Reduce UBC’s Carbon Footprint and Win $ 5000!
The aim of the UBC Alternative Energy X contest is to engage the UBC community to help identify the most appropriate technology to reduce the Vancouver Point Grey Campus Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions and overall energy demand.
Each year the UBC Steam Plant produces approximately 58 000 tonnes of Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions to heat the buildings at the UBC Vancouver Campus. That’s the same amount of GHGs as getting into your car and driving from Vancouver to Toronto… 94 462 times!
Our goal is to reduce/eliminate our emissions and take positive action towards climate change.
Contest Details: This contest has 2 stages and will be evaluated by the UBC Alternative Energy Committee for inclusion into the Alternative Energy Feasibility study to be delivered next fall.
Stage 1: Vision letter- Deadline: Midnight, June 5th. In less then 600 words, tell us how UBC can become a “net positive energy and water campus”
Click on the links below for details.
- Official entry guidelines
- Rules and regulations
- UBC emissions inventory
- General background information relating to emissions sources and electrical line capacity issues.
Stage 2: Detailed Proposals- Deadline: Midnight, June 30th. Furthering your Stage 1 “vision letter” describe how your vision will address each of the key criteria as laid out in the Official entry guidelines.
Additional details to be announced on June 17th to the top stage 1 contestants.
Contest Prizes: The Alternative Energy X Contest has $10 000 in Cash Prizes!
Grand Prize: $ 5000
Second Place: $ 3000
Third Place: $ 1000
Two Stage 1 Vision letter contestants will be randomly drawn and awarded $500. Thats right - you could win $500, just for submitting a short letter.
Eligibility: All members of the UBC community are eligible to enter the contest. Click here for full contest rules and regulations.
I’m really excited about this contest- its great to see that ideas from our community can lead to solutions that will enhance sustainability at UBC. Jeff- thanks so much for getting this contest off the ground!
Jeff: This is excellent. My only suggestion is that you give readers some idea in this overview of the nature and size of the Detailed proposal. John
I’m exited to see all the entries!
While we’re at it, why don’t we take on a major global issue and stand up to the bottled water industry? Water is a basic human need and should be free and available to all. We need campus wide drinking fountains and a return to the tap. BAN ALL SALES OF BOTTLED WATER ON CAMPUS!
I agree with water access! — ridiculous we have no fountains anywhere…..
I think the implementation of more working water fountains on campus is a great idea. The few that are around aren’t reliable sources of drinking water and bottled water is ridiculous.
And it’s a great idea that has already started.
This past year UBC bought 20 new water fountains, and they are currently in the process of being installed on campus!
I’m actually part of the student team that collaborated with UBC Land & Building Services to allocate these 20 water fountains. I was super impressed at the fact they made room for student input! We (Common Energy UBC) were pretty much given responsibility for making a top 20 list of places to allocate the fountains. There are already two new fountains installed in the Neville Scarf building- check them out!
What’s great about these new fountains is that they have an extra tall spout that is much more convenient for filling water bottles.
The remainder of the fountains are still in the process of being installed, but you can expect to see more new fountains in visible, high-traffic places over the coming year. Examples include Buchanan, Macmillan and a few of the older science buildings.
Of course, 20 fountains won’t be enough to adequately service the UBC community…hopefully a larger purchase will be mobilized in the future when there are more funds, or perhaps when there is more public pressure.
UBC is in a contract agreement with Coca Cola company to provide Dasani vending machines. In return, UBC receives money compensation for shutting off all water fountains. Isn’t this ironic? In these days, just using the words “green”, “sustainable” or “reducing carbon footprint” fools others what the real intention is. Would UBC be willing to reinstate water fountains and lose $million in the process? Can we address the current and much simpler plastic bottle issue first before taking on bigger projects?
Each department should have a dishwashing station so students and faculty are encouraged to bring their lunches instead of purchase food on campus in disposable containers. Dishwashing stations should have a faucet high enough to facilitate filling of water bottles so buying drinking water is not considered a convenience.
And while we’re at it - how about turning the heat down in the buildings at night?
P.S. Noda Sani you have a point. Prohibiting exclusivity agreements with disposable packaging vendors would ensure that students, staff and faculty have the most options when it comes to green packaging… or as your conspiracy theory suggests… options for things as basic as drinking water.
Nancy DiNovo - Why not have vending machines that dispense empty bottles with a filtered water tap next to them? That would make folks think twice about paying $1.50 for a basic human need. And shipping the empty bottles to campus would use less fuel as each bottle would way practically nothing.
I can’t wait to start writing some self serving, navel-gazing CBC op ed about how solar panels, tidal power and increased taxes will save the earth!
Dear Mr. Troll,
Please crawl back underneath your bridge.
Cheers,
Panama
One place to start would be to put a bubble on the 50 metre outside pool during fall, winter and early spring to help reduce heating requirements. It has apparently been promised by UBC in the past, but to my knowledge has never been acted upon.
