Miles Per Gallon (MPG): The average number of miles a vehicle travels on one gallon of fuel (gasoline).

2010 Ford Fusion Hybrid: 39 mpg

2010 Honda Civic Hybrid: 42 mpg

2010 Toyota Prius: 50 mpg

2011 Chevrolet Volt: 230 mpg  (General Motors’ own estimation)

An Edmunds: InsideLine Magazine article titled, “‘Start Over’ on MPG Rating System,” states directly what the online car magazine thinks should be done with the Environmental Protection Agency rating system. Edmunds’ CEO challenges the U.S. Government to reconsider what he calls the “misleading” MPG rating. In fact, according to the article, “The advantage of EVs over traditionally fueled vehicles is “nowhere near as great as the proposed EPA ratings would imply.” For example, the 2009 Mini E, an all-electric vehicle, is rated by the EPA at 99 mpge (equivalent), and Edmunds estimates it costs $49.39 per month to operate. The Chevrolet Volt plug-in hybrid is rated at a much higher 230 mpg, but Edmunds estimates it will cost $53.55 per month to operate.”  Therefore, the MPG rating for each vehicle does not provide an accurate picture for the operating costs of each vehicle on which the consumer relies when considering the purchase of a hybrid or electric vehicle.

As I thought about the launch of the Chevy Volt, a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle expected to be in full production at the end of 2010, I wanted to analyze the advantages or disadvantages of owning such a vehicle in the state of Kansas. The Volt will run up to 40 miles on a single charge of the on-board battery system. Antyhing beyond 40 miles will automatically start the gasonline generator capable of running the vehicle at 50 MPG. The following analysis considers the MPG rating, the cost to operate the Volt, and the CO2 emissions compared to standard combustion engine vehicles.

If I were to drive 40 miles round trip to work every day in a fully charged Volt, I would be getting the equivalent of 150 MPG. Considering the Toyota Prius provides 50 MPG for the same drive to and from work, the Chevy Volt greatly surpasses anything else currently out on the market. However, how does the Chevy Volt perform at longer distances? Consider the 230 estimated MPG that GM claims the Volt would reach — this is where the MPG Rating system falls apart:

Therefore, the MPG rating falls dramatically as the distance of travel increases without recharging the vehicle. Nevertheless, 57 MPG is still equivalent to or better than enything else on the road today. Now what about the operating costs of the vehicle? Again, it depends on the driving habits of the owner. Using the same two examples as above we will calculate the approximate cost for each of the trips compared to the Toyota Prius:

General Motors claims that the Volt produces zero emissions when in electric drive mode. This is true if one calculates the emissions from just the tail-pipe of the vehicle. However, electricity production (an therefore the use of that electricity) emits CO2 and other harmful chemicals into the atmosphere. So, let us consider the emissions of electricity production specific to the state of Kansas:

Although the consumption of electricity while driving the Volt produces zero emissions, the generation of that same electricity in Kansas emits CO2:

As you can see above, the Volt does NOT produce significantly different levels of CO2 emissions when considering the source of the electricity. While Kansas produces 74% of its electricity by burning coal, the United States, on average, produces only 50% of its electricity using coal (Missouri is 86% coal). So the Volt may indirectly produce less CO2 emissions in states that use nuclear or non-fossil fuel (wind, solar, etc.) electricity generation modes.

In summary, the current MPG rating system fails to provide a useful or accurate estimation of the operating costs of vehicles like the Chevy Volt. In addition, GM’s claim that the Volt will be rated at 230 MPGe is supect even when attempting to “fudge the numbers” to achieve such a rating. However, the Volt will cost less to operate on average and still maintain a higher MPGe (on short and long-distance trips) than that of the leading green vehicle, the Toyota Prius. But, when considering the emissions that result from electricity generation, the Volt does not emit significantly different levels of CO2 when compared to the Prius.

The estimated price for the Volt ranges from the mid-30s to $40,000. The 2010 Prius rings in at $21,000 to $27,250. Unless the Volt can produce significant savings in operating costs, it may not be an economical purchase. However, according to AutoblogGreen, as the average cost of gasoline increases the Volt becomes more desirable.

