In light of the recent controversy over whether the goal of “Project $AVE” should be to save money or to save the environment, we offer the perspective that these goals go hand-in-hand. If we are using less energy and materials, it follows that we are saving both the environment and money.
Project $AVE (Sustainable and Viable Efficiencies) is a program in which faculty, staff, and students can submit ideas for ways to save energy and materials in order to increase the efficiency of the University. Many of these ideas have been implemented, and the person who submitted the best idea last semester was even presented with an iPod. It is commendable that this largely student-initiated program is (metaphorically of course) killing two birds with one stone. Saving University money helps everyone, whether through new buildings or new programs, and hopefully to be used toward higher faculty salaries and slightly lower tuition. Helping to save the environment is part of a larger effort to ensure a better world for future generations.
The University purchasing office saved over $800,000 last year, and though we cannot directly translate this into a number that shows how much we helped to save the environment, it is fruitless to argue over whether the money-saving or environment-saving aspect should be stressed. Still, Project $AVE could be improved.
We advocate spending money now in order to save money and the environment in the long run. For instance, if a building is required by fire regulations to have lights that cannot be turned off by a switch, a motion detector should be installed. It might cost money, but this one-time investment lowers energy use, energy costs (and light bulb costs) in the long run.
So instead of arguing about whether or not the “$” in “$AVE” should instead be an “S,” think of some ways Wesleyan can save green- money and the environment. And bear in mind, you often have to spend money in the present to see results in the future.
Leave a Reply