Nothing new here: just put back the water fountains, replace inefficient buildings, provide affordable on-campus housing and daycare. The major pollution source is automobiles: long commutes in single occupancy vehicle cars, requiring large parkades, and water-shedding roadways.
Basically just do the opposite of what has happened on campus in the last decade with the cranking out of luxury condos instead of affordable housing. What percentage of condos are allocated to faculty and staff? What percentage can actually afford to purchase one of these overpriced units?
The answers are very simple, just not as profitable for UBC as building luxury condos.
Traditionally, UBC has been a commuter campus. But key initiatives like many of those you suggest are transforming UBC into a sustainable community where people can live, work and learn.
Here are a few key facts that I think address your concerns about affordable housing, sustainable practices and leasing at UBC:
• UBC has Canada’s largest stock of student housing on a single campus with approximately 8,500 beds available
• 50% of the family homes on campus have someone who works or studies at UBC
• Since 1991, 2,200 new apartments and townhouses have been added on campus—20% are kept as rental housing and, in turn, half of these units are subsidized
• Since 1997 when the U-Pass program launched, UBC has increased transit ridership by 185% and decreased single-occupant vehicle trips by 14%—reducing GHG emissions by 16,000 tonnes per year
• UBC has reduced the total number of parking spaces on campus by one-third—from 15,000 spaces to 10,000 spaces. We also charge a lot to park here to deter single-occupant vehicle trips.
• Through its own Residential Environmental Assessment Program (REAP), UBC now measures and certifies the green building practices used to construct all family housing projects on campus
• To date, revenue from land leased for housing on campus accounts for 28% of UBC’s Endowment ($282 million) which funds scholarships, bursaries, research and professorships
When completed, UTown @ UBC will provide a mix of housing options, improved public transportation, shops and services, and access to cultural/recreational amenities in a pedestrian-friendly setting.
I am equally concerned with the uprising of luxury condos on this Student-led ? university. Just because the numbers are great compared to universities across Canada, this is no excuse to shift the focus from student housing to luxury homes. As a student, I can attest to the difficulty in getting a place in Gage towers. The lottery is cruel and hard to get in. This leads students to live far away while atracting families to live here. This has a double impact on transportation which suffers from increased ridership from families giong to work and school downtown and etc.. and also sufferes from students coming in from east van where many resort to cars (old ones, that pollute more because their are cheaper) because the public transportation system is a joke, we are held like sardines in the 99.
So think about students first because after all the moto of UBC is ‘Tuum est’ is it not then a student university?
we might learn how to spell
Point Grey!
For heavens sake..Make UBC Virtual..all communications should be via broadband from profs to students..
Overall Cost for 2 way interactive audio/video is .0000001% of the overall costs to drive, support a city (UBC) and just used “canned” lectures on demand…etc etc etc..it’s trivial…I didn’t need to have my buddy beside me in a lecture hall..It could all be done from one’s home.
Harry
Most of the bottled water is a fraud. I never ever use it . In my day at UBC we had many fountains and bottled water was unknown. 1948 grad.
I find this greenhouse gas is a bigger fraud as is climate warming…. May I refer you to an excellent 100 page book by Nigel Lawson who amongst other posts was Chancellor of the Exchequer under Margaret Thatcher. The book is called AN APPEAL TO REASON a cool look at Global Warming. The last chapter is about ten pages and he gives the most marvellous Summary and Conclusion.
I would recommend this book to everyone.
I agree. Rising CO2 follows warming trends; it doesn’t lead. Temperatures have been cooling the past two years.
I will read that book if you read The Weather Makers by Tim Flannery.
I wish global warming was a fraud - unfortunately it’s real and there is no way to stop it - even David Suzuki has admitted that it can’t be stopped. Given the politics of BC Hydro and the impossibility of future major hydro projects, or any kind of other major GHG free energy projects in BC, the best we can hope for is to maintain the beauty of our forests and rivers and ignore the global aspect of GHG emissions. It seems that the environmentalists are loathe to make the tough choices that would actually lead to reduced GHG emissions in BC.
What a load of trendy humbug. This is all the reason I need to stop donating to UBC, if this is how money gets wasted. These naive folks obviously get their education from the Vancouver Sun, and don’t read any deeper.
I have been involed with energy efficiency issues in buildings since Architectural school in the 70’s. Some recent trends are quite alarming to me. There needs to be some dispassionate, scientific analysis of bio-mass energy systems for one. Does bio-mass combustion make things better or worse? Can we really put GHG’s into the atmosphere and justify it as “carbon neutral”? My inclination is to think that any and all kinds of combustion, whether fossil fuel or bio-mass, needs to be reduced and/or eliminated where ever GHG capture is not possible. I don’t see any magic bullets out there right now.
On the other hand, energy use reductions through passive energy saving measures are never wrong.
I have to agree with Peter. In addition it is obvious only a fool would submit such a proposal.
This concept has to be idea of someone in arts. They want an engineering proposal and the winner to give up intellectual property. No professional in his right mind would do this.
The only gas of concern is coming from the left end of campus.
