.S. Green Building Council.
In response to student interest, The Princeton Review developed a green rating system to help
students make a decision. In addition, at least three other organizations have begun providing
more specific guidelines for initiating and evaluating a universitys sustainability efforts, with a
topics including:
Education & Research, Operations, Administration and Finance (Association for the
Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education)
Administration, Climate Change & Energy, Food & Recycling, Green Building, and
Transportation (Sustainable Endowments Institute)
Administration, Climate Change & Energy, Food & Recycling, Green Building,
Transportation, Endowment Transparency, Investment Priorities, and Shareholder
Engagement (National Wildlife Federation)
Although the topics often are interwoven, this paper will focus on improving campus
operations, most notably buildings, as a way to demonstrate sustainability. It will examine the
factors that are prompting universities to develop plans, show why buildings are a good place
to start on the sustainability path, and cite examples of organizations across the country that
are using the approach in their buildings. This paper also looks at how student engagement is
having an impact on campus.

More Students, More Buildings

What happens on college campuses has a huge impact across America as university
populations continue to grow. In fall 2009, a record 18.4 million students were expected
to attend the nations two-year and four-year colleges and universities, according to the
Department of Educations National Center for Educational Statistics.4
A good portion of the almost $365 billion that is annually spent on degree-granting public
and private postsecondary institutions is for construction and operations. In its 35th Annual
Official Education Construction Report, American School & University reported school
districts and higher-education institutions spent $43.4 billion in 2008 for addition and
modernization construction.5
Total spending on new, addition and modernization construction by school districts and
higher-education institutions increased to $43.3 billion in 2008 from $32.9 billion the year
before. The amount colleges specifically allocated to new buildings especially is increasing,
reflecting the pressure to continue constructing new spaces to keep up with enrollment
growth. College spending on new construction alone jumped to $7.3 billion from $5.3 billion
in 2006.6

What happens on
college campuses
has a huge impact
across America
as university
populations
continue to grow.

Additionally, many structures were built before 1980, so it is likely that much of what has
already been built will need to be replaced. At the very least, the internal systems of older
buildingsheating, cooling, security, water will require upgrades to ensure energy efficiency
and code compliance.
At the same time higher-education institutions are feeling pressure to reduce maintenance
and operations budgets caused by difficult economic conditions and rising costs especially
energy. Colleges and universities spend close to $2 billion each year on energy.7 The situation
is expected to escalate as total world consumption of marketed energy is projected to
increase by 44% from 2006 to 2030,8 plus rising fuel costs, the need for new power plants and
updating an aging grid means some electric utilities anticipate raising their prices.

Embracing Opportunities
While many see these as threats, more progressive universities are seeing these as
opportunities. For instance, saving energy can also help reduce global warming. Using fossil
fuels such as oil, coal, and natural gas to heat and power buildings increases the amount of
carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere, and CO2 is a major contributor to climate change and
the resulting global warming.
Research by the McKinsey Global Institute finds that using existing technologies to boost
energy productivity could cut global energy-demand growth by more than half over the next
15 years. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions results in a number of environmental and social
benefits from healthier students and employees to a healthier planet able to sustain the
growth expected both on campus and throughout the world.9
A growing number of leaders at institutes of higher learning are taking action to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions on campus. The American College & University Presidents Climate
Commitment (ACUPCC) was launched in 2006 to address global warming by achieving climate
neutrality for campuses and developing the capability of students to help society do the same.
As of August 2009, some 650 schools representing more than a third of the higher education
student population in America have joined the commitment to develop and implement a
comprehensive plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.10

Students in schools
also want to be
prepared for whats
being called green
collar jobs.

