Rebooting the Future
Thinking about Sustainability, Climate Change, and Clean Technology
Rebooting the Future

Envisioning a Low-Carbon Future


I was invited recently to contribute an article to the Tompkins Weekly Signs of Sustainability series, organized by Sustainable Tompkins. It appeared in the February 28, 2011 issue. Here it is (with hyperlinks added):

Listening to the rhetoric of oil, coal and gas company executives such as the Koch brothers, you would think they were champions of limited government and the free market. In fact, however, the fossil fuel industry is one of the most subsidized businesses in the U.S. and its burgeoning profits would shrink dramatically without federal support. According to the Environmental Law Institute, the U.S. government provided the industry with $72 billion between 2002 and 2008. About $54 billion of that total was permanent tax credits for oil, coal and natural gas producers. In contrast, during that same period, the renewable energy industry received $29 billion, most of it also in the form of federal tax credits. The difference is that none of these tax credits is permanent.

On top of these enormous subsidies for oil, coal and gas, there are staggering external costs incurred as a result of our dependence on fossil fuels. These include the expense of defending strategic oil interests in the Middle East and elsewhere, the damage to air quality and our health and the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on the climate. Then there is the looming crisis of peak oil and our growing competitive disadvantage as other countries such as China rush to embrace clean energy technologies. Taking all of these factors into account, it’s hard not to believe that relying solely on fossil fuel energy is foolhardy.

The Pentagon knows this. At a recent White House summit on clean energy, I spoke with several Army officers from Fort Carson in Colorado and it was clear they were hard at work making the transition to renewables and energy efficiency. No one had to remind them of the tremendous sacrifice in lives and dollars sustained in military operations as a result of our dependence on foreign oil. And no one had to convince them that climate change was a rising national security risk; they had their own hard data about the impact of global warming on political and economic stability around the world.

In light of these developments, it makes perfect sense that President Obama is seeking to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars that the government gives to oil and gas companies. As he put it in a speech at Penn State earlier this month, “It’s time to stop subsidizing yesterday’s energy; it’s time to invest in tomorrow’s.” The redirected dollars would go toward the development of wind, solar and geothermal power, energy efficiency technology and building upgrades.

In his Penn State remarks Obama called on Americans to take up the challenge of energy innovation. The Tompkins County Climate Protection Initiative (TCCPI) has been doing just that since June 2008. A coalition of community leaders from the business, financial, nonprofit, local government and education sectors, TCCPI has brought together many of the key organizations and institutions in Tompkins County to explore ways we can build a low carbon future and achieve the county’s target of an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

In particular, TCCPI has worked closely with Cornell Cooperative Extension, Tompkins County, to launch the Tompkins Energy Conservation Corps (TECC), consisting primarily of students from Cornell, Ithaca College and TC3. Pursuing an innovative approach to the social marketing of residential energy retrofits, Energy Corps members carry out energy assessments on the homes of Tompkins County leaders to underscore the importance of energy conservation and its impact on the local economy. In addition, TECC conducts outreach efforts through community blower-door workshops, youth activities, employer brown bag lunch events and an evolving marketing campaign.

It is efforts like these in countless communities across the U.S. that will make it possible for us to reengage as citizens in a democratic society and take our country in a different direction, one that steps back from the brink of ecological disaster and moves towards a world in which the balance between the natural world and human civilization is restored and a more just and equitable future for our children and grandchildren is made possible. In the end, it will be people, not technology, who make the difference.

Building a Culture of Sustainability at an Online University

I'm serving as an outside "expert" this semester in a course on "Integrating Sustainability into Training and Curriculum," addressing student questions related to their reading of Boldly Sustainable. One of the questions posed was particularly challenging: how can people who work and study at higher education institutions that offer mostly online courses help promote sustainability on their campuses?

"We do all want to see these changes, but it never seems to be as cut and dried as many of these best case scenarios offer," the student wrote. "I know there are more people I can bring to the cause ... but with 8 campuses spread between two states and the ethos (we have a big online program), it’s hard to get anyone together."

