Sep 26 2014

Urban greening in the City of London

Leave a comment

MW - profile photoMichelle Warbis, LSE Environment and Development student, proposes an amendment to the  City of London’s  ‘Community Infrastructure Levy’ that could promote the growth of urban green space in the Capital – despite a policy landscape that has previously hampered greening by prioritising revenue-generating building developments. 

‘Greening’ is considered a policy priority both locally and nationally.  Though outlined in England’s National Policy Planning Framework (NPPF) and the London Plan, it has become increasingly difficult as an era of high growth, spurred by increasing urban land exchange values at the cost of use values takes hold.  London perhaps epitomises this transition, as new developments for business, entertainment, retail, housing and public services pop up more rapidly, and at higher cost – economically and otherwise – than ever before.

At present the London Plan and the NPPF have placed increased emphasis on both quantity and quality of green space, though the provision of such space is still not a statutory requirement in the country.  The City of London – one of the capital’s 32 boroughs – provides an interesting case study in the problems and possibilities of urban greening as a result of its truly unique governance structure, its position as a global leading financial centre, and of course its unusually small size.

Currently at less than 5% green space, the area falls well below London average, problematic for both environmental and social ills.  A major issue for the City of London is the requirement for floor space for business.  Adverse to the recommendations in the NPPF and the London Plan, the City’s Core Strategy highlights the need to increase floor space stock for business by 1,150,000m2 by 2026.  As such, the likelihood of increasing the borough’s green space above 5% under current plans is unlikely – to say the most.

City land-use

Figure 1: Charts showing current land-use in the City of London. Statistics taken from City of London Core Strategy.


Problematizing the City’s greening further is its governance structure:  it’s highly complex and fragmented, decision making is littered with private-public partnerships, and the interdependence of international global businesses and finance allows the City to operate outside of common regulation.  Additionally, the City’s Lord Mayor, removing the borough from wider London mayoral activities, grants the City the right to run its own affairs.  This is arguably best demonstrated by allocation of ballot papers to City workers and businesses, in numbers of which dwarf the tiny 8,000-person residency.

City green map

Figure 2: Map showing location of green spaces in the City of London (not to scale).    Source: City of London Core Strategy


Clearly, a full circle is in action:  businesses operating in the City of London exert disproportionate control over floor space stock decisions, in a context where there is a lack of statutory requirement for green space, and where the City has a high degree of autonomy.  These conditions point towards a continued decline in green space and urban greening as the built environment of the City of London continues to grow outwards and – increasingly – upwards.

It is this upwards growth, however, that may provide a feasible solution to the City’s urban greening dilemma.  In July 2014, The City of London Corporation introduced a Community Infrastructure Levy on all development within the borough.  Under this policy, housing developments and business, retail or leisure developments must each pay a levy, or tax, per square metre of net additional floorspace.  This rate varies depending on the type and location of development.  The Corporation then uses this money for community benefits, which may range from public leisure facilities to care for the elderly.

So why may this enable an increasing upwards flurry of green space?  Research undertaken in April and May 2014 indicated the potential to include voluntary urban greening in new developments through this levy.  It is proposed that the levy’s baseline per square metre should be increased and then proportionally reduced where plans include urban greening in the form of green roofs and walls.  This reduction of per square metre levy would be proportional per square metre of urban greening provided.

The higher quality and more equitable (e.g. accessible) the proposed greening, the higher the rate of increase, eventually taking the levy back to its original per square metre rate.  Where developments still choose to opt out of greening, the finance derived from the increased levy should be ring-fenced by the Corporation for their own green projects which may include road-widening for tree planting, altering existing buildings with greening or expanding or improving existing open green space.

A win-win seems to appear:  urban greening takes place privately, at the hands of developers by way of avoiding an unnecessary tax, or alternatively, ring-fenced revenue from an enforced tax will enable publicly funded greening.  Of course tax levels must be set efficiently to avoid moral hazard and ensure cost-of-greening to cost-of-tax equity, but following this, the simplicity of an existing levy alteration has the power to be incredibly effective:  earlier research pointed towards upwards urban greening has the potential to grow the City’s green space to 8% (up from 5%  – ie a conservative estimate of a 67% increase) by 2031.

Community levy outcomes

Figure 3:   System diagram showing likely outcomes of an altered Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). Implementing alteration leads to growth and urban greening.