Americas success in addressing climate change depends on proactive, leadership by higher

education - the only institution in society that has the influence, the critical mass and the
diversity of skills needed to develop capabilities for society to re-stabilize the worlds climate,
according to its 2008 Annual Report.11
On top of voluntary efforts, many states are enacting climate change reduction legislation, and
federal legislation could mandate emissions measurement and reductions to meet global goals.
Educators also are working with funds from the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act
to enhance programs and facilities. Through the Energy Independence and Security Act of
2007 grants and loans have been made available to fund projects. These projects includes
six green building demonstration projects at four universities, grant programs for renewable
energy research and 10 million allocated to establish a university based research and
development program.12
Students in schools also want to be prepared for whats being called green collar jobs. While
the definition of the term varies, it generally involves employment in industries that promote
environmental progress. For instance:
Renewable energy and energy efficiency currently provide more than 9 million jobs and
$1,045 billion in revenue in the U.S. As many as 37 million jobs can be generated by the
renewable energy and energy efficiency industries in the U.S. by 2030-more than 17%
of all anticipated U.S. employment.13
According to employment projections reported by the U.S. Department of Labor
Statistics, the total number of HVAC-related skilled trade positions will jump from
291,000 in 2006 to more than 317,000 by 2016. An aging workforce and an increasing
demand for cost-effective and efficient facilities all contribute to the increasing need for
HVAC program graduates.
With these and other environmental, financial and social reasons to act, colleges are moving
forward and developing sustainability plans. A survey of the 332 schools with the largest
endowments surveyed in the Sustainable Endowments Institutes College Sustainability Report
Card 2010 found that a considerable number of schools have recognized the need for fulltime
campus sustainability administrators. Other findings include:
More than two-thirds report having full-time sustainability staff dedicated to
sustainability, with others planning to hire soon.

 More than half of schools have signed the Presidents Climate Commitment.
Many schools are already taking action with 40% purchasing renewable energy or
renewable energy credits, while 45% have facilities that are producing solar, wind,
or geothermal.
The study also found that most schools have adopted green building policies. And that is
where many universities start down their own path to sustainability.14

Beginning with Buildings

Buildings that contain the people who teach, learn and facilitate are the common factors
that touch almost everyone in a university community. Students will be the first to say that
buildings play a big role in the learning environment. A 2008 APPA survey of 1,481 students
found that the top building elements were noise, air temperature, lighting and cleanliness as
the most important building element to impact the students personal learning.15
Additionally, it has been found that all U.S. non-residential buildings account for:
70% of electricity consumption
39% of energy use
39% of all carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
40% of raw materials use

LEED is a
comprehensive
set of voluntarily
applied standards
that designers,
builders and owners
can use to maximize
both the economic
and environmental
performance of
buildings.

30% of waste output (136 million tons annually)

12% of potable water consumption.16
Of the colleges that had completed new projects or were planning to complete construction
by 2011, more than 88% said green/sustainable concepts were important in determining the
types of materials or products used in their construction project. Thats especially true in
the New England and Mountain states. Most said they would be including lighting or controls
projects, or HVAC expenditures.17

Vet School Reduces Carbon Footprint

Saving energy and water also reduces greenhouse gas emissions, a fact
that can drive sustainability on campus. For instance, the Oklahoma State
University (OSU) Center for Veterinary Health Sciences (CVHS) upgraded
five buildings, doing everything from glazing windows and installing lighting
controls to retrofitting the buildings plumbing and air flow systems. OSU
is expected to realize approximately $9 million in cost avoidance over
20 years through performance contract with Johnson Controls, Inc. At the
same time, CVHS is mitigating its carbon footprint by reducing the amount
of fossil fuels needed to produce electricity. In less than two years, the
amount of energy saved by the project is equivalent to what would be
consumed by 175 single family homes. The amount of water conserved
could fill 18 Olympic size swimming pools.

Leading with LEED

Like everyone else,
we are obviously
concerned with
global warming,
environmental
damage and
protecting our
planet. In addition,
we have found that
numerous issues
save the university
considerable money,
which could be
plowed back into
other sustainable
efforts.
Robert Nall,
Assistant Vice
President for Facilities
at the University of
Central Oklahoma