-Joshua Foster

I am following up on the Nov 16th post “How much did the last mile cost?” which highlights the government of the Netherlands’ plan to introduce a tax based incentive system that charges a few cents for every kilometer (mile) a person drives instead of taxing the vehicle purchase.

Part 2 focuses on another European country, Denmark, which currently has the media’s attention for the upcoming meetings in Copenhagen to discuss an international agreement on curbing greenhouse gas emissions. President Obama pledged a provisional long term target for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions for the international climate meetings.

Denmark, as the host of the meetings, wants to show that they are a leader in tackling the green house gas issue. A Dec 2nd NYTimes article, “In Denmark, Ambitious Plan for Electric Cars“, reports on the country’s plan to move away from the combustion engine altogether. A $40,000 tax break will motivate consumers to purchase electric vehicles and a $100 million infrastructure investment in charging stations around the country will provide citizens the means to make the EV purchase more convenient.

Denmark will become an important test case “for the idea that electric motors and batteries can supplant the petroleum-burning engines that have powered cars for more than a century.” But, before we get excited about the prospect of making the US an electric vehicle haven, we must understand that the $100 million investment in infrastructure will go a long way in an green-minded country of 5.5 million people such as Denmark but would be a drop in the bucket for America. However, the implications of this experiment on the future of electric vehicles and the battle against rising emissions are wide and deep. If Denmark can effectively abolish the standard gasoline engines that dominate its roads, many other countries will follow suit.

-Joshua Foster

Based on information provided by KU Purchasing Services for FY2006 and FY2007, The University of Kansas purchases an estimated $315,000 of copy paper per year. The most effective way to reduce the cost associated with paper use is to buy and consume less. Although copy paper is necessary to the daily operations of the University, there are options to reduce consumption without compromising productivity. The University of Kansas should pursue drafting a campus-wide printing policy that includes the implementation of a double-sided (duplex) default setting for all printers on campus. Duplex printing is defined as the ability to print on both sides of the paper. Duplexing would reduce paper use and cost for the user. In addition, reducing the amount of paper purchased would mitigate some of the harmful environmental effects associated with the paper consumption and disposal.

Easan Selvan, a systems specialist for the Student Success Technology Services Office, put forth an incredible amount of work in creating and implementing the Student Success Technology Conservation Policy.  Included in the policy is the recommendation that printers be set to duplex automatically. But that is only a small part of this policy that seeks to curb the waste of valuable resources. In fact, Easan’s work was recognized by the Environmental Protection Agency.  At current electricity costs, this new policy will save $29,050.20 in electricity annually. Easan was recognized at the Sustainability Leadership Awards for his efforts.

In a recent experiment, the Student Success Technology Services office recorded the page count on 3 printers between the 24^th of February and the 25^th of March, 2009. On every Monday during this time period, the default setting on each printer was changed to automatically duplex. During the following week, the user could choose single sided printing (even as a default if they wish) but the printer would revert to duplex by default on the subsequent Monday.

 Considering the information displayed in TABLE 1, the number of images printed without duplexing capabilities would be equal to the total number of pages printed. On average, with the use of an automatic duplexing policy, the number of pieces of paper used fell by 37% over traditional one sided printing. This result corresponds to a 37% reduction in cost associated with printing. A reduction of that magnitude would save the university approximately $115,000 per year!

In addition, the conservation policy has led to greatly reduced energy consumption across the entire Student Success unit and is being used as a model for other departments campus-wide. The KU Center for Sustainability would like to encourage the implementation of this policy across the entire university.

-Josh Foster

This was originally posted on the “Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education — Campus Sustainability Perspectives Blog“. I am RE-POSTING the entry on our blog for the education of our readers. The information provided below is unchanged. -Joshua Foster

The University of Kansas frequently competes for research grants. As highlighted in the October 12, 2009 KU News Release: KU continues to rise in national research rankings — nationwide, federal funding for science and engineering research is a leading indicator of a university’s overall reputation. KU has seen an upward trend in the amount of federal grant dollars invested in research at the University.

How does this relate to sustainability?

I came across an article about Clemson University’s recent landing of a $45 million research grant from the US Department of Energy to build a wind turbine testing center. Such a grant will propel Clemson into the forefront of alternative energy research. The University of Kansas should take note of this event and plan for the future as environmentally conscious research dollars become more prevalent.