Indeed, new urban life presents challenges to sustainability, and the ‘sustainable city’, though currently in vogue, may seem little more than a buzzword. However the potential for the tiny, densely packed City of London, as discussed here should give us hope for simple yet pioneering, low-cost yet effective, win-win solutions to problems of the increasing demise in urban green space, metropolitan open land or ‘natural’ environment in an urban setting. However, for such policy alterations to truly take effect there will need to be a proactive and innovative attitude exhibited by businesses and development agencies concerned.

Though the City of London can lead by example through the levy, at the core of such contemporary urban challenges is the need for cohesion between local authorities, businesses, residents – and indeed all those with a stake in the future of urban space.  Without shared goals and a wide understanding of the benefits of urban greening, a voluntary mechanism, though desirable, may not cut it.


This article was corrected on 29 September 2014:  It originally stated that the CIL applies per m2 of land – in fact it applies per m2 of net additional floorspace. 

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: , , , ,

Aug 29 2014

Sustainability Careers: A New “Traditional” Path?

Leave a comment

Meaghan Krohn - smallBy Meaghan Krohn, who graduated from LSE with an MSc in Environmental Policy and Regulation in 2013.

One of the biggest hurdles I face in my transition from graduate school into my career is that my chosen career path – corporate sustainability – is not a traditional profession. I went to The London School of Economics and Political Science, which is a fantastic institution with a supportive and enthusiastic Careers Centre. However, most of the job postings and career fairs on campus were geared towards more classic trajectories like finance, accounting and consulting. I found myself wondering where corporate sustainability fits in, and how I can find a job when everyone seems to be looking for Wall Street traders and business analysts.

The more I thought about what sustainability means to me and how I want to make my mark on the world, I realized that separating “traditional” careers from what I wanted to do was part of the problem. Corporate responsibility is only going to be effective if it breaks down the misconception that “traditional” businesses and sustainability are mutually exclusive.  Sustainability isn’t separate from business strategy, it is an integral part of it.
This summer, as an Environmental Defense Fund Climate Corps fellow at Syniverse, I have had the opportunity to do just that: integrate responsibility and the triple-bottom-line into a company’s business strategy.

I was thrilled to be matched with Syniverse for my fellowship precisely because of how the project fits into my goal of integrating sustainability into the business world by breaking down barriers and working on a paradigm shift. In order for sustainability ideals to gain traction in traditional business settings, practitioners need to speak to executives in their own language and highlight how it fits into existing structures. Materiality assessments do just that. Materiality is a concept
borrowed from accounting, and refers to issues that may impact the way a reasonable investor would make an economic decision about a company.

A materiality assessment asks stakeholders – anyone affected by the businesses’ operations – how important they think certain issues are to that business. I surveyed internal stakeholders and compared executives’ opinions against those of employees and managers. I asked how strongly certain topics could impact Syniverse’s business operations. The results of the assessment show which issues are more or less critical to both parties. Some of the results were predictable. For example, executive managers rated global operations as a more critical issue than directors and lower-level employees. This makes sense since it is the executives’ job to think about global business strategies, whereas directors and managers tend to work more regionally. Both groups of stakeholders also recognized that extreme weather events – increasingly more common due to climate change and especially relevant given Tampa’s location on the Gulf Coast – have a strong impact on Syniverse’s business operations.

With the information from the materiality assessment, Syniverse can design programs that focus on those issues that both groups of stakeholders see as highly impactful to the business. It doesn’t make sense to invest resources on something that does not provide value to the business.

As a sustainability practitioner, I aim to improve a company’s social and environmental impact, and that means looking at the organization’s DNA and infusing sustainability principles in every action. Every company – even “conventional” ones – benefits from this shift, and I’m happy to have spent the summer helping Syniverse on its journey.

Sustainability may not be a conventional career path yet, but as Jeff Selingo, author of College (Un)bound says, “The jobs of tomorrow just don’t exist today.” To bridge the gap between today and tomorrow, practitioners must show how traditional fields and sustainability interact to yield success along all three bottom lines: people, planet and profit. When they come together, the result is an almost limitless realm of cost-saving, revenue-generating, energy-reducing possibilities!

This article originally appeared on the EDF Climate Corps blog on 18 August 2014. 

