Hope Next Door: How Climate Solutions Are All Around Us
By Meghan Cleary
If asked several months ago what climate solutions I had personally seen enacted, I probably would have said something like recycling or hand dryers in the bathroom instead of paper towels. In fact, much of my knowledge of sustainability efforts hinged on a project I did in the second grade. I was tasked to create a poster illustrating the actions people could take to help the environment within my home county of Loudoun in Northern Virginia. As I labored over drawing “Keep Loudoun Beautiful” in bubble letters on my 8” by 11” piece of paper, I thought about what actions I would illustrate on my poster. I decided on recycling, taking colder showers, and walking rather than driving. I remember my eight-year-old self feeling emboldened by my groundbreaking contribution to the climate mitigation effort, flaunting my poster to my family while simultaneously scolding them for throwing their soda cans in the trash and taking steamy showers.
Thirteen years later, I’m now a student at a university with a robust sustainability program. The programs that have been implemented at the University of Virginia extend far beyond what sustainability efforts looked like to me in the second grade. The University stays true to the basics I outlined in my second-grade project, like recycling, encouraging dorm residents to take shorter showers, and creating a bike and public transport infrastructure that effectively eliminates the need for cars among students. But its efforts to reduce the amount of carbon it emits into the atmosphere stretch far beyond what I had ever considered possible. Projects to make current buildings more energy efficient, like Delta Force, have reduced the university’s carbon emissions by 180,000 metric tons and have saved over twenty million dollars in energy costs (UVA Sustainability). And yet, some of these climate solutions are not readily apparent: the small LEED certification plaques that adorn the entrances of many of the university’s buildings often go overlooked despite the fact that they symbolize a monumental effort by and paradigm shift of the university to reduce its contribution to climate change. If these substantial sustainability efforts didn’t reveal themselves to me until I actively searched for them, I wonder how many other important climate mitigation efforts are being undertaken locally and around the world that I just haven’t seen yet.
The range of readily available climate solutions is laid out clearly in an important book I read for a recent class I took. That text, Drawdown, outlines a wide variety of climate solutions in what editor Paul Hawken calls “the most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse global warming.” The term drawdown describes the point at which the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere peaks and subsequently begins to decrease. It is this concept of drawdown that, according to Hawken, makes a reversal of global warming possible. The plan outlines current actions that can be scaled up in a variety of different “solution sectors.” A key tenet of these solutions is the fact that they are viewed by the Drawdown team, a collaboration of scientists, economists, policy experts, and engineers, as being not just solutions to the climate problem, but opportunities to cultivate justice for marginalized groups, save people money, and live a more beautiful life.
One of the solution sectors outlined in Drawdown is Buildings and Cities. This sector proposes changes to urban infrastructure as well as changes in the way we build both residential and commercial buildings. Drawdown details the carbon emissions-saving effects of making cities more walkable, creating a bike infrastructure, and retrofitting buildings with energy-efficient upgrades. Before being introduced to these concepts, and notwithstanding the wisdom of my eight year old self, I still imagined energy-efficient upgrades to be only space-age, highly visible alterations to homes and landscapes like solar panels or wind turbines. Drawdown showed me that making homes and cities energy-efficient doesn’t necessarily require large scale changes to existing infrastructures, and that climate mitigating upgrades are already hiding within seemingly ordinary buildings and structures.
The University of Virginia and Charlottesville employ many of these types of “hidden” climate solutions. Infrastructures in Charlottesville specifically designed for pedestrians and cyclists are perhaps the most ubiquitous. These “town and gown” efforts to entice members of the community out of their cars have huge implications for the climate mitigation effort. According to Drawdown, the combined global impact of improved pedestrian and bike infrastructure would avoid over five gigatons of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere. And Charlottesville is just one example of a place where climate mitigation is made a priority when decisions are made about urban planning and the future of new and existing buildings. Cities around the world are making strides towards becoming more sustainable and mitigating climate change. Drawdown breaks down urban planner Jeff Speck’s “theory of walkability” to three essential elements; safety, comfort, and interest. The City of Charlottesville and the University of Virginia achieve this in a variety of ways.