More than a decade ago, leaders in the building industry recognized the challenge of creating
a common set of standards that would lay the groundwork for building project teams to
design, construct and operate fully green buildings. The premiere methodology emerging
in the building industry for defining and measuring how to build sustainable facilities is the
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System from
the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC).
LEED is a comprehensive set of voluntarily applied standards that designers, builders and
owners can use to maximize both the economic and environmental performance of buildings.
It promotes a whole-building approach to sustainability by recognizing performance in five
key areas of human and environmental health: sustainable site development, water savings,
energy efficiency, materials selection and indoor environmental quality.
Since USGBCs founding in 1993, the Council has grown to more than 20,000 member
companies and organizations. Federal, state and local government entities across the United
States are adopting LEED standards for public-owned and public-funded buildings, and LEED
projects are in progress in dozens of countries, including Canada, Brazil, Mexico, India and
China.18 The number of colleges and universities involved in LEED also continues to grow. As
of late 2009, some 4,300 LEED projects were registered or certified on college campuses.19

Green, Not Just LEED

As much as LEED is becoming the de facto standard, some colleges choose to go green by
using the rating system as a guideline only and not seeking certification. Dennis R. Topper,
D.Eng. is the Dean of Administrative Services at Lee College in Baytown, Texas. He says that
the college chose to incorporate LEED concepts into the design for a new Performing Arts
Center, but not the rating itself for two reasons.
We did not have the money to seek a full LEED rating, so we did the best we could with
the funds we had. Another constraint was the special purpose use of the building with all its
acoustical requirements. For example, some of the walls are double thick to prevent noise
transmittal. Double thick walls are not an LEED feature. We may eventually obtain an LEED
rating on the building as resources and technology advances permit, he notes.
Nonetheless, more than half of the nations top-endowed schools have adopted green
building policies, whether they are LEED-specific or not. Almost 60% of schools have adopted
campus-wide green building policies that specify certain minimum performance levels such
as achieving LEED Silver certification. A similar number of these schools have at least one
building certified through the LEED rating system or are in the process of constructing one.20

Fiscal Management
Administrators and facility managers are addressing sustainability issues through their
buildings, not just in the name of the environment, but also in the name of sound fiscal
management. They are finding that building green is not just the right thing to do; it is the
smart thing to do.
Robert Nall, Assistant Vice President for Facilities at the University of Central Oklahoma,
says the university became interested in sustainability because, Like everyone else, we are
obviously concerned with global warming, environmental damage and protecting our planet.

In addition, we have found that numerous issues save the university considerable money,
which could be plowed back into other sustainable efforts.
Because of ever-tightening budgets, green buildings are cost-neutral in upfront costs
compared to traditional construction. They are less costly to operate over the life of the
building, and returns on investments come much sooner, which is especially important to
managers of owner-occupied buildings like those found on campuses. Green buildings have
several beneficial characteristics in common that include:
Optimal environmental and economic performance
Increased efficiencies saving energy and resources
Satisfying, productive, quality indoor spaces
Whole-building mindset from the start of design and over the buildings entire life cycle
Fully integrated approach to design, construction and operation for teams, processes,
systems

No Cost Difference to Be Green

Although some believe that the construction of an environmentally friendly, energy- and
resource-efficient building brings with it a substantial price tag and extended timetables, that
is simply not the case. Breakthroughs in building materials, operating systems and integrated
building automation technologies have made building with an eye on our global future not
only a timely, cost effective alternative, but the preferred method of construction among the
nations leading professionals.
A 2006 study, The Cost of Green Revisited, updated an earlier research and confirmed
that there is no significant difference in average costs for green buildings as compared to
non-green buildings.
The authors reviewed 221 facilities built to LEED standards, including academic buildings,
laboratories and libraries. According to the study, despite the fact that construction costs
have risen dramatically, Many project teams are building green buildings with little or no
added cost, and with budgets well within the cost range of non-green buildings with similar
programs. We have also found that, in many areas of the country, the contracting community
has embraced sustainable design, and no longer sees sustainable design requirements as
additional burdens to be priced in their bids
Furthermore, university leaders understand that buildings are huge investments, and like any
sound investment, investors expect a significant return. Todays building-industry leaders are
enjoying increases in efficiency and productivity, and reductions in design, construction and
operational costs, all of which helps to drastically improve bottom lines.21

Many project teams

are building green
buildings with little
or no added cost,
and with budgets
well within the cost
range of non-green
buildings with
similar programs.

