|
|
|
By Racquel Palmese
“When you sit in council for the welfare of the people, you counsel for the welfare of that seventh generation to come. They should be foremost in your mind, not even your generation, not even yourself, but those that are unborn. So that when their time comes here they may enjoy the same thing that you are enjoying now.”
Oren Lyons, Faithkeeper, Onondaga Nation
With unemployment in California holding steady at around 12 percent, the demands on community colleges to train and retrain workers is growing. The largest postsecondary educational system in the world, the California community college system already serves over 2.8 million students, accounting for 73 percent of the state’s public college students and one quarter of all community college students in the U.S.
Ninety-four percent of community colleges reported increased enrollment in a recent survey by the California Community Colleges (CCC) Chancellor’s Office, having gained some 150,000 students in one year. At the same time, according to CCC Chancellor Jack Scott, an additional 140,000 students were turned away this academic year.
Budget cuts and the tide of new students have left the system’s facilities straining to accommodate everyone. Its 112 campuses, 69 off-campus centers and 22 district offices incorporate 21,600 acres of land, almost 5,000 buildings and over 64 million gross square feet of space. Yet it’s far from enough.
Over the next five years, enrollment growth is expected to require 15 million new assignable square feet (ASF – the amount of space between wall surfaces, paint to paint, that constitutes the area required for a given program) at community colleges in California. A massive modernization effort is also needed, as 74 percent of community college buildings are over 25 years old, and 60 percent are over 40 years old. These buildings not only waste energy, they are inadequate to train a workforce in new technologies.
Many community college districts have been undergoing building and renovation projects, especially since the passage of Proposition 39 in 2000, which lowered the voter approval requirement for local school bond measures from two-thirds to 55 percent. Proposition 39 also mandated that bond funds could not be used for operating expenses or salaries. Since then, $22.8 billion in local bonds have been approved, and with additional support from a 2006 state education bond of $1.5 billion, many community college building projects have been launched - with more to come.
At present, a $6.1 billion general obligation bond to construct and modernize educational facilities, AB220 (Brownley), is making its way through the California legislature and slated for the November 2010 ballot. Many pitfalls could halt its progress, but if the bond does make it to the ballot and is approved as it is currently written, community colleges would receive another $800 million. UC and CSU would divide up $350 million and the rest would be allocated for K-12 school districts.
The Plan
Meanwhile, the Chancellor’s Office has presented a Five-Year Capital Outlay Plan for the California Community Colleges to the Governor. It includes $18.6 billion of capital facility needs for the CCC system. Of this amount, $11.1 billion is for new facilities construction and $7.5 billion is for modernization of existing facilities. An additional $9.3 billion of currently identified facilities is deferred to 10 future years.
“At this time,” says the report, “the total unmet facilities needs for the community college system have been estimated at approximately $27.9 billion.”
The first year of the plan, covering 2010-2011, includes 248 projects totaling $2.1 billion. There are 82 state-funded projects, ranging from a $2,224,000 student services building at Antelope Valley College, to a $25,625,000 learning resource center at College of the Desert, to a modernization of the Schott Center at Santa Barbara Community College District for $1,038,000. The total of all these projects is $1.024 billion. Of that, the state is funding $593 million and the rest, $431 million, must come from local districts. The remaining $1.1 billion for this year’s 166 projects are to be funded solely by local districts.
A Better Mousetrap
While up-to-the-minute details on the status of each project are not easily obtainable, Fred Harris, assistant vice chancellor for the CCC Chancellor’s Office, says that many of the projects that are called for in the first year or two of the five-year plan are in progress, and districts are now researching products and services.
“All the districts will be open to those who can provide a better mouse trap,” he said. “We have $1.6 billion from the state for community colleges to move forward over a two-year bond. A lot of districts are leveraging local money against these bonds.” Harris says that projects for 2011-12 will be made public this month.
As far as how green these projects will be, he says, “in broad strokes, in 2011-12 we’re proposing 86 projects, and 69 of them will exceed Title 24 by 10-15 percent. This shows where the focus is concentrated – to build efficiently on a 60-80 year investment.”
Green Building Codified
In January, 2011, a new era in building construction in California will begin, as the state’s new green building code, CalGreen, becomes mandatory. Filling the need for more seats at higher education institutions will inevitably take a sustainable path.
Shifting from what are now voluntary green building codes, in January, all new buildings at community colleges will be required to meet CALGreen standards.
Water and power conservation and indoor air quality will need to be addressed in a number of different ways. From commissioning and efficient HVAC [heating, ventilation and air conditioning] systems, to acoustical controls, parking for fuel-efficient and clean air vehicles and low-VOC paints, sealants and carpet, a baseline of sustainability has been fixed into California’s Building Standards Code.
“The community colleges have made a commitment to sustainability and have made great strides,” said David Thorman, California State Architect. “The CALGREEN code is a fantastic opportunity to collectively move all our college campuses toward sustainability and continue the fight to save California’s natural resources.”
The CCC-IOU Partnership
To help community college districts move forward with green building projects, the California Public Utilities Commission established the California Community College-Investor Owned Utilities (CCC-IOU) Energy Efficiency Partnership in 2006. The consortium includes the CCCCO and the four investor owned utilities, Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas & Electric, San Diego Gas & Electric and the Southern California Gas Company. It set ambitious goals of saving 19,000 kilowatts, 84 million kilowatt-hours (kWh), and 2.5 million therms of natural gas. To help achieve this, the Partnership committed $22 million in incentive funds to community college districts.