In terms of comfort, sidewalks and vast pedestrian areas around Charlottesville make the experience of walking or cycling to your destination feel communal and friendly. I walk to class every day up the sidewalk next to University Ave. The prospect of passing by various coffee and juice shops on my way to class, potentially stopping to treat myself on a busy Friday, excites me as I get out of bed every morning. On nice days, I often venture out to the Downtown Mall, where wide open pedestrian spaces reign and local vendors interact with passersby. Traveling sustainably in Charlottesville is made interesting by public artworks intentionally peppered along pedestrian and bicycle routes. The city even has a downloadable guided pedestrian/bicycle art tour to make walking and biking that much more enticing (Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation). I’ve seen many of these artworks through the window of my car, as I drive the very walkable distance from my house to shops and restaurants. Walking this route would allow me to take time to fully appreciate the artworks I’ve passed so many times, and maybe even learn about how they got there from the guided tour. The prospect of encountering these attractions may just entice me out onto the sidewalks!
Stepping off the sidewalk and onto the front steps of a typical Charlottesville building, it may seem like we’ve reached the end of our tour of climate solutions related to infrastructure. But many of the solutions outlined in Drawdown, such as LED lighting, heat pumps, smart thermostats, and insulation can be installed in existing structures, or retrofitted onto existing buildings. This makes seemingly ordinary buildings the perfect place to explore what strides have been made towards making Charlottesville more sustainable. My favorite walk in Charlottesville is the one up the Lawn towards the Rotunda. The Rotunda, with its rich history as a founding structure of the university and its UNESCO world heritage site status, might seem like the least likely place for energy-efficient upgrades to be installed. Surprisingly, the Rotunda and two of the pavilions that flank the ancestral academical village are LEED certified, meaning they have met a set of rigorous standards for energy efficiency. These old and revered structures have undergone upgrades to their heating and lighting systems to make them more energy-efficient, while the most historic and characteristic parts of their structures have been preserved (Zork). It is easy to think that the best way to protect the past is to preserve its structures exactly as they were, but there is no better demonstration of respect for the past than ensuring that the earth is protected in the future. If the Charlottesville community was willing to risk the integrity of one of its most important monuments for the sake of reducing carbon emissions, imagine the efforts that are being made to upgrade other commercial and residential buildings.
The global impact of retrofitting existing buildings with energy efficient upgrades amounts to over 21 gigatons of carbon dioxide reduced from the atmosphere. But these upgrades have impacts outside of climate mitigation, with an almost 6 trillion dollar net savings in energy costs associated with buildings that have been retrofitted (Hawken). The financial savings of retrofitting buildings with LED lighting, smart thermostats, heat pumps, and insulation alone, is one fourth of the United States national debt (US Debt Clock, as of March 5th, 2020). These solutions are not only significant reducers of atmospheric carbon, but important money-saving measures for homeowners and commercial building owners. Retrofitting as a money-saving upgrade to existing buildings makes it a great solution for communities everywhere. Saving money is something people from all ends of the climate spectrum can agree on. Recognizing the more tangible effects that retrofitting has on members of the community is an essential part of including all people in the climate mitigation effort.
My house in Charlottesville is typical for students. Inefficient windows make the inside temperature subject to the whims of the weather outside and cause the outdated heating system to work overtime. Incandescent light bulbs use up more energy than their LED counterparts would, while leaky faucets waste gallons of water a week. Aside from the fact that these problems have negative implications for the environment, they cost me and my roommates hundreds of dollars a month in utility bills that could be avoided. Looking around at the perpetually open doors and dilapidated exteriors of my neighbors, I’d say energy inefficiency is not uncommon among the houses in Charlottesville. How then are the city and its residents coping with the high costs and carbon emissions these problems cause?
