Aydin Akyol

Like many universities, Yale has pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. Recently, Yale pledged to reduce its emissions by 43 percent from 2005 levels by 2020. Now, as universities and even Fortune 500 companies commit to 100 percent emissions reductions, it’s time to check up on Yale. Though Yale has been putting forward new sustainability, beneath the public eye, the University has only reduced emissions by 16 percent — a decrease too slow to meet the 2020 goal.

Now, as a community, it’s time to look for alternatives. We have a duty not to let our dollars be wasted on fuel rather than being put towards scholarships or programming.

But why wait for the administrators? The path to big decisions can be a slow one for a university. To reduce emissions, why not start with your math professor’s home instead?

Students have been working to decarbonize Yale through formal channels, but progress can begin with the Yale community, inspiring institutional change through private consent. Yale Project Bright, an undergraduate team, has publicly requested the 100 percent decarbonization of all faculty and staff households where it would be cost-neutral or profitable to do so. Other student groups have voiced support, including the Yale Student Environmental Coalition. But the agreement has stretched beyond campus as well, to major solar installers who can help make the vision a reality.

Here’s the agreement Project Bright made: any homeowner (with a 650 credit score) can get a panel installation for free on their roof. The homeowner (your professor or favorite dining hall staffer) pays the installer the cost of their old electricity bill (or less) for fewer than five years, and after that, they get free electricity. Absolutely free. And they get the additional benefit of increased property value. If they sign on through a student, they get an extra month of energy for free. So in that case, it’s free with a bit more free included for free.

Students can take a stand and ask their professors if they might consider a solar array on their home. It’s a proposition many haven’t thought through, but one that even the most nefarious hater of trees could still embrace as a risk-free source of profit. 75 percent of the millions of American households that have gone solar cite reduced electricity costs as their main reason for the switch. Installations are completed in a single day. An average homeowner can expect $714 in annual savings on their electricity bill.

How would you spend $714? The question may be more relevant than you think, as Project Bright and the Yale College Council have partnered to reward students handsomely for encouraging Yale homeowners to go solar.

Imagine a city full of faculty and staff members with roofs adorned in solar panels. The financial savings and emissions reductions they experience will signify to the administration that solar at Yale can have a positive impact on the community. This display of a cost-effective and progressive energy solution will illustrate Yale as a fiscally and environmentally responsible institution. Yale’s status would make this type of solar project even more visible, creating the potential for this strategy to serve as a replicable model for other universities. As we face a climate change crisis, we can no longer waste our energy fretting about red tape.

For this green endeavor, I would suggest walking around the red tape.

Financial savings with environmental benefits is a fantastic double bottom line. Private consent can offer the most clear and convincing evidence for why the University should commit to further carbon reduction.

With an ever-expanding campus, Yale’s power plants will supply a decreasing percentage of our necessary energy. A recent installation at West Campus has demonstrated that solar can be a fiscally sound choice for Yale. But this is just a first step and we need to expand this vision. If greater solar installations prove to provide economic benefits to our community, it is our obligation to convince the University to begin this transition as well. We hope to engage a large group of students to expand the reach and impact of this initiative by having the right conversations with faculty and staff.

It’s easy to talk about change, but we need to take action, and this starts with us.

Tess Maggio is a senior in Davenport College. Contact her at tess.maggio@yale.edu .

  • sy

    “So in that case, it’s free with a bit more free included for free.” Sounds like a politician, but not a Yale senior who has taken Intro Econ? This is why climate change, solar power, and wind power have so many doubters and opponents. Their proponents do not deal with some facts and economics honestly. All of the “free” is subsidized either by government taxes or debt, or by other electricity users. You don’t want to say or deal with that honesty, even with smart people who can handle the truth. Little home solar panels in non-desert, cloudy Connecticut, which is always dark an average 12 hours per day, are very inefficient, and they cost multiples of efficient, large-scale, utility-produced electricity (without any CO2 from scary nuclear power plants). If reducing some CO2 (how much?) is worth what you and other people knowingly agree to give up, do it. But telling people they have to give up nothing, even get it for free, is either merely uneducated or intentionally misrepresented for political or religion-substitute purposes.

    • Earl Gray

      Is it misrepresentative that the library says ‘free coffee,’ since -economically speaking- it comes collectively from student tuitions? The op-ed didn’t go to length describing tax subsidies in the state, since perhaps pitching the relatively-unknown outcome of those subsidies for middle-class families was enough. That critique is as trite as it is unfair.
      Given your professed superiority on economic matters, it’s odd that you neglected to note that the important factor regarding renewable energy in a state is not how often the sun shines, but the price of a substitute. Since CT’s conventional fossil fuels are the highest in contiguous USA (maxed out gas transport infrastructure, which is supply-resistant), Connecticut is more viable than many southern states for solar.
      Lack of awareness about economic realities (that an average middle-class family can save money, without much disposable income), or scientific ones, is the recent for renewable doubters — not that bright young women are giving it a good pitch.

      • Man with Axe

        The author made it seem that the solar installation would pay for itself, when that clearly is not the case. She should have at least made that clear to the uninformed reader who, as the author intended, would see her proposal as one in which everyone wins. That’s not true. Someone else is picking up the tab. Without the subsidies the solar installation will not pay for itself, and is therefore inefficient. That’s a good reason not to do what she suggests.

  • ShadrachSmith

    Nobody but the Marxist Vanguard still cares about AGW politics. Your base has faded, because you lied so much. That’s your fault.

    • Earl Gray

      The anthropogenic element of climate change doesn’t matter. Fossil fuels are inefficient, and their pollutants place a large financial burden on society. Using free inexhaustible resources like sunlight and wind is objectively attractive. Renewable energy is far from political.