About EDF Climate Corps

EDF Climate Corps ( taps the talents of tomorrow’s leaders to save energy, money and the environment by placing specially trained EDF fellows in companies, cities and universities as dedicated energy problem solvers. Working with hundreds of leading organizations, EDF Climate Corps has uncovered nearly $1.3 billion in energy savings.  For more information, visit  Read our blog at Follow us on Twitter at and on Facebook at


Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: ,

Aug 20 2014

A rubbish exhibition at the Science Museum

Leave a comment

Jon EmmettThe Science Museum is currently exhibiting a whole month’s worth of its own waste.  Jon Emmett, LSE Sustainability Projects Officer, went along to take a peek at what they put in their bins, and what it says about the institution, its visitors, and our society’s approach to resource consumption. 


In June and July this year, curators at the Science Museum spent a month trawling through their bins to see what was inside.  They extensively categorised and archived every item in this gargantuan mountain of waste, and invited visitors to get their hands dirty and participate too.  Finding everything from old banana peel, to love letters, to giant fake bombs, the waste was then brought back out and put on display later in July.

1 day's waste at LSE, on display in May 2014

1 day’s waste at LSE, on display in May 2014

Having organised similar events at LSE in the past – albeit on a smaller scale, and without the artistic and analytic features of this exhibition – I was intrigued to see this for myself.





Re-processed materials

The more generic waste streams (glass bottles, paper, etc) were sent off via their normal recycling contractors, and followed through their transformation processes into new raw materials – re-emerging into the gallery in the form of huge sacks of glass pellets, giant rolls of paper ready for sale to goods manufacturers.


Rolls of paper reaching up to the ceiling


Ground glass

Space oddities

Meanwhile, more unique items of waste – e.g. this bomb prop from an old display about the science of explosions – were kept intact, and saved to appear ‘in person’ in the exhibition.  The bomb was one of the highlights of the show – LSE doesn’t get to throw away many props of mass destruction.  Similarly, these unassuming bits of wire were once frames to make giant bubbles in the children’s ‘Launch Pad’ section.


Not a bomb.



Frames for making giant bubbles.









These games made by children were really sweet.  I wonder what they were made for?  (“Pretend to eat pork pies.”  “Slap each other when you see a yellow car.”…?)  Especially poignant is the piece of paper stuck to a lightbulb box, sternly instructing its finder “Do not throw away”.

Kids writing


But not as poignant as this tragic letter of unrequited love. Love letter


Waste reconsidered

The exhibition was curated by artist Joshua Sofaer, who has produced a number of other similar exhibitions on waste including ‘Scavengers’ at the Tate Modern, and creating a ‘rubbish library’ in Japan.  In his words, the exhibition “inverts the idea of the museum preserving what is sacred or unique, asking us to consider what we choose to keep, what we discard, and why”.

This theme is picked up in a blog post by Mark Champkins, the Science Museum’s Inventor-in-Residence (best job ever?), who describes the “disheartening pattern” he encountered, whereby much of the waste comprised perfectly good-quality items.  Numerous pairs of shoes, enough clothes to fill a suitcase, and three wheelchairs were all retrieved.

The curators clearly had an eye for how spotting the beauty in apparently mundane objects.  This beautiful tree-like pattern is formed on a piece of sandpaper used to buff the floor, while the coloured deposits on the cotton swabs below could almost be tiny segments of a painting by Seurat.

Floor sander - Copy Swabs - Copy


But while the more unique and personal items tell intriguing stories on a human level, the sheer scale of the quantity – and the quality – of goods disposed of asks broader questions about how our culture and economy assigns value to products, and when it considers them waste.

I was particularly tickled by Mark Champkins’s project to find creative ways to re-imagine and refurbish some of the items into new objects, giving them a second lease of life.  Like turning this copper funnel into a light fitting.  On a mass scale it’s difficult to see this working as a ‘solution’ to our waste and resource crisis, but it’s certainly an elegant approach to starting a conversation about how we address the underlying issues.

The Rubbish Collection demands that we rethink what we classify as ‘rubbish’, and take a more holistic view of the cycle of production, consumption, disposal, and back to production again.  Without reassessing how to achieve this in a more sustainable way, we will find ourselves running out of stuff to consume in the very near future.

The Science Museum’s ‘Rubbish Collection’ runs until 14 Sept 2014. 

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

Aug 13 2014

Reducing footprints and increasing brainprints: the role of UK universities in carbon reduction

Leave a comment

Tim Pryce - Carbon TrustTim Pryce, Head of Public Sector at the Carbon Trust, looks at the exciting opportunity for universities to lead the way to a prosperous low carbon economy and be a key part of the solution to climate change.