In Charlottesville, residential energy use is responsible for 29.8% of the total carbon emissions for the city (Charlottesville 2016 Greenhouse Gas Inventory). The impact that retrofitting many residential homes in Charlottesville with energy efficient upgrades could have on both reaching the city’s stated goal of a 45% reduction in emissions by 2030 and in solving another major issue in Charlottesville, the affordable housing crisis, is vast. The best part is that it’s already happening.
In 2009 an organization called the Local Energy Alliance Program, or LEAP for short, was formed to channel federal funding provided to the city of Charlottesville by the Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Leap). The funding was made available in order to create jobs through a program designed to help people weatherize their homes. A decade since its inception, LEAP is now an integral part of making the Charlottesville community more sustainable and more affordable for families. Families contact LEAP requesting an energy assessment of their home, and a LEAP representative assesses the house’s basic energy efficiency and installs minor energy efficient upgrades like LED lights. The condition of each home and the owner’s demonstrated financial need are used to determine which families will receive more substantial energy efficient upgrades, like heat pumps and insulation.
At the beginning of LEAP’s existence, roughly 300 assessments were performed annually, mostly on the homes of middle-class families. Over time, LEAP shifted its focus to addressing more low-income family homes, eventually performing as many assessments on low-income homes as market value homes. Out of the 300 homes assessed by LEAP each year, sixty to eighty will receive insulation upgrades while 25 will receive upgrades to their heating system. Most of these larger upgrades are provided to low-income households.
The LEAP program has recently launched a new division called the Housing Voucher Energy Efficient Pilot or VEEP. This program attempts to fill the gap in energy efficiency of rental properties while simultaneously addressing the affordable housing crisis in Charlottesville. Attempts have been made by the adjacent county of Albemarle to rectify the housing crisis in Charlottesville by providing low-income families with housing vouchers that subsidize the cost of rent (Albemarle County). A problem exists in this solution in that landlords are not required to accept housing vouchers by any legal means, and therefore often refuse leasing to families presenting housing vouchers. VEEP attempts to solve this issue by incentivizing landlords to accept housing vouchers by providing them with free energy-efficient upgrades on their rental properties. Upgrading rental properties with energy-efficient appliances helps low-income renters twofold, by saving tenants money from energy costs associated with old and outdated appliances and by granting them access to housing that would have previously been unavailable to them. So far, VEEP has served about 10 households, but its progress has been stunted by city officials slow to approve spending on rental property subsidies. Nonetheless, the implementation of this pilot program is an encouraging sign that the city is exploring and seriously assessing these needs. VEEP highlights the fact that if they are to be effective, climate solutions must be compatible with and well suited for the communities they serve.
My research into local housing initiatives in the context of Drawdown’s climate solutions led me to interview executive director of LEAP and VEEP, Chris Meyer. The morning of the interview, I programmed the address of LEAP’s headquarters into my GPS. After a short drive, I arrived at what looked like a residential neighborhood. Confused, I parked in a cul-de-sac near the house that matched LEAP’s address and shut the engine off. As the time drew nearer to the interview, I watched as several employees pulled up to the LEAP office on bikes, and one in a Prius. Finally, five minutes before the interview, I watched a man pull up to the LEAP building riding a bike with a covered carriage attached at the back. The man dismounted the bike, scooped his goldendoodle out of the carriage, and set him loose to roam about the LEAP headquarters. I was greeted at the door by Bear, the friendly goldendoodle, and led upstairs to Meyer’s office through a building that was sparsely furnished and had no lights on. The whole experience, from watching employees arrive on bikes to entering into the no-waste work environment, was one I could have only expected from an organization committed to sustainability.
