Firing up the Greens
In 2002, a student-led campaign resulted in the University purchasing 100 per cent of its electricity from renewable sources. That switch made us the seventh largest purchaser of green energy in Europe and saved 50,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide per year - more than any other HE institution in the UK.
Despite the contract being celebrated as one of the few landmarks of co-operation between the students and the administration, there are rumours that the Vice Chancellor, John Hood, is considering terminating the contract when it comes up for renewal in March 2005.
This year, students are mobilising again. Over 100 candles in green lanterns lit up the steps of the Bodleian last week as students from across the University gathered to demonstrate against dropping the contract. Over 1,500 signatures have been handed over to the Vice Chancellor, but the decision has yet to be announced.
The Vice Chancellor has explained that although he is in favour of renewable energy in principle, the recent price increase has led him to reconsider renewing the contract. He has a point - why should we switch to green energy over, say, increasing the environmental sciences' research budget?
I put the question to Tony Juniper, Head of Friends of the Earth. "There is a cost problem," he acknowledged: "but switching to green energy is only part of the deal. It should be brought in with increased energy efficiency measures that reduce wastage sufficiently to cover the extra costs."
Not only that, but "by purchasing green electricity Oxford would raise demand, encourage suppliers to increase capacity and help bring down prices in the long term."
If Oxford renews this contract, it will take a step beyond merely teaching about the global energy problem: it will become part of the solution. We already know the problem exists, as environmentalists and the media never tire of reminding us. Consumption is increasing, the South is industrialising and energy demand is likely to outstrip supply. Even the front page of the FT is screaming that there will be no ice in the arctic by 2070. But simply publishing apocalyptic facts about the energy problem is not going to solve it - we need to make real changes. Renewing the contract is one such tangible change, saving the energy equivalent of 8,000 houses last year.
The renewable energy contract offers a positive step in place of the notoriously negative campaigns run by green campaigners. We've heard it all before: The population is expected to reach £9bn by 2050, there will be no rainforests by 2070, Southern England will be submerged in 100 years. Sometimes, you almost get the feeling that environmentalists want some ecological disaster to happen so they can sit smugly in their fossil-fuel induced flood and tell you that they told you so. And who wouldn't get apathetic in the face of such world-threatening rhetoric? Who cares about renewing the university's contract when the Earth's probably only got another 100 years left anyway? I put this question to Mr Juniper.
"We've got two options, we can either look at the problem and say it's too big, we're all going to die, or we can ask ourselves whether it really is impossible to change, to adjust our lifestyles. There's no one silver bullet to solve something like global warming, it's about everyone making a contribution to change." When you say that problems are global, it doesn't mean that they're out of your league, it just means that they affect you as much as everybody else.
Even the sceptics have to admit that the benefits of Oxford switching to renewable energy will go far beyond what it saves in emissions. As Mr Juniper explains: "Oxford University's international profile gives it massive leverage; it is able to offer a profound signal to the market and offer inspiration to others." Oxford could act as an example to other HE institutions around the world, potentially creating a domino effect as others follow its leadership. The university could use its reputation to lead the 21st century in a more sustainable direction.
The benefits aren't just one-way. Running on 100 per cent renewable energy sources also offers a massive PR boost to the university. It would provide a good comeback to those who accuse Oxford of being a stuffy, traditionalist establishment and help to promote its image as an innovative and forward-thinking institution.
All of us (bar President Bush) acknowledge that pumping six billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year is causing problems, and that fossil fuels are, by definition, unsustainable in the long run. One way of implementing better alternatives is to switch, or to continue to use, renewable energy. It is, as Mr Juniper puts it, 'a move forward'.
Taking even small steps to reduce greenhouse emissions requires leadership: someone has to make the first move. Oxford University, as one of the most prestigious educational institutions in the world, is well suited to play that role. Rather than taking a step backwards and reintroducing fossil fuels, we should at least maintain our current status as one of the largest consumers of green energy in Europe.
18th Nov 2004