I thought it might be useful to post my response here:

Wow, Laura, talk about going right to the core of the problem! First, let me assure you that you are not alone in facing this particular challenge. Every campus deals with this issue, even those commonly viewed as "the green elite" schools such as Middlebury or Brown. In your case, though, the challenge is complicated by the fact that your institution is defined in large part by its extensive use of web-based learning and multiple campuses across two states, which means that there is a more dispersed student and faculty community than you would find in a more traditional institution.

The trick is to find a way to turn this seeming liability into an advantage. One possible way to do this would be to leverage the creative potential of social media to engage students and faculty in a conversation about sustainability and climate change, and promote actual behavior change on the part of individuals. If you haven't already done so, establishing a Facebook page for greening the campuses is an obvious first move; getting a Twitter conversation going is also another obvious step you can take. But how do you generate interest in using these tools?

The most important thing in any social marketing effort -- which is what we're talking about here -- is to get people to make an early incremental commitment. If you ask folks for too much upfront, you're likely to scare them off. From this perspective, getting people to "follow" you on Twitter and "like" you on Facebook could be seen as one of the ways that you can get people to make their first incremental commitment. But you need to follow up with something more substantial quickly or you will lose momentum.

Given the dispersed nature of your community, it might make sense to get people to commit as individuals to changing some aspect of their personal lifestyle and in this way build a more tangible community of shared purpose. You could use David Gershon's Low Carbon Diet to suggest a range of actions that people could take and how much each action would reduce that individual's carbon footprint. But you need to provide a way for people to make these commitments public so that they can hold each other accountable and a way to measure the results. Both of these (accountability and the ability to measure progress) are important principles of social change theory.

I recommend that you take a look at the Interfaith Power and Light initiative, which puts together a really interesting model for doing something along these lines using the web. Take a look, in particular, at its Cool Congregations project and 10% Challenge. I think these ideas could be pretty easily translate from congregations to student and faculty teams. You might organize along department or degree lines and pit them against each other (business on one campus versus business on the other campuses, for example) in a contest to see who could lose the most weight on the low carbon diet.  

In addition, to fuel the competition, you could organize a contest around each participating team making a short (2-3 minutes) video about sustainability and/or climate change using a cell phone or small video camcorder like a Flip (but nothing more sophisticated or expensive because then people won't be competing on a level playing field) and having a panel of judges (fair and balanced, you decide!) to select a winning team. You could even have winners for different categories; comedy, drama, action, and musical, for instance. During the contest you could get participants to post the videos on the web and let people know about them through Facebook and Twitter. Instead of a formal panel of judges, using the web, you could have people vote for their favorites. Or you could do both: "the people's choice" award and the judges' award. You might be able to get the administration to put up a small amount of money that the winning teams could commit to some climate or sustainability action on campus (a student organic garden, the showing of a relevant movie, or more bike racks, for example).

The ultimate goal of these activities is to build a network of committed activists that you can then leverage for more direct collective action on the campuses such as a student vote to mandate fees for sustainability work in the university. Even a small annual fee of $10-15 can add up very quickly to a substantial sum of money that can then be used towards increasing the sustainability of the campuses. You might even be able to raise enough money this way to hire a sustainability coordinator!

Remember that you don't need everyone on board to carry the day. The kinds of activities suggested above allow you to attract and engage the early adopters, who can then reach out to a larger number of people on campus to build what is known in social change theory as "the early majority." In many cases, the early adopters and early majority can be enough together to tip the balance in the right direction. Of course, there will always be "the laggards," the folks who will never change their behavior or consciousness. Don't waste your energy or time knocking yourself out to get this group on board -- to put it bluntly, you don't need them. 

It sounds as if there have been a number of truly significant changes in university operations and that what you are seeking is to go beyond that to shift people's behavior and consciousness. I think perhaps something like I'm suggesting above will help. At least I hope so!

Good luck! Your commitment and passion is inspiring and gives me hope for our future.

Does anyone else have suggestions for Laura? Anything you've tried at a web-based university or other learning organization that has worked?

Towards Interdependence Day

I received the following a few days ago from Brian Malarkey, a friend and colleague of mine at Kirksey, a green architecture firm in Houston. He and John Kirksey are trying to raise awareness about the connection between the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster and climate change. I thought it was worth sharing on the Fourth of July:

Happy Independence Day!