In the current economic and political climate, especially with President Obama pledging a provisional target for reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in the United States for the international climate meetings in Copenhagen next month, research in sustainability related fields is garnering more support. I believe that KU could better enrich the lives of students and research faculty alike by encouraging more sustainbility related research.

I would like to highlight some of the current sustainability related research originating with KU faculty. The University has a significant number of research faculty conducting studies related to sustainability ranging from African and African-American Studies to Urban Planning.

If you know of any research that is not listed on the Center for Sustainability website, please forward the information by email to sustainability@ku.edu

-Joshua Foster

A few months ago I had the pleasure of working with a few students from the KU EcoHawks. We were tabling at the Lawrence Energy Conservation Fair (educating local residents about ongoing sustainability related projects at the university) and I had the opportunity to learn about the electric vehicle (EV) they were working on. The overwhelming response to their program saw the EcoHawks prominently mentioned twice on the main KU website homepage, a feature story on Fox 4 news, NPR radio, newspaper articles in the Lawrence Journal World and student run University Daily Kansan and on October 15, 2009, WIRED Magazine featured the KU EcoHawks in an Autotopia blog post titled, “Old-School Beatle Runs on Batteries and Biodiesel“

The goal of their associated project is to design a production quality, fuel neutral series hybrid vehicle using the tenets of sustainability. The student’s definition of sustainability is the application of engineering principles to solving real-world problems by focusing upon the interconnectedness of the environment, energy, economy, education and ethics. To date, the students have recycled a 1974 Volkswagen Super Beetle, destined for the scrap heap, and incorporated a generator running on 100% biodiesel created from used campus cooking oil as part of the KU Biodiesel Initiative.

In addition, The Center for Sustainability recently presented its annual Sustainability Leadership Awards, recognizing faculty, staff and students who have exhibited outstanding leadership and creativity in addressing issues of environmental, economic and social responsibility on the KU campus and beyond. Awards were presented in five categories, honoring individuals and campus projects. The award recognizing an academic project was presented to KU EcoHawks.

This program enables students to get first hand experience with alternative fuel vehicles (although somewhat primitive by today’s standards) that spark their interest in sustainability-related engineering. I hope that more people sign on to contribute to the EcoHawks to recognize the need for more green focused engineers and the green ideas they could contribute.

-Josh Foster

In a November 16, 2009 New York Times article titled, “Paying Extra for Green Power, and Getting Ads Instead,” author Kate Galbraith discusses the efficiency of paying energy providers extra for green energy.

Last year, the Student Environmental Advisory Board (SEAB) purchased green energy offsets for the Anschutz Library on the KU campus. The board voted to pay the cost difference between wind energy and conventional energy to power the library through March 2010. More information about this project is available here.

The NYTimes article questions whether or not the extra money paid for projects such as the one for Anschutz is a viable option for encouraging alternative energy solutions over the long-term. SEAB’s intent was to encourage the use of alternative energy solutions and educate KU students about alternative energy in Kansas. The board considered education and outreach an important aspect of the program. However, in retrospective, the money used to pay for the extra cost of alternative energy could have gone to a project with a higher return on investment. 

According to the article, a significant percentage of the money spent on alternative energy through alternative energy sales such as Westar’s wind energy initiative  “went into marketing and administration” rather than actual infrastructure. The utilities are essentially collecting extra money that they promise to use to support the development of renewable energy, a pitch that some customers find persuasive.

With only about 2% of customers agreeing to pay a higher monthly bill for alternative energy, the needed investment in infrastructure such as new solar arrays and the  bolstered efficiency of a smarter grid will not be possible. I advocate that rather than relying on the investment of a small percentage of the population interested in helping the environment every person should pay a little bit more for the benefit of all. The environment shouldn’t rely on student groups like the Student Environmental Advisory Board to invest in wind energy, it should be everyone’s responsibility. That is what it means to be socially responsible.