Integrated Design
While LEED certification involves many factors, three elements daylighting, indoor air
quality (IAQ) and energy offer colleges and universities the opportunity to create a learning
environment where students can see clearly, be comfortable, increase the possibility of higher
achievement and reduce expenses at the same time. They also provide building designers and
decision makers with the opportunity to create unique and distinctive spaces, which become
positive factors in recruiting and retaining teachers and in improving their overall satisfaction.

Integrated design remains the key. For instance, daylighting and IAQ can have a profound
effect on student performance. Daylighting refers to the wise use of natural sunlight for task
illumination normally provided by artificial lighting fixtures. Air quality is concerned with
chemical and biological airborne impurities that can have an adverse effect on student and
faculty health.
As an example of how these two elements interact, an architect calls for large, energy
efficient windows that allow the suns light to pass through, but nearly eliminate heat
exchange. The windows may cost marginally more than traditional windows, but the cost
will likely be defrayed by smaller, less expensive HVAC equipment needed to heat and cool
the space due to the high efficiency windows. The smaller equipment also uses less energy,
generating greater utility-cost savings for the life of the building.

Daylighting
Using a single green design strategy, in this case daylighting, the upfront costs remain
relatively the same while the learning environment is substantially improved and operational
costs are reduced for years. Therein lays the power of building green and, more specifically,
integration: making design decisions based on their impact on other aspects of the building.
The Collaborative for High Performance Schools (CHPS) has issued several reports on the
correlation between high performance buildings and improved student performance. One
study found students learning in classrooms with the most daylighting progressed 20% faster
on math tests and 26% faster on reading tests in one year than those with the least amount of
daylight. Similarly, students in classrooms with the most daylighting were found to have 7% to
18% higher scores than those with the least.22

The returns on
investment in
energy efficiency
make it a strong
priority for action.

Indoor Air Quality

For years, news reports, scientific inquiries, and educational efforts have communicated the
symptoms, causes and solutions to indoor air quality problems in schools. Theres no doubt
that better indoor air quality results in lowering indoor pollutants such as chemical toxins and
biological agents that can create significant health risks and adverse learning conditions. CHPS
postulates that greater indoor air quality results in healthier students and faculty, which in
turn results in lower absenteeism and further improves student achievement. In the corporate
world, studies show that proper lighting and thermal comfort can increase productivity
between 6% and 16% and can reduce absenteeism by as much as 15%.
Sustainable design, by definition, helps improve indoor air quality (IAQ) and helps to eliminate
conditions related to Sick Building Syndrome (SBS) and other Building Related Illnesses (BRI).
SBS is said to result in a range of health complaints including headaches, eye, ear and nose
irritation, pneumonia and flu-like illnesses, and re-occurring allergic diseases such as asthma.
BRI, a more serious condition, is brought on by exposure to the building air where symptoms
of a diagnosable illness are identified (e.g. certain allergies or infections) and can be directly
attributed to environmental agents in the air.
The sources for SBS and BRI break down into two major categories contributing to indoor air
quality problems: heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; and, contaminants.
The HVAC system controls the circulation of air throughout a building, the introduction of fresh
air into the mix, and the filtration of airborne particles. Poorly ventilated or seldom cleaned,
these systems can pump contaminants through a building again and again. One of the most
common pollutants contributing to these effects is mold, which can significantly impact
health, but also contributes to significant building bio-deterioration and premature aging of
a buildings mechanical systems. Problems can also occur when a building is operated or
maintained in a manner that is inconsistent with its original design or prescribed operating
procedure.23

As SBS is such a broad category of illnesses, there is little corollary research available
between it and student performance or between it and student health. However, college
administrators can recognize the logical inference that the physical well being of students as
well as the faculty and staff is an important factor in increasing student performance.
Integrated design and construction helps address these two major concerns of daylighting
and IAQ well before the site is even selected. Position of the building relative to the sun,
in addition to bays of large windows and skylights can enhance fixture illumination. Highly
efficient building systems that balance the exchange between indoor and outdoor air do
create a healthy building environment. But the benefits of integrated design and construction
arise only when colleges and universities establish green as a specific design goal for their
building project from the very beginning.