Ponder this while you savor the anniversary of the American Revolution.

As we approach July Fourth, the 72nd day of the BP oil spill, the USGS’s Flow Rate Technical Group estimates that the flow of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico has averaged 500,000 gallons per day or roughly 1500 tons of carbon per day.

As tragic as this event is, it does not compare to the 86,000,000 tons of carbon per day we introduce into the earth’s atmosphere through our use of fossil fuels and deforestation. In other words, each day we voluntarily release carbon comparable to 57,000 times the amount leaking into the gulf on a daily basis.

Did you know… Of the carbon that we add to the atmosphere each day, roughly 90% of it will remain, active on our earth 500 years from now.

Did you know… There are three major carbon sinks (repositories) on the earth; the oceans are the largest, followed by the land (rocks), and lastly the tropical forest. The world’s oceans are reaching full saturation and are taking up less and less carbon while becoming highly acidic. This combination is having a significantly negative impact on marine life. The tropical forests sequester about 1 billion tons of carbon per year while simultaneously deforestation is contributing about 2 billion tons of new carbon each year.

Did you know… The US spends about $1 billion per day on imported oil and petroleum products, many of these products coming from governments with strong anti-American sentiments.

Did you know… The fossil fuel industry spends roughly $1.5 billion each year with lobbyists in Washington to influence our energy policies (does not include political contributions).

Did you know… Contrary to the speculation that volcanoes represent a large source of carbon, scientists calculated that there was an actual reduction in the total carbon output during the Iceland volcanic eruption last month, due primarily to the grounding of an extensive number of airline flights coming into and out of Europe.

Did you know… 2010 is unfolding as the hottest year on record since reliable instrumental temperatures records began in the late 1800s. The first decade of the 21st Century is already the the hottest decade on record.

Did you know…Coal produces 2100 lbs of carbon per Mwhr of energy, while natural gas produces 950 lbs of carbon per Mwhr, or only 45% the carbon of coal.

Is it time for another American Revolution; a technical revolution? Can we envision another Independence Day in our future?

Think about it.

There's certainly a lot here to ponder. We seem to be reaching some kind of turning point in the country's understanding of the high environmental price we pay for fossil fuel and the importance of developing clean energy alternatives.We may not be at the turning point, but we are approaching it. 

I would go beyond the above argument, though. No doubt technological innovation will be a major component of any effort to build a more sustainable future.  But we also need a cultural revolution, a completely different way of understanding the relationship between human society and the natural world.  We need to figure out that we don't stand apart from the natural world but instead are enmeshed in it and that our very lives depend on the health of this relationship.

What would this culture look like? I think it would look a lot like EcoVillage at Ithaca (EVI), where I'm privileged to serve on the board. A 176-acre co-housing community and nonprofit educational organization just outside of Ithaca, NY, EcoVillage has been up and running for over twenty years now and has emerged as one of the most advanced sustainable communities in the world. 

Thanks to the visionary leadership of its executive director, Liz Walker, EVI is now undertaking a third neighborhood, called "TREE." This latest neighborhood will feature 30 affordable and accessible energy efficient homes and apartments that will have a near zero carbon footprint. They will be designed to allow its occupants to "age in place," thus contributing to the richness of the EVI community by making it easier for folks to stay as they grow older.

How much demand is there for this kind of housing? Well, if EVI is any guide, it's significant. TREE has filled all 30 units before even breaking ground and there is a waiting list.

"EcoVillage is far more than just a residential community," observed Walker in a recent interview. "It's a whole concept, an experiment in sustainable living and holistic agriculture. Part of our mission is to demonstrate a new way of living, to increase biodiversity. We focus on the conservation of open space using organic farming, and we had one of the first CSAs (community-supported agriculture organizations) in the country."

So, yes, clean technology is part of the answer. But just as important, perhaps even more so, is the fostering of communities like EVI. We need more than a "technical revolution." We need, as Liz Walker puts it, a whole "new way of lviing." That's what a real Independence Day would look like: something we might call "Interdependence Day." 