Given the contents of the last year’s assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change it generated surprisingly little media coverage. When you consider the potential impacts in its conclusions, it makes for some uncomfortable reading.

Backed by universities and meteorological offices the world over, the report uses the latest and best science to evaluate where we’re heading without deep and sustained cuts to carbon emissions, looking at the likely impacts over the coming decades and centuries. It explains that sea level rises could occur, flooding the homes of hundreds of millions of people – many of them in the UK. And the potential for temperature rises of over four degrees would greatly reduce global agricultural output.

However, the IPCC report is also clear that we still have time to avoid the worst effects by making a rapid transition to a global low carbon economy. And universities, in the UK and globally, are crucial to effecting that transition – so much so that the Committee on Climate Change is currently considering a report into the role of the higher education sector in combating climate change.

A sustainable development framework for the Higher Education sector, linked to the Climate Change Act

Universities have been central to driving forward our understanding of the science and the impacts of climate change. They are also where the solutions are being developed around the world to help address the environmental challenges that we are facing.

This means that a review of the role of the HE sector in driving sustainable development is timely. And the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) is currently doing just that, consulting on a framework and carbon reduction target for English universities to 2020. This is directly linked to the UK’s own legally-binding targets from the 2008 Climate Change Act, which involves making a 34 per cent reduction in carbon emissions by 2020, compared to 1990 levels, leading to a 50 per cent reduction by 2025 and an 80 per cent reduction by 2050.

In the first instance, Universities need to lead by example, reducing carbon by cutting their energy demand and using energy more efficiently in their estates and operations. Huge potential still exists from energy efficiency savings, primarily from buildings and transport. And these efficiency savings also help universities to meet two other pressing challenges – making cost savings in a rapidly changing funding environment, and differentiating themselves from other institutions in order to attract paying students. This can be seen in the hotly contested Green Gown Awards, and the vying for rankings in the People and Planet Green League.

The financial opportunity from energy demand reduction is particularly compelling – rising energy prices mean that the potential savings get larger every year. These savings alone should make finance directors sit up and listen. Since 2001 the Carbon Trust has worked with over 3,000 public sector bodies providing them with advice and carbon management services. These organisations have reported actual savings to date of £640 million, with potential future savings of £2.6 billion. As a result money is freed up for frontline teaching and research – the core purpose of the Higher Education sector.

The Carbon Trust is working with universities to help them do just this. We have worked with over 100 UK universities to help them to develop low carbon investment strategies, covering projects ranging from building retrofit to decentralised energy. And we are now taking the UK’s expertise in carbon reduction and exporting it to emerging economies such as Mexico, China, South Africa and Malaysia.

Cardiff Metropolitan University is just one example of our work to help cut carbon in the HE sector. Since working with us in 2008, the university has implemented a range of projects, including automatic monitoring and targeting of energy use, and has cut electricity use by 12% and gas use by 5%. This not only equates to total savings of around £1m over five years, it also means a significant reduction in the university’s carbon footprint.

The Carbon Brainprint of the university sector

However, thinking only about university estates and operations misses the real power of the HE sector to drive change. The wider influence of the sector is massive – examples include education for sustainable development (ESD), research, international collaboration, incubating or spinning out startups, skills development, and collaboration with local government and business.

In a joint project with HEFCE, Santander and the Carbon Trust, Cranfield University attempted to quantify the wider carbon reduction impact and potential of this wider influence – and find ways to grow this impact, as well as increasing the scale of low carbon research and teaching at the university. The term used for this wider impact is Carbon Brainprint – a way to look at the wider carbon reduction potential of the sector.

Through their education and research, universities have a hugely exciting opportunity to lead the way to a prosperous low carbon economy in the UK – and to export technology and expertise overseas. They can develop the skills and knowledge that will be crucial to mitigating, and adapting to, climate change in the future. And through their own action, they can demonstrate the reality of a low carbon economy, as well as tangible cost savings, to students and stakeholders.

By reducing their carbon footprints, and increasing their carbon brainprints, UK universities can be a key part of the solution to climate change.

This article originally appeared on the Carbon Trust website on 18 June 2014.

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: , , , , ,

Jul 30 2014

Environmental Management Systems: past, present and future

Leave a comment

Jon EmmettLast week, LSE achieved re-certification for ISO 14001 – an international standard that recognises we have robust systems in place to continually improve our environmental impacts, in the form of our ‘Environmental Management System’ (EMS). 