Energy
Perhaps the most urgent concern on the green building spectrum is energy. With costs
continuing to rise, facility managers are looking at reducing energy as a priority. They also are
looking at ways to develop on-site renewable energy generation as a means of revenue and
to provide a stable energy supply, especially in areas where brownouts occur or where
Three important opportunities are inherent in a long-term approach to energy alone,
according to the National Wildlife Federation.
Investments in efficiency and a clean energy future will yield good returns, and savings
will compound over the years.
Decoupling fossil fuels from the campus energy system will lead to greater stability of
price and supply - and offer a hedge against an uncertain regulatory future.
The prospects for new careers and a more relevant college education for students will
only get better.24
Dozens of higher education institutions are undertaking projects such as major energy
efficiency facility upgrades and alternative schedules to reduce energy use.25 The returns on
investment in energy efficiency make it a strong priority for action. A 2008 joint report from
EPA and the U.S. Department of Energy on energy efficiency in several building sectors offered
these conclusions:

The key to
successfully
integrated design
on campus
is to follow a
consistent process,
coupled with new
technologies and
innovative thinking.

When comprehensive energy efficiency measures are implemented, overall energy

savings range from 15% for supermarkets to 30% for retail stores and office buildings,
with peak demand savings ranging from 21 to 42%.
O&M measures alone result in overall cost-effective energy savings of 9 to 24% and
peak demand savings of 3 to 10%.
Implementation of comprehensive energy efficiency measures increases the buildings
EPA energy performance ratings by 17 to 46 points.
Proper sequencing of energy efficiency measures reduces a buildings required cooling
capacity by 3 to 20%, helping to lower HVAC equipment and installation costs while
increasing savings.26
Though not specifically aimed at higher education buildings, the trends do point to energy
efficiency as a strong component of a sustainability plan. The improvements also can reduce
energy costs through efficiencies, allowing funds to be allocated to improve educational
resources or increase student amenities, furthering an institutions mission to better educate
tomorrows leaders.
Integration brings together owners, design teams and construction teams at the earliest stage
of the building project to integrate processes and building systems. Developing buildings on
an integrated, whole-building framework ensures the efficient use of energy and resources,
a healthy and productive indoor environment conducive to teaching and learning, the
optimum performance of all systems, and a wealth of other benefits that directly impact the
environment and the budget.

Path to Sustainability
While the opportunity for financial savings is impressive, improved daylighting, IAQ, energy
and other strategies can be costly. The key to successfully integrated design on campus is
to follow a consistent process, coupled with new technologies and innovative thinking. By
following this Path to Sustainability, colleges can develop and implement sustainability plans
that address environmental, financial and social issues in a way that will meet the needs of
generations to come.
The elements include:
Commit to improvement targets by senior management
Collect data, analyze and benchmark across the portfolio, then assess facilities
Contract for guaranteed results. The performance contracting model is best for
implementing large scale energy efficiency retrofit projects.
Confirm performance over time to maximize energy and operational savings
Communicate plans and progress to internal and external audiences
The importance of this type of approach is that it is simple to understand, implement and
communicate. As indicated earlier, the sustainability movement requires involvement from
every level within the campus. If the university community including the board of trustees,
administrators, academic and professional staff, facility professionals, vendors and of course
students is in agreement on the approach, it is more likely that it will be successful.

By assembling
key decision
makers at the
earliest stages of
a project, colleges
and universities
maximize revenues,
plan for all
contingencies,
and prevent cost
overruns and
timetable delays.

Commit to improvement targets by senior management

The establishment of the American College & University Presidents Climate Commitment
(ACUPCC) is indication enough that sustainability requires leadership.
According to the ACUPCC 2008 Annual Report, We recognize our responsibility to minimize
our own contributions to global warming and to accelerate education and research to make
the transition to a low-carbon, more vibrant and sustainable economy. We believe that taking
a leadership role in this effort fits squarely into the educational, research and public service
missions of higher education. As of October 2009, over 650 colleges and universities in all
50 states have taken up this challenge.27
The key is to transfer this embodiment of leadership to those within the community.
The formation of a green team with members from many levels can help facilitate
implementation. In The Cost of Green Revisited, the authors suggest that sustainability
be a program issue, rather than an added requirement, especially in facilities.
Our analysis indicates that it is necessary to understand the project goals, the approach to
achieving the goals, and the factors at play for the project. Simply choosing to add a premium
to a budget for a non-green building will not give any meaningful reflection of the cost for that
building to meet its green goals. The first question in budgeting should not be How much
more will it cost? but How will we do this? This must be done as early as possible in the
project, and it must be considered at every step of design and construction. This is done by:
Establishing team goals, expectations & expertise
Including specific goals in the Program
Aligning budget with program
Staying on track through design and construction.28
By assembling key decision makers at the earliest stages of a project, colleges and universities
maximize revenues, plan for all contingencies, and prevent cost overruns and timetable delays.