The Digital Cathedral in the Age of Democratic Sustainability

This is the first part of an article that just appeared in Issue #25, Spring/Summer 2010 of Terrain.org: The Journal of the Built & Natural Environments. I've been working on this article in one form or another for about four years, so I'm excited about finally finishing it and getting it published.

How can the digital revolution and the new social media it has spawned nurture the development of democratic sustainability? By democratic sustainability I mean a social and political process that engages citizens as active agents of social change in the complex task of balancing economic prosperity, effective environmental stewardship, and social justice. As Paul Hawken notes in Blessed Unrest, the democratic sustainability movement has emerged “from the bottom up,” becoming “the largest social movement in all of human history.” It “grows and spreads in every city and country,” writes Hawken, “and involves virtually every tribe, culture, language, and religion, from Mongolians to Uzbeks to Tamils.”

Moving toward democratic sustainability has less to do with technology than a massive change in human consciousness, one that encourages systems thinking and transforms the relations of people to each other and to natural world. Nonetheless, tools are necessary to facilitate this task, and the rise of the Internet and digital technology has provided us with new and potent means to do so. As Hawken observes, “There have always been networks of powerful people, but until recently it has never been possible for the entire world to be connected.” Even as we acknowledge the “other side” of the Internet—its potential to splinter thought and concentration, take time away from reflection, and exacerbate a growing nature-deficit-disorder among youth—its unprecedented ability to construct global movements beckons.

Community is the essential concept underpinning sustainability. Whether an ecosystem or social system, the dynamics of interconnectedness and interdependence are what make growth and health possible. In medieval society, the cathedral embodied this understanding of what was known at the time as the “Great Chain of Being.” An awe-inspiring structure, the cathedral by its physical presence affirmed the vertical hierarchy that held medieval society together, and its construction gave individuals in the community a clear and compelling sense of their place in the world and the links that bound them to each other. “Building a cathedral,” says Robert Scott in The Gothic Enterprise: A Guide to Understanding the Medieval Cathedral, “entailed an ongoing, difficult, yet energizing form of collective enterprise in which people could take enormous pride and around which they could rally a community.”

Cornell Moves Beyond Coal

I recently contributed this post to the Second Nature blog  "Campus Green Builder":

Not all green buildings on campus come with lots of windows and sunlight. I recently attended the grand opening of Cornell University's new Combined Heat and Power Plant. Given the quality of the conversation about climate change in the U.S. these days, it’s easy to get discouraged and cynical. But I came away from this particular event feeling like Cornell had taken a real step forward. The new plant will allow Cornell to stop using coal in 18 months and will reduce the university’s carbon footprint by 28 percent. Getting off coal power and hooking up to an interstate natural gas pipeline that runs close by the campus will also save 100,000 gallons a year of diesel fuel used to deliver the coal by truck from West Virginia mines. Now that’s green by anyone’s standards. 

Especially impressive was President David Skorton’s strong expression of support for the ACUPCC at the opening. "When I signed the President's Commitment," he said, "I did not know how we would get to climate neutrality, but I did have faith in our collective ability as a university to educate and discover our way through, and today is an example of finding a piece of the larger puzzle. Although we are celebrating today, we have a long hill yet to climb."

After the remarks and a press conference, I took a tour of the new 15,000-square-foot facility located next to the old coal-fired central heating plant. It was hard to miss the two giant turbines fired by natural gas that drive the electric generators. As was explained to us over the din of the turbines, very little goes to waste; heat from the turbines makes steam that runs another generator and that steam is piped throughout the campus for heating. In fact, so little energy is wasted that solar collectors had to be installed to provide heat and hot water for the new offices and locker rooms attached to the facility!

When thinking about Cornell's switch from coal to natural gas, here's something to keep in mind: only one-third of the energy in coal actually gets used to generate electricity. The rest goes up the smokestack along with much greater carbon emissions than natural gas. Thanks to mountaintop removal, more than 470 mountains in four Appalachian states (West Virginia, Kentucky, Virginia, and Tennessee) have been destroyed to date providing coal for power plants such as the one that Cornell is shutting down (see "How Do You Kill a Mountain?"). Given the inefficiency of coal, that means only about 156 of those mountains went into producing electricity. The other 314 mountains were not only destroyed, they were a complete waste. Cornell's new power plant will be running at something like 85% efficiency and natural gas emits far less carbon than coal. The obvious conclusion: natural gas may be "bad," but it's dramatically less bad than coal.

