All of the programs, facility maintenance, and upgrades proposed thus far in the 2015 iCAP are supported by a variety of sources:

» Campus utility budget.

» Energy Performance Contracting – using cost savings from reduced energy to pay off the initial investment. Requires an upfront debt.

» Deferred maintenance – a student fee dedicated to funding maintenance that was previously needed, but couldn’t be done due to lack of funding.

» Central campus budget – one-time allocations for individually approved projects.

» Student Sustainability Committee – student fee supported $1.1 million to grant each year to sustainability projects proposed by students, faculty, and staff.

» Revolving loan fund (RLF) – Established in FY12 to pay upfront for projects and then is reimbursed by utility savings (energy, water, materials).

» External grants.

» Private donations.

» Sale of carbon credits – In FY15, our campus sold carbon credits to Chevrolet, which retired them on behalf of the environment, in order to support emission reduction projects.

To learn more about each of these sources, please refer to the complete 2015 iCAP. Goals: Ensure all the best ideas for reducing our greenhouse gases can be realized.

Objectives:

35. By the end of FY16, develop criteria and a review process for the iCAP Working Group to allocate funding for feasibility studies of SWATeam-recommended sustainability projects and initiatives, using funds provided by campus administration and other sources.

36. By the end of FY16, increase the size of the Revolving Loan Fund to a level commensurate with our aspirational peers, expand the reach of the Fund, and increase the use of Energy Performance Contracting.

37. By the end of FY16, identify the amount of funds that are available across campus for projects that do not offer a rapid financial payback, but which are nevertheless important for improving campus sustainability, and identify options to increase that amount annually.

38. By the end of FY16, evaluate the feasibility of internally putting a price on carbon emissions.

»There are real costs associated with emitting carbon into the atmosphere, but the campus doesn’t currently pay them. The campus could choose to “charge itself ” for those costs, and use those funds to support emission reduction projects or to purchase carbon offsets. This would provide individual units with a financial incentive to reduce their emissions.