This article was co-authored by myself and Tom Chance. It was originally intended for The Ecologist, however it was never published. This article was meant to be published alongside a 10 Step Plan to Green Electricity.
Update: Oxford University renewed their renewable energy contract!
Two years of petitions, meetings, letters and lobbying from the Reading University Campaigns Forum have finally paid off - The University of Reading is now using 100% green electricity. Student activism won, but how, and was it worth it?
Why push for a switch?
Reading University is one of the 134 universities and colleges in England that consume over 200 million worth of energy each year. Reading itself uses almost 40 million kilo-watt hours of electricity per year - equivalent to the power used by about 12,000 homes according to DTI figures. The Campaigns Forum decided in the middle of 2002 that Reading should take responsibility for the impact of it's energy use on the climate. A few other Universities had already made the switch, driven by student campaigning groups up and down the UK pushing for green electricity. Reading is now the seventh University to go 100 per cent green after Oxford, Bradford, Sussex, Loughborough, Huddersfield and Sheffield Hallam.
We were also aware of the UK's commitment to meeting 10 per cent of it's energy needs from renewable sources by 2010 and the government's various incentives to try and make this a reality. Given the speculation surrounding the likelihood of the UK meeting this target, switching a large institution like Reading University seemed like a good way of increasing positive publicity and increasing pressure on the Government. With this in mind we realised that switching the University to green electricity was an achievable and worthwhile goal.
What does it mean for an institution to "use green electricity"?
Before I go into how we convinced the University to make the switch, I want to explain what using green electricity means. When Reading buys green electricity from Scottish & Southern, it does not mean that a separate green cable now goes into Reading University and powers it exclusively from renewable sources. Reading University has not detached itself from the national grid. When you buy green electricity from a company you still use the general mix, of which green is a small percentage (unlike in Scotland where some of the energy companies sell directly to the end user).
However, what it does mean is that for every unit of electricity that Reading now buys, Scottish & Southern supplies 1 unit of green electricity to the national grid. Also, according to Friends of the Earth, Scottish & Southern invest 5% of their annual turnover in renewable energy projects. This includes expenditure on building new renewable generation (such as wind) and research in new renewable energy technologies.
It is also important to be clear about what constitutes 'green electricity. Many definitions include sources like Combined Heat and Power (CHP), which may include incineration, and sometimes even nuclear. Unless your sole aim is to reduce carbon dioxide emissions resulting from your institution's electricity usage, in which case any 'green' scheme will do, you should be careful to define exactly which sources you find acceptable. We settled for anything that didn't use fossil fuels, that wasn't CHP and that wasn't nuclear. For the UK at the moment, then, this generally means hydroelectric and wind.
Therefore, people switching to green electricity does make a difference. By buying green electricity you are directly affecting the potential for supporting existing renewable technologies and building new ones. Also, the more that people buy into renewables, the more economical it becomes with economies of scale and advancement of technologies through increased investment.
How did we get the University to switch? (look at the 10 point plan for more details)
We started our campaign in November 2002 by writing an open letter to the Vice Chancellor stating our demands and rationale. We emphasised the need in terms of our impact on the environment, and in terms of the University needing to stay ahead of the competition (by mentioning competing universities that had or were switching), and hinted at reasons why Reading should move now. From the very beginning we had the support of the national campaigning group, People & Planet, who gave us lots of ideas and helped us draft our letters and reports.
Before receiving a reply, we began running a couple of stalls a term around the University campus from December 2002. At the start there were only a few of us running the campaign, but with time, students joined us as we got more and more public exposure. We crucially also started meeting up every Monday night to discuss the campaign and what needed doing, which made us much more organised.
After exchanging several letters, the Vice-Chancellor eventually agreed to meet with a few of us in January 2003. After grilling him about the University's energy policy he highlighted that we had to both show wider support for our campaign and the feasibility of the switch before he would take us seriously.
So we held more stalls, which helped us gain the support of the President of the Student's Union by explaining our campaign and showing the petition as it was in February 2003. By October 2003 we had also won the backing of two local MP's (Jane Griffiths and Martin Salter) and Caroline Lucas MEP with several phone calls and letters. We forwarded their letters of support to the Vice-Chancellor who had no choice but to respond to the respective politicians and ourselves.