This was the third year running that LSE have retained ISO 14001 status, and it gave Jon Emmett, LSE Sustainability Projects Officer,  cause to reflect on developments in environmental management over the last three years, and ponder what the future has in store. 

The ghost of EMS past

When I first started working at LSE way back in June 2011, the School was just gearing up for an external audit under the ‘Ecocampus’ system – an environmental management standard tailored to universities.  My first two weeks in the team were spent frantically gathering assorted documents from all the far-flung corners of the institutions, and ensuring that various and students staff members were fully briefed in time for the big day.

We passed the audit, albeit with some ‘corrective actions’ – meaning that we had fill in a few gaps in our written procedures in order to tip us over the bar to certification.  In July 2012, we achieved the full ISO 14001 standard.

Since then (in fact since our first Environmental Policy was adopted in 2005), the incremental improvements we’ve made have often gone unnoticed at the time of their implementation.  But looking back at their cumulative effects, it’s incredible to see how far we’ve come.  For one thing, I can’t imagine these days scrambling around in the days before an audit, checking that we’ve got the right documents in place.  I just take it for granted that all that stuff is just… there.  (Albeit I help this along with a rolling programme of internal audits and legal compliance checks, assisted by a fantastic team of volunteers from across the School.)  I still always have to deal with amendments to various papers, and occasionally hunt down a stray Waste Transfer Note [a legally required ‘receipt’ for waste disposal] – but nothing like as much as I used to.

Continual improvement

We’ve been really helped by having the same auditor (Dr Margaret Rooney) for all four of our annual audits since 2011.  This has meant that Dr Rooney has been able to take a consistent approach over that time.  By remembering the people she’s met, and the processes and initiatives she’s seen, she’s been able to take a ‘big picture’ view of how the School has steadily developed.  Rather than asking the same blanket questions each year, she’s been able to recommend ways we could improve our practice that are always appropriate and proportionate to where we are along our sustainability journey.

We’ve found that successive audits have addressed increasingly fine levels of detail.  As a colleague from another university once expressed it:  first sift out the rocks (the really big errors);  then the stones (the smaller problems);  and finally the sand (the little issues where there’s always room for further improvement).  You can’t expect to resolve every minor detail in an Environmental Management System at the first attempt, and immediately end up with something perfect:  it takes time to bed in, and smooth down the rough edges.

Yet simultaneously, as the system has bedded in, discussions with the auditor have moved away from highly specific comments on the technicalities of how we document our processes, and towards a broader overview of the big things we do that have tangible benefits to our environmental impacts.

For example, the ‘corrective action’ we got in 2011 was to prepare written procedures for specific environmental emergencies – spills, etc – rather than rely on individuals who know what they’re doing but don’t have clear processes in place.  The next step was to get them embedded, by inserting them into the standard manuals of the relevant maintenance technicians and contractors, and communicating them to everyone to needs to know about them.  By 2014, the conversation had moved on, and the auditor met with LSE’s senior Business Continuity Manager to discuss how we address different  levels of emergency at different  levels of seniority, from operational level training, to Divisional-level desktop scenario exercises, to drills undertaken by high-level Gold and Silver command teams testing their responses to major potential environmental incidents.

Is it worth it? 

At times I’ve questioned whether the level of resource required to maintain the EMS is worth the hassle, and whether we shouldn’t simply move to a more projects-focused approach instead.  I also occasionally recall my Masters lecturer’s rather scathing view of Environmental Management Systems:  although they’re intended to drive continual improvement, they’re flexible in terms of scope and implementation methods, and don’t prescribe specific targets, hence don’t hold major polluters to account.

Despite these issues, I still find the overall benefits of having an EMS far outweigh any shortcomings.

The more the EMS becomes embedded in the fabric of our work, the less it becomes a standalone piece of bureaucracy, and the more it simply becomes ‘the way we do things’:  joining the dots between governance, reporting, target-setting, prioritisation of projects, performance monitoring, training and engagement, compliance checks and more.

Plus however well we think our environmental management processes are ticking along neatly by themselves, the ability to invoke the figure of the phantom auditor, and the system they symbolically uphold, remains an important part of keeping us on track.

The future

There are big changes planned, both inside LSE and externally.  Our next major challenge at the School will be implementing an ‘Energy Management System’ (EnMS), ISO 50001 – the cousin of ISO 14001.  We’ll then integrate this with our existing ISO 14001 system, to make sure all our work is pulling in the same direction, and avoids unnecessary repetition.

