UNL needs to boost “green” efforts

The currently under-construction residence hall at 17th and R streets is "going green," a popular term people throw around when they mean environmentally friendly. But it’s imperative to remember just because UNL’s shiny new living quarters will be "green" doesn’t mean the university is doing enough to protect the environment.

The new building, set to open in the fall of 2010, will have geothermal heating and cooling, thermal pane windows, insulation and Low-E glass, according to the Feb. 2 article in The Daily Nebraskan. The new residence hall will also be made from durable, environmentally friendly products purchased from nearby distributors and businesses to conserve gas for delivery, according to the article.

These energy conservation measures, while commendable, have been adopted from an almost purely financial standpoint. Energy costs money, more and more each year.

UNL’s dining halls are working on conservation as well, with Residence Hall Association President Sammy Nabulsi’s push toward trayless dining, a move that will cut down on food waste and water and soap for cleaning trays – going "green" to save some "green."

One of the benefits of trayless dining cited by Nabulsi in a Jan. 12 article in The Daily Nebraskan was saving money. The university would spend less money on food in the dining halls if students were consuming or wasting less.

If the university is concerned with conserving cash, why not expand the current recycling program and return aluminum cans and bottles for cash? That money can then be used to improve the campus recycling program or can go toward other environmentally conscious practices.

What is UNL doing now? The current campus recycling program is meager at best, and without enough recycling bins around campus and in every building, students aren’t encouraged to do their part.

Although we are happy the university is striving to sustain the environment, new dining hall practices and a "green" residence hall are merely baby steps in the right direction.

While one can’t argue with the bottom line, making decisions from a purely financial standpoint for things (such as buildings) which will have an impact for the next 50 years or more is missing the bigger picture – complete sustainability including full life-cycle costs, climate change mitigation, ending pollution of both our atmosphere and indoor air quality, encouraging healthy lifestyles, striving for net zero energy use and innovative leadership.

The university should consider the big picture and enhance the entire campus in eco-friendly ways. Waiting four semesters to start conserving energy – and not in even the majority of campus facilities – is hardly enough.