We were now a force to be reckoned with as we had the backing of over a thousand students and three politicians. So we arranged another meeting with the Vice-Chancellor in November. This time the Director of Faculties Management, Patrick Hackett, was also present. They were clearly impressed by what we had achieved so far and the VC gave the go-ahead for the University energy staff to look into the possibility of making the switch. At the end of the meeting we arranged another date to meet Patrick Hackett again with Arthur Handley, who was Reading University's energy manager.
From December 2003 to March 2004 we met with Arthur and Patrick several times. They initially wanted to confirm what we meant by 'green electricity i.e. that it didn't include nuclear, CHP and fossil fuels; why the University should make the switch; what universities have already made the switch (to show that it is a viable option); and what green suppliers are out there. So we compiled a simple report with all of the data they wanted and gave it to them. We also outlined that we wanted the University to change the University's energy policy so that it would always go green in the future, even after we left the university.
To help us in these meetings we consulted with People & Planet, who provided invaluable advice as well as facts and figures to back up our case. We also gained the support of an Environmental Auditor from Reading Borough Council, who provided us with sample policies from other universities, councils and local businesses, and who attended one meeting to demonstrate her support for our campaign, and to help discuss specifics with Patrick.
The importance of changing the University's energy policy
But simply lobbying for a switch wasn't enough. The Oxford People & Planet group are currently in negotiations with Oxford University about renewing their green electricity contract. Oxford showed its commitment to the environment by signing a 100% renewable energy contract in 2002, which made it the third-largest consumer of green electricity in England at the time. The contract currently comprises 101,400,000 kWh and it is agreed that the reduction in carbon dioxide (between 2003-2005) attributable to the switch is approximately 50,000 tonnes per year - significantly more than any other higher education institution in the UK.
However, only three years later, as the contract's end approaches, the students fear the University will go back on its commitment and revert to non-renewable fuel because they are complaining about prices. The student body has been outraged by this and a campaign to encourage the university to renew its contract, led by People and Planet, is under way. A petition signed by over 2,000 people has been handed to the Vice Chancellor during a demonstration outside the university offices, which was attended by several hundred people. A candlelit vigil has been just one of a number of awareness-raising stunts students have employed to voice their support for a contract renewal.
Despite these and other significant demonstrations of student support for the contracts renewal and an obvious dedication within research departments to take climate change seriously, the pressures of funding shortages now seem set to persuade Oxford University to return to fossil fuels when its current renewable electricity contract expires in March 2005.
This illustrates the importance of getting the University to change its policy on green electricity. After two years of being green, the Oxford group has had to again stage demonstrations and get petitions signed before they are even at a stage when they can negotiate. It is completely unrealistic and unsustainable to expect students to have to protest every time their university's electricity contract comes up for tender.
At Reading we ensured that the University reviewed and changed their energy policy permanently to make sure that we wouldn't have to do this. After much consultation, Reading University adopted a new energy policy in February 2004 which ensured that whenever the Universitys energy contract comes up for renewal, green electricity will always be chosen for the residential sector and, as long as it is financially viable, it would be given first preference for the commercial sector. We were shown a copy of the policy before it was passed through the relevant management committees, ensuring that it met our requirements in terms of its definition of green electricity and the reliability of it's commitments.
Universities are increasingly in financial difficulties (on 31 July 2003, the University of Reading had 19.6m of long term debt outstanding according to their annual financial report) and therefore unwilling to pay extra for green electricity. One of the arguments the University used was that they wouldnt sack a member of staff to pay for green electricity, since the students' fees are already at their legal limit.
The Climate Change Levy (CCL)
To counter this we highlighted the savings the University would make by not paying the Climate Change Levy. The UK Climate Change Levy (CCL) commenced on 1st April 2001 and is an energy tax that adds approximately 15% to typical energy bills of UK businesses. It is a levy on energy use in the whole of the non-residential sector in industry, commerce, agriculture and the public sector.