10

Collect data, analyze and benchmark across the portfolio, then assess facilities
Once the team is assembled, it can use modeling information from the U.S. EPA ENERGY
STAR program to benchmark its facilities. Benchmarking is a LEED-prerequisite, plus it forms
a baseline for developing priorities and gauging success. When the facilities are assessed,
campus leaders can develop priorities based on cost and other factors.

Contract for guaranteed results.

The performance contracting model is best for implementing large scale energy efficiency
retrofit projects. The details of this method can vary by state law, but it generally involves
making improvements without using capital budgets or increasing monthly operating
expenses. The improvements are funded with a loan or other third party capital, and repaid
out of energy and operational savings which are guaranteed for the duration of the contract,
and the contractor is required to pay any difference. Once the project is complete, the
university keeps the remaining savings. One benefit of this type of funding is that projects
with short-term paybacks can fund long-term paybacks, especially for renewable energy
technologies such as wind turbines, solar panels, geothermal heating and cooling systems,
and other on their campuses. Often these projects can be paid for over several years through
a performance contract that provides energy savings in other areas of the campus.
Performance contracting is one method of contracting that is being used in a partnership
between the Clinton Climate Initiative (CCI), an effort launched by former U.S. President Bill
Clinton, and ACUPCC signatories. CCI and ACUPCC are working together to implement building
retrofit projects that achieve their shared goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. By
guiding colleges and universities through the retrofit project development process, these
organizations are helping signatories begin to achieve their commitment to attain climate
neutrality while lowering energy bills.

Its hard to
imagine a better
opportunity for
financing if youve
got a company like
Johnson Controls
that will issue a
guarantee on the
savings. You know
exactly how much
youre going to
save on utility rates.
And youve got a
back-up on that.
- President Bill Clinton,
Clinton Foundation

CCI has secured commitments from leading energy services companies (ESCOs) to perform
building retrofits and guarantee the energy savings under best practices terms and conditions,
and more than 30 manufacturers of energy efficient products who will offer discounts on CCI
projects. According to the ACUPCC, a joint task force is developing standard templates and
RFPs to help institutions participate in the program.
The ACUPCC and CCI have also jointly published a toolkit for Performance Contracting in
Higher Education available on the ACUPCC website.

Confirm performance over time to maximize energy and operational savings

An important element of performance contracting or any contract - is measurement and
verification (M&V). The International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol
provides a wide range of M&V alternatives, including stipulation based on engineering
calculations, metering, and using the results of a short-term test to calibrate computer models.
These measurements can provide feedback on whether investments are producing the
anticipated benefits. If they are not, monitoring may identify reasons for the shortfalls and
help facility managers improve performance with other projects.29

Communicate plans and progress to internal and external audiences

Just as a campus sustainability plan must be several levels, so must communications involve
all levels. For instance:
Involve students in residence hall focus groups, newsletters and online communities.
Ask students for critiques on facility issues.
Involve faculty through strategies such as reward and recognition programs, making
sustainability a part of the job description, conducting faculty development workshops,
encouraging interdisciplinary research and teaching.

11

 Engage the Administration by integrating facility sustainability into the mission, vision,
and master plan; including in job descriptions and reviews; and creating opportunities
for everyone to share what theyve done.30
As Michael Crow, President of ASU and Chair of the ACUPCC says, the higher education
sector may only have 3% of our nations carbon footprint, but it has 100% of the
educational footprint.31

Student Engagement

Colleges and
universities are
fertile learning
grounds for social,
economic, political,
scientific and
environmental
issues, regardless of
students fields of
study.