Meanwhile, the international environmental community is currently re-drafting the ISO 14001 standard.  The present version of the standard has been around since 2004, and has a bit of catching up to do with global changes in environmental discourse that have taken place since then – particularly a move away from focusing heavily on basic environmental compliance, and placing greater emphasis on embedding broader sustainability and reporting practices.  A new version is due to be released in summer 2015, and is expected to be stronger on strategic governance and supply chain monitoring – though we’ll have to wait and see when the details of this emerge.

Roll on our July 2015 re-certification…

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: , ,

Jun 23 2014

Book Review: The Nine Elements of a Sustainable Campus by Mitchell Thomashow

Leave a comment

In The Nine Elements of a Sustainable CampusMitchell Thomashow proposes a blueprint for making universities more sustainable. As the former President of Unity College in Maine, USA, he argues that the campus is the perfect crucible for developing ideas and action, engaging diverse communities and teaching the next generation of citizens.  Jon Emmett finds a book that may not contain simple, ready-made answers to this complex question, but which is hugely engaging and accessible, and full of inspiration for approaches that could be adopted elsewhere.

Find this book: amazon-logokindle-edition

The Nine Elements of a Sustainable Campus. Mitchell Thomashow. MIT Press. April 2014.

The strange case of the Whitehouse solar panels

In 1979, US President Jimmy Carter installed solar panels on the roof of the Whitehouse, symbolising a government drive for energy independence and efficiency following the recent Middle East oil crisis.  But only two years later President Reagan ordered the solar panels to be removed, as they clashed with his vision of an optimistic, highly-consuming America.  The panels found their way onto the roof of Unity College, Maine, in the 1990s, before one of them was eventually re-installed on the Whitehouse in 2013 – where Barack Obama wanted to demonstrate renewed presidential support for solar energy.

This flavour of symbolism and storytelling is a theme that runs pleasingly throughout a new book by Mitchell Thomashow, former President of Unity College and erstwhile owner of the nomadic solar panels.  In The Nine Elements of a Sustainable Campus Thomashow examines possible approaches to create more sustainable universities, and how this might in turn contribute to a more sustainable society.

Teaching and the curriculum

Thomashow was a long-standing environment lecturer before becoming President of Unity College, which itself is a university that specialises in environmental subjects.  Drawing on this expertise, he developed a distinct structure to provide a diverse but streamlined range of taught sustainability courses.

But more importantly than the specific solution adopted at Unity College, Thomashow describes how he sensitively managed the process of change; transforming the curriculum over a two year period by slowly engaging with and gaining the support of faculty staff until everyone was satisfied with the outcome.  He addresses many thorny challenges: managing competing strategic priorities; aligning with institutional strengths, weaknesses, and philosophies; bringing the whole campus community into decision-making processes to ensure widespread support; and linking policy with grassroots action.  It seems that, just like in the UK, unilateral sustainability diktats don’t work in universities – even if you’re college President!

Beyond collaborating with the faculty, he also espouses the benefits of the whole campus working together to develop sustainability teaching – leaders, academics, professional services staff, grassroots networks and students.  While there has been a great deal of similar work in UK universities (e.g. the HEA Green Academy), this debate is often muffled by a lack of interaction and coordination between sustainability professionals and academics.  It is therefore particularly interesting to hear this view articulated by someone with Thomashow’s academic and leadership backgrounds.

The campus sustainability experience

Given the author’s background as a lecturer, I was surprised that his view of what constitutes ‘university learning’ extends well beyond the classroom, and gives equal weight to the experiential learning of inhabiting the campus itself.  This seems to derive from his framing of university sustainability as not merely an end in itself, but a vehicle to engage with people, and shape society’s approach to sustainability as a whole.  Just as with the Whitehouse solar panels, the ability of energy efficiency projects to affect people’s environmental awareness is awarded just as much emphasis as their ability to reduce actual energy consumption.  This reflects Thomashow’s apparent aspiration to live a holistic life that transcends boundaries (work, leisure, etc), echoing of the ideals of William Morris.

He perceives students’ experiences of sustainability at university to be particularly critical, because at such ‘turning points’ in their personal development, they are likely to form new habits which then stick throughout life – including behaviours that relate to the environment (recycling, etc).  This view is also supported by research in the UK, including by Defra, though Thomashow is cautious of jumping to conclusions, and suggests the need for further long-term study.