I think this is a great idea to engage the whole UBC community in generating problem solving ideas. As for alternative energy sources for heating I leave that to the experts. For my part I find answers when I look back to how things used to be before the widespread use of plastics, when family homes were smaller and family budgets did not allow for expensive flights to far flung places for holidays. I cheer everytime gas prices go up! My pet peeve is the extensive use of plastic. Since people generally will not make changes unless forced to I think we should push for legislation to ban plastic - we used to use paper for wrapping our food, bagging our groceries and garbage, even for drink containers. It is biodegradable, comes from a renewable resource and the trees are beneficial to the environment when they are growing (unlike plastic factories). Our community (Delta) has just legislated that garden waste must be put out in paper bags or reusable garbage cans and everyone seems to have adjusted. Our local grocery store (Thrifty’s) has announced that after July they will no longer provide plastic bags. I say yea! So I say let’s look back to the past for some answers - life is possible without the ubiquitous plastic.
Here’s an extreme idea: INstead of UBC spending hundreds of millions building cool green buildings, how about you stop buying redundant, new 1st year physics and other texts and reuse older ones, and repair leaky taps in older buildings? GENIUS!
I am all in favor of producing more efficient internal combustion engines but am not in favor of using food (corn) to substitute for petroleum when, if you do the whole sum, uses more energy per km driven than a gasoline based fuel and will cause more starvation.
I am afraid I have not heard of Flannery but if he is of the same ilk as Gore I could not read such trash.
One of the biggest nuisances is the U N and unfortunately they are quoted almost daily on some statistic or other by TV and the press
I’d like to suggest an already-existing technology: the “tree.” The more of these devices that UBC has operating on campus, the lower its ecological footprint will be. Oddly enough, UBC is in the process of removing thousands of already-installed “trees” and replacing them with condos and retail outlets. Perhaps UBC should:
1.) Stop removing the “trees”. Install more.
2.) Use another already-existing technology: the “bulldozer.” Remove the already-built market housing. Re-install “trees” in its place.
I’ve got an idea that would generate revenue, save money for many students, and reduce climate emissions: monthly parking rates scaled by vehicles’ fuel economy.
Here’s the basic idea:
Free parking for pure electric vehicles
1/3rd regular price for anything under 6L/100km (e.g. a 2009 Honda Civic Hybrid)
1/2 price for everything around 8L/100km (e.g. a Chevrolet Malibu Hybrid A-4)
2/3 price for ~10L/100km (e.g. a Volkswagen Jetta SportWagon 2.5L A-S6)
Full price for ~12L/100km (e.g. a Ford Mustang 4.0L M-5)
1/3 more for ~14L/100km (e.g. a Toyota Tacoma 2WD M-6)
1/2 more for ~16L/100km (e.g. a Cadillac Escalade 2WD FFV Gas A-5)
2/3 more for : over 18L/100km (e.g. a Porsche Cayenne GTS M-6)
You’ve already got the infrastructure to check people’s registration and fuel economy when they sign up for a monthly pass and to verify parking passes are being used to park the correct vehicle. All you need is the political will to start scaling parking rates and increasing daily and hourly parking so people won’t avoid the system that way.
Easy. Fair. Green. Will you do it?
To Peter C, Alec Purdy, John Brodie, R. Zimmerman et al.:
I really hope none of you attended UBC. What an embarrassment to the University if that is the case.
Listen, before you make fools of yourselves any further, read the following two websites. When you’re done, then come back and comment. Not before.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php
http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to_a_sceptic.php
I’m a UBC graduate (Computer Science) who doesn’t buy into the global warming hype. My favourite ’skeptical’ website is http://wattsupwiththat.com/, which won the Best Science Blog category in the 2008 Weblob Awards.
Avram and David,
Do you really think that the government is doing this to make money? This is going to hurt the economy, is a huge political capital cost which can make politicians loose votes from skeptics like yourselves, and is complicated. The reaosn why they are doing this is because they need to. What are you going to tell the future generations when they have a much harsher world to live in? And if it doesnt happen, we at least came out with cleaner technology and less dependency on foreign oil. But we cannot afford to continue debating sound science so that industry leaders can maintain their high ROI. Carbon is not an ailment, it is the excess of carbon that causes the problem. Politicians are not trying to control our breathing like in one of these INCRRADIBLY BIAS sites you guys have posted, they are trying to control carbon emissions from large emitting sources. And if your worried about escalating taxes.. (little and progressive by the way) then aim your anger at war efforts. Thats where the bulk of our tax goes. PS> You think that having people who stand up for the future an embarrassment? That my friend, is the real embarrassment.
The ongoing Climategate scandal clearly shows that anthropogenic global warming is a fantasy. A good place to follow the action is http://www.climatedepot.com/
David
Great website. I am totally with you on this. I am suprised and disappointed that institutions like UBC are so caught up in the global warming/climate change/CO2 dilusion. How can an institutions of higher learning be so misguided and fail to allow honest scientific study to prevail.