A paramount goal of any learning institution is to provide the context for maximizing student
achievement and performance. A campus filled with pleasant and comfortable learning and
living environments enhances a students ability to learn and achieve and be ready for the
future. It also provides a college or university with innumerable public relations opportunities
in the community, a significant point of difference from its competitors, an entre into
a position of trailblazer rather than follower, and other benefits completely unrelated to
economics or the environment.
In order for colleges and universities to fully realize the benefits of an environmental
sustainability philosophy, however, they must integrated throughout the organization and put
into practice at every turn. Because students are at the heart of what universities are all about,
the sustainable revolution ultimately must involve students. And the more they know about
sustainability, the easier it will be.
Colleges can engage students in many ways, including
Adding multi-disciplinary courses on sustainability issues to the curriculum.
Developing educational campaigns in sustainability practices
Placing kiosks or other visual technology in classroom buildings and dorms to
demonstrate energy consumption measurement
Training Resident Assistants to encourage students to practice sustainability
Creating items such as educational door hangers, posters or stickers
Developing sustainability clubs and organizations for students
Holding events, such as a light bulb swap, to raise awareness.
Two different studies showed that students are willing to pay a fee of anywhere from $2 to
$45 per year to pay for such initiatives as purchasing renewable energy credits and installing
renewable energy technologies on campus, or living in environmentally sustainable housing.32

On the Way to Carbon Neutral

In its efforts to promote its leadership in
environmental stewardship, education, outreach and
research, the University of Wisconsin - Oshkosh is
developing a campus sustainability plan. But its goal
is aggressive: to be one of the first major universities
in the country that is carbon neutral. Working with Johnson Controls on
projects such as alternative design/build approaches to new construction,
performance contracting, and purchasing renewable energy, UW-Oshkosh
now has both strong academic achievements as well as measurable energy
and environmental initiatives.

12

Conclusion
At its best, higher education helps students become critical thinkers, not just masters of a
given body of knowledge. Colleges and universities are fertile learning grounds for social,
economic, political, scientific and environmental issues, regardless of students fields of study.
Utilizing green building practices allows an institution to address all these issues at once and
provides students with positive examples of what it means to be good citizens. I see it as
being an ever increasing component of the educational arena as students buy in and demand
more actions. Our daily actions will begin to reflect more sustainability actions as we change
technology to take advantage of opportunities to help cut down the damage done to our
planet. says UCOs Nall.
As parental concern about increasing tuitions, the reality of state cutbacks for public colleges
and universities, and rising operational costs at both public and private institutions provide
more than enough financial incentives to select a green approach to building design,
construction and operation. Corporate and commercial building owners, public organizations
and government institutions as well as colleges and universities can easily point to an
improved bottom line as a deciding factor to build green. Yet, there are hundreds of equally
compelling, non-financial reasons for colleges and universities to choose sustainable design
for their campuses.
In addition to quality of life and the potential for green jobs, there is a growing consciousness
throughout the building industry regarding the impact the built environment has on the natural
environment. Buildings consume huge amounts of energy, electricity and raw materials. Every
college administration has to demonstrate that plans are in place to achieve the schools
mission in an effective and timely manner. Building green is an ideal platform on which to
achieve the numerous goals set forth in the missions of higher learning institutions. And
student engagement is the way to sustain the approach for another generation.
Campus buildings can also be viewed as the outward expression of an institutions core
values and mission. Student and staff safety, improved student achievement, state-of-theart technology, and meeting the changing needs of students, not to mention environmental
accountability, are just a few issues that can be addressed and supported through green
design, construction and operations.
A campus with energy- and resource-efficient buildings that are comfortable and productive
spaces with a reduced footprint on the natural environment, then, instills a positive, lasting,
forward thinking and fiscally responsible perception among students, parents, staff, important
constituencies and the surrounding community. For all these reasons, sustainability on campus
is becoming the norm and not the exception.

13

Resources
Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future 1983 http://www.un-documents.net/wced-ocf.htm

John Elkington, 1998 book: Cannibals with Forks: the Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business.

The Princeton Review: Princeton Review 2009 College Hopes & Worries Survey Findings
http://www.princetonreview.com/uploadedFiles/Test_Preparation/Hopes_and_Worries/colleg_
hopes_worries_details.pdf

National Center for Educational Statistics, Projections of Education Statistics to 2017.