In the same spirit, Thomashow advocates the importance of the examples set by college leaders: the values of transparency and accountability; sign-posting and explaining sustainability initiatives, not just ‘doing’ them; environmentally-themed art installations that produce a ‘sustainability aesthetic’; and buildings designed to foster an appreciation of their relationship with the materials and energy they use (as LSE attempted with the recent Saw Swee Hock Student Centre).

However, despite Thomashow’s skill in drawing together these diverse strands of university life into a unified vision of progress, readers may be surprised that environmental research is not addressed as part of a sustainable campus, except in the context of conducting research on the university itself in its mode as a ‘living lab’ for sustainability.  Many academics would certainly testify to the importance of robust research in furthering our understanding of environmental issues and informing public policy.

Broad appeal  

Thomashow’s style throughout the book is to provide broad reflections on the issues at play, rather than focusing on technical details of implementing individual projects.  This makes the book highly accessible to a wide audience – also helped by its easy-to-follow structure and the excellent clarity of the prose.  It also makes the author’s insights flexible enough to translate to universities in a variety of settings across the globe.  Indeed, I was frequently struck by the familiarity of many of the scenarios, challenges, and even specific conversations encountered by the author in a small specialist college in rural America, compared with my experiences of sustainability across the UK university sector.

The potential drawback to this approach is that seasoned environmental managers probably won’t pick up new tips on how to reduce their energy bills.  It also left me wanting more – particularly because of Thomashow’s highly personal account of his tenure at Unity College.  After his struggles with obtaining campus-wide backing for his plans, what happened next? What tangible examples are there to demonstrate the successes of his initiatives?


Overall I found Nine Elements an inspiring read. For those already familiar with the field it may not offer startling new solutions to achieving sustainability overnight, but it does provide nuanced insight into how we might undertake the journey in an accessible and engaging way.  At a time when we still need many more university leaders who vocally champion sustainability, it is particularly significant that someone in Thomashow’s position has added his weight to the growing body of voices calling for profound sustainability transformation, in universities and beyond.

This book review originally appeared on the LSE Review of Books, on 3 May 2014.

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett

Jun 9 2014

LSE Celebration of Sustainability 2014

Leave a comment

Vyvyan EvansBy Vyvyan Evans, LSE Sustainability Assistant. 

After hundreds of recycled batteries, thousands of Fairtrade teabags and one or two electric heater amnesties, Green Impact 2013-14 has come to an end.

"Reclaimed boards": cockney rhyming slang for 'awards'.

‘Reclaimed boards’ – cockney rhyming slang for ‘awards’.

We celebrated in style at our annual Celebration of Sustainability awards ceremony held on 22nd May in the magnificent Shaw Library.  Students and staff from across the School were awarded for their involvement in Green Impact and their many other achievements in improving the sustainability of the School.

The event was hosted by the School Secretary Susan Scholefield, who did an impeccable job of steering us through the mountain of awards to be presented. This year the awards were made out of some rather fine reclaimed oak floor boards from a recent LSE construction project.  (Pictured.)

Rosebery Hall nabbed the hotly contested Platinum award for scoring the most points of any team. (In fact, Rosebery nearly fell off the leader board they had so many points!). Click here for the list of awards won by each team.

Rosa Gil, colelcting Rosebery Hall's Platinum award.

Rosa Gil collecting Rosebery Hall’s Platinum award.

On top of the Green Impact awards and announcing the Student Switch Off winner, we also awarded five special awards for LSE departments and individuals who created ingenious projects, or who generally stood out in another way in the area of sustainability.

This year Passfield Hall won for their student engagement idea of adopting a plant,

Gerald the Leprechaun

Gerald the Leprechaun

Residential Services won for the creation of Gerald the Leprechaun (pictured), who popped up all over the place with green tips.  Gerald almost stole the show, but did eventually agree to share the stage with Dan Reeves from Estates Division and Andra Fry from the Library who both won a Fairtrade hamper for the sustainable projects they have both been involved in over the year.  (I was actually more than ready to part with these hampers, as my desk had started to develop a pungent aroma due to a particularly pongy blue cheese that I popped in the hamper.)


Dan Reeves and Susan Scholefield 

The special awards also recognised Justine Rose from ODAR, for her outstanding contribution to sustainability.  Speeches were given by Michelle Farrell from the NUS, and LSE Head of Sustainability Martin Bolton.