After chatting about LEAP’s operations, I asked Meyer about the organization’s mission in terms of climate mitigation. It quickly became apparent that while LEAP has significant impacts on the Charlottesville community in terms of global warming, climate mitigation is not their primary goal. Meyer explained: “LEAP falls under the budgetary umbrella of housing” and “does not pursue any policy agendas.” This came as a real surprise to me, but it illustrates in vivid terms how targeted forms of social responsibility can lead to additional social benefits as well as important environmental gains: LEAP’s emphasis on job creation morphed into addressing the affordable housing crisis in Charlottesville and simultaneously produced meaningful climate mitigation results.
So all intentions aside, LEAP is contributing in a major way to solving the climate crisis in Charlottesville. In fact, in the city’s recent emissions report, LEAP is recognized as “one of the most significant initiatives focused on the subject of energy efficiency” (28). The upgrades completed by LEAP have amounted to a reduction in energy usage of 7 million kWh per year, which the emissions report explains is “an amount of emissions reduced equivalent to the annual greenhouse gases from 959 passenger vehicles.” (29). LEAP’s successes expose the flaws in the unfortunate, persistent idea that social and environmental solutions are mutually exclusive or even at odds with each other. And Charlottesville’s recognition of these “co-benefits” is a powerful step toward recognizing and helping to meet the fundamental needs of people struggling in the community.
A report examining the co-benefits of climate mitigation efforts on health and equality in California proved that subsidizing energy-efficient upgrades for low-income renters and homeowners was effective in bringing equity to marginalized and underprivileged groups and reducing climate-related health problems among them (Climate Change, Health, and Equity: Opportunities for Action). Programs like LEAP are being implemented around the world to help bridge the gap in access to sustainable upgrades among marginalized groups. In Inglewood, California, for example, climate change is being framed as a social justice issue to help the underprivileged groups that suffer disproportionately from its effects gain access to climate mitigating resources. In many ways, the creation of organizations that help to mitigate climate change by serving the groups most hard hit by its effects is the best way forward in the climate movement.
Having previously worked to advocate for the inclusion of marginalized stakeholders in the climate discussion at the federal level, Meyer has had ample experience working on the justice side of climate mitigation efforts. Helping people meet their fundamental needs in a way that promotes sustainability demonstrates to them how important climate solutions are. The more people who experience the net positive effects that climate solutions can have on their health and well-being, the more voices there will be speaking up for climate action. And, according to Meyer, more marginalized voices speaking up for climate action increases the overall volume of those voices, causing outcry for climate action to get too loud for policymakers to ignore.
But it is not just the volume of demand for climate action among members of the community that will influence policymakers to act on climate, it's how climate solutions are framed. In order to make solutions happen within the Charlottesville community or any community, bipartisan support for these solutions must be achieved. Meyer highlighted this point by explaining, “When climate solutions are framed as cost cutting measures, members of both parties on a governmental level agree on them. Saving money will almost always garner bipartisan support, whereas climate change solutions are almost always split down party lines.” Despite the fact that climate change affects all of us, politicians still disagree on its importance and the need for action regarding solutions. Instead of pointing the finger at one party or another, the best approach, according to Meyer, is to frame climate change as a money-saving measure, which is exactly what LEAP and VEEP accomplish.
At the conclusion of the interview, Meyer asked me where I lived in Charlottesville. I described my house, highlighting the fact that it's a disaster from an energy efficiency perspective. He invited me downstairs to talk with the staff of LEAP about setting up an energy assessment of my house. Once I had set a time and date for LEAP to perform their assessment on my house, Meyer shook my hand and wished me luck. I left the interview feeling hopeful. My discussion had been honest and straightforward. Meyer admitted to being frustrated with the limitations LEAP’s growth faced because of city bureaucracy, recognizing the fact that the LEAP model might not work in all cities. The picture of LEAP I gained from this interview is one of an organization that works within its means to help people from all backgrounds. LEAP’s willingness to help improve the energy efficiency of my home, just by hearing my description of it, demonstrated to me the eagerness with which LEAP’s employees approach all potential projects. It was enlightening to learn that people like those at LEAP, who are obviously passionate about helping others and making my community more sustainable, exist so close to home.