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/projections/projections2017/tables/table_10.asp

35th annual Official Education Construction Report, American School & University-2008
http://asumag.com/Construction/planning/education-construction-report-200905/index2.html

2008 - 35th annual Official Education Construction Report, American School & University
http://asumag.com/Construction/planning/education-construction-report-200905/

EPA Energy Star Program.

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=higher_ed.bus_highereducation

International Energy Outlook, May 2009. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/world.html

McKinsey - A Simple Plan to Cut Energy Demand Growth and Carbon Emissions.
http://www.mckinsey.com/aboutus/mckinseynews/simpleplan.asp

Signatory List by State: Presidential Climate Commitment

http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/html/list_state.php

10

American College and University Presidents Climate Commitment: 2008 Annual Report
http://www2.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/reporting/documents/ACUPCC_
AR2008_053109LR.pdf

11

Alliance to Save Energy: 2007 Energy Bill Detailed Summary

http://www.energy.ky.gov/NR/rdonlyres/4D0E82A9-E167-494B-8545-EF5A272F79EF/0/
FederalEnergyBillSummary.pdf

12

Green Collar Jobs in the U.S. and Colorado: Economic Drivers for the 21st Century
http://www.ases.org/images/stories/ASES/pdfs/CO_Jobs_Rpt_Jan2009_summary.pdf

13

Green Report Card. http://www.greenreportcard.org/

14

APPA: School Cleanliness Affects Learning

https://www.appa.org/files/PDFs/APPAISSACleaningAffectonLearningPR_000.pdf

15

USGBC: Green Building Research. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=1718

16

American School & University 35th Annual Official Education Construction Report
http://asumag.com/Construction/planning/education-construction-report-200905/index12.html

17

USGBC: Presentations. http://www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CMSPageID=1720

18

Green Right Now: US Green Building Council Sees Campuses as Leaders in Green Building
http://www.greenrightnow.com/kabc/2009/08/28/us-green-building-council-sees-campusesas-leaders-in-green-building/

19

Sustainable Endowments Institutes College Sustainability Report Card 2008

http://www.endowmentinstitute.org/sustainability/CollegeSustainabilityReportCard2008.pdf

20

Cost of Green Revisited. http://www.davislangdon.com/USA/Research/ResearchFinder/2007The-Cost-of-Green-Revisited/

21

Collaborative for High Performance Schools: Overview. http://www.chps.net/overview/index.htm

22

Aerias: Air Quality Sciences- Building Related Illnesses.

http://www.aerias.org/DesktopModules/ArticleDetail.aspx?articleId=16

23

Higher Education in a Warming World

http://www.nwf.org/campusEcology/BusinessCase/HigherEducationInAWarmingWorld2-21-08.pdf

24

14

 AASHE Digest 2008: A Review of Campus Sustainability News

http://www.aashe.org/files/documents/AASHEdigest2008.pdf

25

Sector Collaborative on Energy Efficiency Accomplishments and Next Steps: A Resources of the
National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency
http://www.epa.gov/RDEE/documents/sector_collaborative.pdf

26

American College & University: Presidents Climate Commitment 2008. http://www2.

presidentsclimatecommitment.org/reporting/documents/ACUPCC_AR2008_053109LR.pdf

27

Cost of Green Revisited

http://www.davislangdon.com/USA/Research/ResearchFinder/2007-The-Cost-of-Green-Revisited/

28

U.S. Department of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy-Performance Measurement

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/commercial/performance_measurement.html

29

www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/html/documents/ACUPCC_SHOWSLIDES_covision_000.ppt

30

PCC Summit Summary-2008. http://www.presidentsclimatecommitment.org/html/

documents/2008_PCC_Summit_SUMMARY.pdf

31

AASHE 2007 Digest: A Review of Campus Sustainability News

http://www.aashe.org/files/documents/AASHEdigest2008.pdf

32

15

Printed on recycled paper.

2009 Johnson Controls, Inc. P. O. Box 423, Milwaukee, WI 53201
Printed in USA MISC-648 (11/09)
www.johnsoncontrols.com