No wonder the Sierra Club will be holding Cornell up as a model as it seeks to get other universities and colleges to close down their coal-fired power plants (see Campuses Beyond Coal). One down and (about) fifty-nine to go!

The Big Idea

With the Copenhagen talks approaching, it's hard not to wonder why more people aren't engaged in the effort to prevent runaway climate change. Even as President Obama pledges 17% emissions cuts going into these crucial negotiations, new polls show that as many as 30% of Americans don't believe in global warming. Obviously, something's not working here.

Unless we move from trying to scare people into action by apocalyptic predictions of the coming climate disaster and focus on the hope and opportunity that can be generated by moving to a new energy economy, we're not going to be able to move forward at the pace necessary to have a meaningful impact. Climate and Energy Truths: Our Common Future, a study issued earlier this year by EcoAmerica, underscores the importance of grasping this insight. Carrying out focus groups and online and phone surveys, the study tested a range of conceputal frameworks and messages for speaking with the American public about energy and climate change.  It's worth reading in its entirety, but here's the report's bottom line: it's far easier to engage people "around the energy debate than the climate change debate."

There is a similar need to shift the framework in higher education when it comes to sustainability. As Andrea Putman and I note in our editorial "A New Era in Higher Education?" (in the October issue of Sustainability: The Journal of Record), the most forward looking corporations understand the need to make sustainability a strategic imperative and are gaining significant ground on their competitors during the current recession. As I've noted previously, in the words of the recent Aberdeen Group report "The ROI of Sustainability," “Far from being a philanthropic ‘nice to have’ [sustainability is a] ‘must have’ strategy for long-term, business viability and success.”

What's the lesson here for higher education leaders? Too many of them are looking at sustainability in terms of what their institutions could do to promote it ("the right thing to do") and not enough are asking, how can sustainability help us become more strategic and perform more effectively ("the smart thing to do")? The big idea that they need to wrap their heads around is that sustainability as a driver can make their institutions smarter, more reslient, and less costly to operate. Perhaps reading the EcoAmerica report would help them better share this perspective with their institutions' stakeholders and move them forward to the new energy future that beckons.

 

Why "Boldly Sustainable"?

For Blog Action Day - Climate Change, a brief excerpt from Boldly Sustainable: Hope and Opportunity for Higher Education in the Age of Climate Change (NACUBO, 2009), which I co-authored with Andrea Putman, my colleague at Second Nature:

Designing a sustainable world is not simply a technocratic exercise. It is as much a cultural and ethical project as a scientific and engineering endeavor. It requires imagination, versatility, and creativity, a willingness to live our lives differently. Only if we come to comprehend that, as the ecologist and theologian Thomas Berry observes, “the universe is a communion of subjects, not a collection of objects,” will we achieve a level of awareness sufficient to produce viable solutions. We must understand that we are woven inextricably into the fabric of life and do not stand apart from it, exercising dominion over the world around us. The “environment” is not something that exists separate from human beings but rather is what makes human life possible...

How do we want to be remembered: as leaders who understood the need to address upstream the pressing issues of our age and acted with courage and foresight, or as people whose primary goals were short-term advantage and gain and who cared for little else besides self advancement? The present moment is unlike any other in terms of what is at stake. As Berry writes, it is a moment that calls on us to transform our exploitation of the earth into a relationship that is “mutually beneficial.” And, as luck would have it, the moment is brief. Unless we act now to preserve and enhance the life, beauty, and diversity of the planet for future generations, we will become, in Berry’s words, “impoverished in all that makes us human.” The question is no longer why we should address climate destabilization, and in some cases, it is not even how. The question has become how fast and effectively we can move forward. In short, to what extent are we willing to be? ...