-Josh Foster

Discussion on the Environmental Capital blog post about tax incentives and the environment:

http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/11/16/low-countries-high-taxes-the-dutch-take-aim-at-driving/

The Dutch government plans to create a new tax on driving. Rather than an annual road tax for their cars, drivers will soon pay a few cents for every kilometer (mile) on the road, in a plan aimed at breaking chronic traffic jams and cutting carbon emissions. The tax would provide incentives for owners to consume fewer miles with “higher charges levied during rush hour and for traveling on congested roads. Trucks, commercial vehicles and bigger cars emitting more carbon dioxide will be assessed at a higher rate.”

Imagine the passage of similar legislation in the state of Kansas, you would have to pay $0.07 (seven cents) for every mile that you drove. For example, my vehicle’s odometer shows approximately 112,000 miles. If such a tax were implemented the day the vehicle was purchased,  we can calculate the total cost of the tax by multiplying 112,000 by 7¢ to get $7,840 (over the 10 year lifespan of the vehicle). However, with the removal of sales tax and other hefty charges at the initial purchase of the vehicle, the average price for a car would fall between 10 and 15%, making vehicles more affordable and  accessible and therefore more abundant.

Would US citizens, or more specifically the residents of Kansas, drive fewer miles based on the knowledge that each additional mile costs 7¢? Or would we respond better to gasoline tax increases such as those widely discussed during the 2008 presidential primary season? The government, both state and federal combined, tax gasoline in Kansas at 43.4¢ per gallon. Does that provide enough incentive?

An argument may arise, “the implementation fo such a tax in the state of Kansas would adversely affect people communting in rural areas where alternative forms of transportation are not readily available.” Well, just as the charges levied during rush hour and on congested roads would increase, the same could be said for reducing charges to those people living in rural areas where congestion is not an issue and where there is no alternative to long drives to the grocery store.

Please discuss further in the comments!

-Josh Foster

Think about how much food you eat in a day. Breakfast, lunch, dinner, and those snacks in between. Now think about all of the food that you didn’t eat; the leftovers from ballooning restaurant portions or the extras in the fridge from dinner Friday night. Next time you sit down to eat, take a hard look at your plate and try to think about what you really plan on eating. Do you have time to eat everything you’ve served yourself in a 15-minute lunch break? Should you really be eating a salad that size?

Strive to throw nothing away from your plate. As cliché and silly as it sounds, there are starving people in this world. Children in particular have fallen victim to the hunger that looms over some of the most impoverished continents. Basic foods have become a precious and finite commodity in our world. It is disheartening to know that children go to school every day without breakfast and growling stomachs and are expected to still do their best.

No, you cannot airmail your leftovers to Africa or India to feed the hungry there, but taking a minute to think about what is on your plate before you start eating is a great step towards considering the waste that occurs all over our planet every second of the day. Are you really going to eat all of that?

- Vanessa

Editor’s Note: This post is one in a series published by students in the Sustainability Learning Community at KU. Additional posts from this series can be found under “LC” on the Categories list.

Posted in Food, LC, Social Responsibility, Waste Reduction & Recycling ]]> http://sustainableku.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/are-you-going-to-eat-that/feed/ 5 KU Sustainability http://sustainableku.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/ku-campus-garden/ http://sustainableku.wordpress.com/2008/11/19/ku-campus-garden/#comments Wed, 19 Nov 2008 16:49:14 +0000 kusustainability http://sustainableku.wordpress.com/?p=63 ]]>

Being outside makes people happy. Studies have shown that kids who play outside learn better than kids who stay indoors all day. Such benefits probably carry over to some degree into adulthood. When you garden, you gain exercise, fresh food, and a sense of accomplishment. Gardening also has many environmental benefits, such as improving soil, air, and water quality, reducing the amount of processing and transportation used to get vegetables, and providing habitat for insects and other wildlife.

Campus Garden is a KU Center for Community Outreach project that encourages people to get outside while providing fresh vegetables for campus use. The gardeners meet twice a week (Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings during growing months) to plant, tend, water, and harvest tomatoes, spinach, okra, squash, peppers, herbs and whatever else we are given. Campus Garden, located next to Grace Pearson scholarship hall, always needs more volunteers. The project is currently small, but with more volunteers could become a large producer of obviously local veggies. For more information contact Margaret Tran at earth@ku.edu

- Jessica

Editor’s Note: This post is one in a series published by students in the Sustainability Learning Community at KU. Additional posts from this series can be found under “LC” on the Categories list.