But why are climate solutions needed in the first place, and why was I so blind to the fact that solutions like LEAP exist before researching solutions in Charlottesville? The scientific causes of anthropogenic climate change can be described most simply as human activity changing both the composition of the atmosphere and altering the surface of the earth (American Meteorological Society).
Human influence on carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, is primarily a result of our fossil fuel combustion emissions and land-use decisions. Emissions increase atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases while natural ecosystems such as the ocean, coastal wetlands, healthy soils, and forests pull carbon out of the atmosphere. It is estimated that humans have caused an average of one degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) of global temperature increase since the advent of industrialization, and that this warming will rise to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) or more in the next ten to thirty years (IPCC).
Without concerted global efforts to reduce carbon emissions and increase carbon uptake by natural ecosystems, global warming could severely alter the climates we are accustomed to inhabiting. The good news is that solutions are being employed worldwide to address climate change, and are having compounding positive impacts on the communities they serve. But why do I rarely hear about these solutions on the news or elsewhere?
Watching the news, I’ve seen Greta Thunberg galvanize the world’s youth towards climate advocacy and action (Alter), wildfires spurred by the effects of a changing climate rage in Australia (Thompson), and President Trump withdraw the world’s second largest emitter of Greenhouse gases from the Paris Climate Agreement (Johnson). These news headlines represent the good, bad, and the ugly of the climate crisis. Thunberg’s ability to appeal to policymakers as a stakeholder in and leader of the next generation threatened by the climate problem gone unaddressed is certainly a bright spot in the climate movement. Her “Fridays for Future” have mobilized young climate advocates to spread awareness about the reality of the current climate situation and demand that actions be taken on a policy level to slow its momentum. Greta’s efforts represent, for me, an intentional and determined confrontation of the failures of the current system to address climate change. Representing the bad in climate news are the devastating Australian wildfires. These encapsulate our current climate position as being a volatile breeding ground for natural disasters of unprecedented severity (IPCC). The wildfires came as no surprise to scientists, since a study done on the attribution of the Australian bushfire risk to anthropogenic climate change found that the probability of observing a Fire Weather Index as high as the recent 2019 bushfire season has increased by thirty percent over the last century (Oldenborgh). The wildfires demonstrated to the public the worst of what scientists saw coming as the juggernaut of climate change speeds full-steam-ahead towards further disaster. Finally, the ugly of the current climate situation exists in the fact that leaders, including the President of the world’s second largest Greenhouse gas emitter (Global Carbon Budget), refuse to take meaningful action in addressing climate change. President Trump described the Paris Climate Accord as an agreement that “handicaps the United States economy in order to win praise from the very foreign capitals and global activists that have long sought to gain wealth at our country’s expense.” This statement stands as a testament to the fact that the economy is almost always prioritized over climate at the federal level, when in reality climate solutions exist that can accomplish both economic prosperity and climate mitigation.
These news headlines are disproportionately negative in tone. I think they contribute to a blindness to solutions that are being implemented in the world. And many climate solutions, like those employed by LEAP and VEEP, have impacts beyond climate mitigation. Climate solutions can be cost saving measures employed to seek justice for all people. Solutions to the problems displayed on the news are already in place, and tools like Drawdown, a book that draws on the knowledge of experts across disciplines from around the world, can help us see them and further foster their adoption. Inconspicuous things in daily life, like sidewalks or a LEED plaque on a classroom door may be the key to discovering the vast scope of climate solutions and the progress that's being made towards achieving drawdown. Hope exists in looking beyond what is readily apparent and seeing how my everyday life is touched by intentional efforts of members of my community to mitigate climate change. I am more hopeful for the future of climate change, knowing that effective solutions backed by passionate advocates exist all around me in my community. I look forward to a world where the innovative work of climate mitigators is amplified and proliferated around the world. Now, the onus is on us as a global community of climate stakeholders to seek out inspiration within our communities and spread the good news about climate mitigation to others.