Given global threats such as the growing disruption of the climate, staggering levels of poverty in the developing world, and the looming peak oil crisis, it is remarkable how insular much of the higher education establishment is. Amid the day-to-day tasks of measuring learning outcomes, recruiting students, cultivating donors, balancing the budget, applying for grants, and keeping controversy to a minimum, surprisingly little time or energy is spent on how to address the truly serious problems that promise to upend the lives of the next generations. “One could make the case that our universities are actually mired in the Stone Age,” notes Michael Crow, president of Arizona State University. “Our universities remain highly static, resistant to change, unwilling to evolve in pace with real time.” Just as our prehistoric ancestors went about busting up rocks, we view the world as something to break down and take apart rather than to understand holistically and live in harmony with. In Crow's words, we seek to “heat it, beat it, melt it, smash it, burn it and blow it up.”

It is time for a new set of priorities that move us from “the Stone Age to the Sustainability Age.” How can it make sense for universities and colleges to keep doing what they do when they have contributed in large part to the current predicament? In light of how we got where we are, shouldn’t higher education leaders rethink the way that teaching, research, and learning take place and how they operate their facilities? More people, both inside and outside academia, are asking these questions. Now, more than ever, we need to keep in mind Eric Hoffer’s acerbic observation that “in times of change, learners inherit the earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.”

Although colleges and universities may be inherently conservative, they must respond to the dramatically altered circumstances or run the risk of becoming irrelevant. Sustainability, as Peter Senge puts it, is “the necessary revolution.” The high stakes involved in meeting the challenges of sustainability and climate change mean that effective leadership, strategic thinking, and implementation in higher education are more imperative than ever. They demand a shift from maintaining the status quo to bringing about transformation. “Boldly sustainable” is not just a battle cry. It is a powerful strategy for higher education to achieve renewal, reformation, and relevance in the 21st century. It is an opportunity for colleges and universities to avoid the fate of collapsing under the weight of their own self-absorption, isolation, and obtuseness,to avoid becoming the intellectual equivalent of Easter Island.

Crossing the Bar: Eulogy for My Father

My Dad, perhaps more than anyone, taught me how to think long term and why it was important, and he passed on his lifelong love of the outdoors to my brothers and me. He also taught us the importance of family and, by example, what it meant to be entrepreneurial. I delivered this eulogy at his memorial service in Suffield, CT -- where we grew up -- on September 28, 2009:

Sunset and evening star,
And one clear call for me!
And may there be no moaning of the bar,
When I put out to sea.

But such a tide as moving seems asleep
Too full for sound and foam,
When that which drew from out the boundless deep
Turns again home!

Twilight and evening bell,
And after that the dark!
And may there be no sadness of farewell,
When I embark;

For though from out our bourn of Time and Place
The flood may bear me far,
I hope to see my Pilot face to face
When I have crossed the bar.

Alfred Lord Tennyson, 1889

My Dad loved life and he loved his family and friends. He was also independent, proud, and stubborn, and he was very, very smart. Anyone who underestimated Dad made a big mistake. He was naturally curious about the world, kept an open mind, and was always ready to embrace new experiences. He had an amazing amount of energy and once he set his mind on something, you could be sure he would accomplish it. And good luck if you couldn’t keep up with him.

Just six weeks ago, Dad drove up to Maine to celebrate my brother George’s birthday. George offered to come down and get him, and his business partner and close friend Phil Shuman offered to drive him up. Dad was not in good health, but he insisted that the only way he was going to Maine was if he could get there on his own. So he set off in his trusty BMW, with Chilli his loyal cocker spaniel at his side, heading north. It took him something like seven hours to get there, he said later, in part because he wasn’t feeling well and in part because Chilli had important business to conduct on the way.

The drive back to Suffield a few days later was altogether different. Perhaps revved up by the birthday celebration and time with his family, he set his cruise control at 78 mph and got home in four and a half hours. To this day we’re not really sure who was actually driving that car, and I’m not sure Dad ever really knew either.Two things we do know for sure, however: first, there were no bathroom breaks for poor old Chilli; and second, Dad had done it his way once again.