Fortunately for us, electricity from green renewable energy sources for business use is exempt from the levy. One of the main reasons for the levy was to help the UK meet its Kyoto Protocol legally binding target of a 12.5% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2010. The government hoped that increased energy costs would promote energy efficiency and even stimulate businesses to switch to green electricity. Indeed, when Sussex University made the switch to green electricity with Ecotricity their contract became cheaper than before as they didn't have to pay the CCL. So for the business contract at least, Reading University could offset much of the price increase.
Unfortunately the climate change levy does not cover residential energy. Therefore whenever we asked students for their support we also had to ask if they would pay a bit extra to cover the costs of changing the residential contract, which would be added to the hall fees. We were initially told that each student might have to pay from 2-10 a year extra on their hall fees to cover these costs. When we explained to students the issues and that it would probably only cost a few extra pounds a year (or as we put it, the price of a few pints), they were still happy for the University to make the switch.
So when it came to writing the electricity policy, we ensured that the residential contract will always go green (the students will pay extra if need be) and the commercial contract will go green if it is cost neutral. Though some may say it is unfair to dump the extra costs on debt-ridden students, it was the opinion of the student body we talked to that the relatively small increase - relative, that is, to hall fees that can top 4,000 per year - was worth it.
When Reading finally came up to renew its electricity contract in October 2004, the University ended up switching both its business and residential contracts with no increase in cost to the university or to the students. This was only possible because of the savings the university made by not paying the CCL.
We had won and celebrated by organising an 'open-mic' night at the students union with talks, music and dancing. Something activists rarely do well is celebrate, so we resolved to do it properly, both for the morale of the activists and for the publicity we could gain. The story was picked up across the local and even national media thanks to a few days of work writing a press release and following up phone calls and other leads.
The future?
Our victory is a clear example of how students, academics and staff working together can make significant changes for the better. We are very grateful that Reading University had the vision to follow through on our ideas about green electricity.
However, not content with this, we are now pressing the University on recycling and energy efficiency. We also want them to improve the management structure of the University so that campaigns like this aren't necessary by hiring new staff, including a dedicated environmental manager. Ideally, all universities would conform to the international environmental management standard, ISO 14001, which sets out a raft of conditions that guarantee good practice.
Unfortunately, after writing a full report to this effect and then discussing our proposal with Patrick and Arthur, it looks unlikely that this will happen. Though some universities employ over fifty staff members to work on environmental matters, Reading is unable, or unwilling, to devote the same resources. So we are looking at setting up a cross-campus environmental steering committee that will include representatives from the Facilities Management division, the Students' Union, each of the halls of residence and each of the faculties. We are also looking into more limited goals, including passing further policies on energy efficiency and recycling, and encouraging better practice amongst the administrative staff in departments that have a relatively stable presence, and so may maintain high standards without further student intervention.
Working with University staff, students, officers in the Students' Union, Reading Borough Council, politicians and environmental organisations such as People & Planet, we hope we will be able to put progressive policies in place for these issues. The more people we have involved, the more we can do to make the University an environmentally friendly institution.
We also hope that the rest of the Higher Education sector will follow our lead. All universities should obtain quotations for the supply of green electricity and make a public commitment to switch their University to a green supply, either all at once or by migrating incrementally, as soon as possible.
Individuals, universities, councils and businesses alike need to push for green energy. With more investment in new renewable energy sources and technologies, we will be able to have an increasing amount of renewable energy powering the national grid.
If we don't use renewable energy now, when we get 5 years down the line waiting for tidal or offshore (or other renewable technologies which will hopefully be developed to replace brown and nuclear fuel) to help us out, we will be 5 years behind on the UK's CO2 targets. By then we may have lost the arguments on renewables, facing a rollout of more nuclear power stations and an undermined renewables industry.
Greenpeace say that the next two years are crucial for the future of the UK renewables industry and electricity market. It is very easy to take a wind-turbine down if newer technologies are invented to replace them, but it is not so easy to put carbon dioxide back in the bottle. Please make the switch today.
Links
Reading Campaigns Forum
UK Green Power - a service to help you compare UK gas, electricity and dual fuel prices between green suppliers.
People and Planet Go Green Campaign
Friends of the Earth green electricity league table.