In September the California Public Utilities Commission approved $3.1 billion for 2010-2012 energy efficiency programs, the largest such commitment in the history of the state. All CCC districts are now eligible to receive 2 percent of construction costs for new buildings that exceed Title 24 by 15 percent, and 3 percent of construction costs for modernization projects that exceed Title 24 by 10 percent.
The CCC-IOU Partnership assists community college districts with energy efficiency retrofits, monitoring-based commissioning, energy efficient new construction and training and education. Dan Estrada, Energy and Sustainability Specialist for the CCCCO, works closely with the Partnership. He says there are currently “somewhere in the vicinity of 120-130 projects that are committed for renovations or retrofits – big and small – from lighting upgrades to energy management systems, to changing HVAC systems.”
There are 118 energy efficiency projects that have already been completed, representing about $39 million in project costs. “For 2010 we have goals to save over 14 million kWh and more than 413,000 therms of gas. Colleges will receive $3,666,401 in energy incentives based on 24 cents per kWh on an annualized basis and $1 per therm. This will be spread over about 60 campuses – which means we’re working with about half of the 112 colleges now and hoping to do more.”
Estrada says that the current three-year objective is to provide almost $16 million in total incentives. “Some projects are more dynamic than others. For example, we’re having tremendous success in the area of ventilation management projects.” He refers to San Joaquin Delta College in Stockton, which retrofitted a 2007 allied science building, upgraded the energy management system for $292,000. The project will save over 320,000 kWh and over 80,000 therms and will be eligible for $161,000 in energy incentives. On top of that, they financed the remaining $131,000 through the California Energy Commission’s low interest loan program at 1 percent. The return on investment was pegged at just one year.
According to Estrada, the life cycle benefits are enormous for implementing energy efficiency. In IOU-served campuses, the ten year effects of three-year CCC-IOU programs result in electricity savings of over 725 million kWh and more than 23 million therms of natural gas. Every $4 spent on sustainable facilities yields $2 in energy savings. Every $1 invested by a district for sustainable facilities improvements through the 2009-11 Partnership will yield $2 in energy savings over the next ten years.
An example of a CCC-IOU project is Citrus Community College District, which built a new central plant with thermal energy storage, replaced ita HVAC units, installed new boilers and replaced exit signs with LEDs. The district’s IOU incentive was $318,982; with a capital investment of $11,308,408, the annual electricity savings will be $1,000,007 and gas savings will be $18,495. The total 20-year estimated life cycle savings are over $17 million, with a net life cycle benefit of over $6 million – money that can be used by the district’s general fund for operating expenses and salaries.
Many of the projects cited by the CCC-IOU partnership have been certified by the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) rating system. The Skyline Facilities Maintenance Center at San Mateo CCD attained a LEED Gold rating. Of the two buildings that make up the center, one is 17 percent and the other is 26.8 percent more energy efficient than required by code. There are six Partnership projects at San Mateo, yielding an annual operational savings of $1.5 million for the district in electric, gas and water.
Additionally, the District received an incentive from PG&E for $1,008,157, along with $168,792 from the CCC-IOU Partnership and $129,930 from Savings by Design. In the works now are four buildings including a student services and administration building, new workforce and aquatic center, an automotive technology building and others with total contract amounts of over $200 million.
Estrada says that while financing is tricky right now, a number of campuses have passed bonds. Some projects are moving forward. “We’re hopeful about a new wrinkle coming into the partnership for campuses,” he says. “Sempra Energy is offering zero-interest, on-bill energy efficiency loans through their financing program, and Southern California Edison is scheduled to begin an on-bill financing program of their own. Pacific Gas & Electric will also offer zero-interest loans for energy efficiency projects, but customers will receive a separate billing statement. All these programs are expected to launch on August l. We hope to have a number of campuses take advantage of these programs.”
Another Partnership model is taking place at Foothill-De Anza CCD, where the district is working with design teams and construction teams to identify additional energy efficiency projects. “The Partnership has brought additional engineering to that district,” explains Estrada, “with the college funding a portion of it and then PG&E funding the rest. We are providing an engineer to come in with the team to look at the plans and see if there are appropriate energy efficiency measures that apply to incentives.”
“It is happening,” says Matt Sullivan, who works for Newcomb, Anderson & McCormick, energy engineering and program managing consultants for many of the CCC-IOU projects. “There are a lot of very aggressive new construction programs. Colleges are starting to understand the whole green building thing. That doesn’t mean it’s easy. Obviously there is still a lot of education that needs to be done, and that’s what we’re doing.”
Moving Forward
In its 2009 AASHE Digest, the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education highlighted many green building projects completed in 2009. Among them is the Mesa College Allied Health Education and Training Facility, a $28.9 million, 50,000 square-foot structure registered for LEED Gold certification. Also in the San Diego area, its new Skills Center, a 67,010 square-foot addition to its Education Cultural Complex now registered for LEED Silver.
Pierce College in Los Angeles opened its new Student Services building in November, 2009, and is seeking a LEED Silver certification, and Butte College collected all student services in one green building that features solar panels and no-flush urinals and is going for LEED Gold. Also at Butte, a brand new 77,000 square-foot Arts Center opened in September 2009,with energy use at 35 percent above the California Energy Code requirements and water consumption at 48.5 percent less than traditional buildings.
The list goes on, with colleges realizing more and more than green buildings are not only good for their bottom lines, they are the teaching tools needed to provide a healthy environment for the next generations.
|