Just a few days later, Dad was in the hospital fighting for his life. He was in tremendous pain, suffering from an infection of his esophagus and unable to swallow any food. Even then he did not lose his sense of humor. For a few days he shared the room with an elderly gentleman who was suffering from dementia and would call out from time to time, reliving some incident from his past. At one point, suddenly sitting upright, he shouted, "Whoa, whoa, whoa!" Dad couldn’t resist and responded in as loud a voice as he could muster, "Giddy up, giddy up!" Even as I was trying hard to stifle my laughter, I thought what a perfect expression of my father’s personality this moment captured. Throughout his life, people had told him to slow down, trim his sails, don’t dream so big, and he would have none of it. Instead, with a "giddy up" or two, he would simply forge ahead.

One of the great truths is that we die the way we live. The courage and determination that Dad displayed in the last days of his life was simply an extension of how he had always lived. At 18 years old, he rescued a couple who had fallen through the ice. Afterwards he said nothing about the incident to his mother, who scolded him for coming home soaking wet on such a cold day.

Only when the husband and wife, grateful that Dad had saved their lives, went to the local newspaper did the story become public. "At no time during the proceedings did he show any indications of losing his head or becoming excited," the couple told the reporter. "‘Just hang on; don’t get flustered; I’ll get you out,’ he kept repeating reassuringly to them.’"

Dad was just as stoic and courageous during his last few years when he fought for his own life. Diagnosed with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma just two days before my stepmother Ruth passed away, he never gave up. Although the loss of Ruth crushed him, he kept moving forward.

As his longtime friend Neil Smit told me in a recent phone conversation, "George was a hard plower." Neil was referring to Dad’s approach to skiing, which he gave up only a couple of years ago, but he was also talking about his approach to life. "Enduring the battle with his body as it began to fail, he continued to live his life," our son Jesse wrote after Dad died. "He did not throw the towel in and he fought for all his days."

One of my favorite quotes comes from John Shedd’s Salt from My Attic: "A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for." If anybody ever embodied this spirit, my Dad did. Not that he went looking for trouble recklessly. After all, he was an accountant. But he was always eager to embark on a new adventure. That was why he loved sailing and why some of his happiest days were on his boat Freedom, cruising along the East Coast from Maine to Florida.

Dad’s love of adventure was not confined to the water. He had always wanted to go skydiving, so for his 75th birthday Ruth arranged for lessons and a jump at the Vero Beach airport in Florida, where he was stationed during with the Navy during World War II. I remember like it was yesterday the excitement in his voice when he called afterwards, still standing out on the airfield. "I did it!" he exclaimed. Included in Ruth’s birthday present was a video of the jump, capturing the exuberant expression on his face as he descended.To this day, whenever I watch the video, I laugh until I have tears running down my cheeks because the soundtrack is Steppenwolf’s "Born to be Wild." Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper had nothing on my Dad.

Some of my best days with my father were when I visited him and Ruth at their place on the ocean in Vero Beach, just south of Sebastian Inlet. It was a magical place on the narrowest part of the barrier island, and only a few hundred yards separated the Atlantic from the Indian River. I would go in the spring, just as baseball was getting underway, and we would head over to Dodgertown on the mainland to watch the exhibition games, eat a hot dog, and have a beer. Afterwards we would stop at a bait shop, pick up some live shrimp and go fishing off the dock back at the lagoon, watching the sun set across the water.

What I realized during this time with my father was that, late in his life, he had learned to live in the moment. This was not necessarily an easy achievement for him, because as Neil says, Dad was a "hard plower." Patience was not one of his greatest strengths and he was always looking ahead. But it was different in Florida. He and Ruth had discovered a place where the land, sea, and sky all came together in one glorious symphony, and it made their hearts sing. Both the past and future drifted away on the tide, leaving only the moment in which they lived.

Loss, although intense, brings great clarity. During the last five weeks as I spent each day with Dad, rooting for the Red Sox, doing crossword puzzles, talking, and sitting with him while he slept, I slowly came to grips with the reality that his life would soon end. In those moments, I realized what I most admired about my father: his integrity. By integrity, I don’t mean just strong ethics, important as they are, but also a consistency between inner core values and outer behavior that creates a sense of wholeness and resilience.

Although Dad kept up to date on a lot of things, he was old fashioned in his belief that hard work, family, and education were the keys to a good life. And you couldn’t spend a day with him without understanding that he lived these beliefs, they weren’t just empty words. As John Adams once observed, "There are two types of education. One should teach us how to make a living, and the other how to live." My father’s life was a testament to the wisdom of Adams’s insight.

So Dad has crossed the bar and put out to sea on his last great adventure. He will be sorely missed. But, as my father’s cousin Giorgio wrote from Italy when Ruth passed away, "We don’t ask you, Lord, why do you carry her away now, but we say thank you, Lord, because you gave her to us for many, special years." The same is true of Dad: he was a gift we will hold in our hearts forever. The flood may bear him far, but we rejoice knowing that he will finally meet his Pilot face to face. May he rest in peace.

Sustainability Means More Than Green

Be sure to take a look at this recent article and video published by the Mc Kinsey Quarterly: "When Sustainability Means More than ‘Green’." The article is adapted from Adam Werback’s new book, Strategy for Sustainability: A Business Manifesto, in which he urges businesses to turn to sustainability in order to gain long-term profitability and transparency. Werback, of course, is the former president of the Sierra Club and current corporate consultant helping to guide Wal-Mart's wide-ranging sustainability initiative.

"To endure in a changeable world with more limits on resources and less credit," writes Werbach, "companies must develop and execute a strategy for sustainability." This is very similar to the argument that my co-author Andrea Putman and I make in our new book Boldly Sustainable: Hope and Opportunity for Higher Education in the Age of Climate Change regarding colleges and universities. In our case, we contend that the institutions that successfully implement sustainability measures across their campuses will make the necessary organizational and pedagogical changes that will allow them not only to survive but thrive in the 21st century.

In Werbach's words, "Every crisis is an opportunity. The crisis we face now is our chance—your chance—to build a strategy for sustainability into the core of your company and your life. Such a strategy is a necessity, not an idealistic illusion." Read his article and watch the interview with him here.

Sustainability as a Strategic Imperative

Boldly Sustainable got a nice mention in Wednesday's issue of Inside Higher Ed. In "Getting to Green," the sustainability blog for IHE, G. Rendell writes that my co-author Andrea Putman and I "not only describe how colleges and universities can save money by reducing their environmental footprints, they explain how a profound commitment to sustainability is the basis for defining higher ed's 21st century market sector."



It's always a happy moment when a reader grasps the larger implications of one's work.  As I've written in this space previously, sustainability is a strategic imperative for colleges and universities. In the words of Cornell President David Skorton, "sustainability is no longer an elective." (See New York Times, June 13, 2007). Those leaders who understand this new reality and act on it will be the ones whose institutions are most likely to survive the current upheaval in higher education.

Why do I say this? Some recent data, which came out after the book went to press, underscores the extent to which corporations that have made a deep commitment to sustainability are financially better off than those that have not. In a report released this past February, "Green Winners: The Performance of Sustainability," A.T. Kearney noted that in 16 out of 18 industries, companies with a strong sustainability commitment were “the clear leaders in the financial markets" and they outperformed industry averages by 15% in the second half of 2008. Among the common characteristics of these leading companies were the following:
  • Focus on long-term strategy, not just short-term gains
  • Strong corporate governance
  • Sound risk-management practices
  • History of investment in innovations

An even more recent study by the Aberdeen Group found that sustainability initiatives cut overall costs in over 200 companies by 6 to 10%; at the same time, customer retention rates increased 16%.

These are by any measure impressive results and deserve close consideration. Higher education, and the economy in general, are not just experiencing a conventional downturn right now; they are undergoing a major paradigm shift in which the old rules will no longer apply and the new way of doing business will have to take into account the previously overlooked value of ecoservices that are under unprecedented stress.

As Jhana Senxian and Cindy Jutras, the authors of the Aberdeen Group's "The ROI of Sustainability," contend, "far from being a philanthropic 'nice to have,’" sustainability is a "'must have' strategy for long-term, business viability and success."

Blog Software
Blog Software