A highlight of the awards event was a rousing speech given by Dave Scott, (pictured above) Departmental Manager of the Maths department, who is currently on sabbatical.  Dave’s sabbatical has been a busy one!  As well as working as a voice-

Dave Scott

Dave Scott

over artist (maybe this is why the speech was so rousing?)  Dave has begun a beer brewery project, which was the topic of his talk.  Dave’s brewery business (try saying that after a sip of his beer!) aims to be as green as possible, by minimising the amount of water and energy consumed, minimising wasted grain, and making transportation of products as efficient as possible.  (For example, he only uses UK hops, rather than importing them from America.)  During his talk, Dave discussed the challenges and costs his business has faced on its sustainability journey.

Julia Manning, student Green Impact Project Assistant

Julia Manning, student Green Impact Project Assistant

The relevance of Dave’s wonderful talk to the audience sat before him was that despite many difficulties that come with being green, particularly in a working environment, LSE staff and students have made clear their commitment to the cause.  A final reward came in edible form, with a delectable buffet laid on by LSE Catering.

At the start of the Green Impact programme this academic year, I anticipated spending much of my time meeting people and trying to convince them of the merit of the Green Impact scheme, but at the celebration no one needed convincing.  It was crystal clear that every department, every member of staff and every student who had contributed were proud to have been a part of the project.  All the changes that departments have put into place; from window boxes to double sided printing, are a steps to make a positive contribution to the sustainability of the School.

Overall a busy year with outstanding results. Bring on next year’s Green Impact!

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with:

May 30 2014

Visit to Ecopark waste treatment plant

1 Comment

LSE staff visited the Ecopark waste treatment plant in Edmonton, North London.  Jon Emmett, LSE Sustainability Projects Officer, looks back at the sights, sounds, and smells of this enlightening trip.   

LSE’s Sustainability Team, along with residences staff and green champions, went on a tour of London Waste’s Ecopark waste treatment centre last week.  We wanted to see for ourselves what exactly happens when waste leaves your bin, and gets carried away to the fabled, usually unseen land of ‘recycling’ – where rubbish is processed into raw materials, composted, or burned to generate electricity.

Our tour guide, Wendy, summarised the history of the plant, and the waste streams they take.  We had an interesting discussion about the nuanced considerations and trade-offs involved when deciding on optimum infrastructure options, local partnership arrangements, operating capacities, and more.

Group photo - small

The LSE visitors model Ecopark’s spring collection.

Then we were straight off to the energy-from-waste plant.  Walking along a raised gantry, we looked down into the abyss of a row of 70 foot deep concrete hoppers, each containing mountains of household refuse from the seven boroughs served by the North London Waste Authority.  The rubbish was grabbed by a giant claw that snatched up two tonnes with each swoop, and deposited onto the grate of the furnace, where it burns at 850°C.  The scale and aesthetic of the scene was reminiscent of an epic sci-fi movie.

Waste hoppers.  Don't fall in...

Waste hoppers. Don’t fall in…

We moved onto the furnace control room, where we spoke to the engineers who monitor the burning waste, ensuring the process is kept in balance.  Live displays of the emissions in the flue gas appeared on giant screens.  The engineers have a variety of tricks up their sleeves to control the conditions inside the furnace.  For example, if carbon monoxide levels are too high, it means the burn is incomplete due to too much moisture in the mix, so they turn up the heat using gas burners.

Ground control

Ground control

The remaining gaseous emissions are scrubbed using a three-stage filtration process.  Dust particles are collected on giant electrostatic plates (like rubbing a balloon on your hair), and then knocked off into silos.  (This ‘fly-ash’ is transported off site in sealed containers to industries that require alkaline-rich materials, including cement product trials.)  The gas is then cooled with water, before lime and activated carbons are injected to neutralise acidity and absorb other pollutants.  Last of all, a fine fabric mesh filters out remaining lime and dust.  All that is left is water vapour – none of what we see leaving the chimney is smoke.  (Annual emissions data is published on their website – hopefully this will go some way to alleviating public concerns over the potentially harmful by-products of incineration.)

We visited the ‘engine room’, which feels like walking through a tropical butterfly house, where steam superheated by the furnace drives turbines that generate electricity – enough to power 72,000 homes per year.  Moving outside, we saw a mountain of ‘bottom ash’ – the remains of the incinerated waste.  It gets sold for use in aggregates, and Ecopark ash has been used in the construction of the Olympics amongst other things.  Nearby was huge pile of iron objects, picked out from the conveyor belt of bottom ash with a magnet, to be sold on for use in manufacturing other products.  The mountain of charred white metal forms, some of them just discernible as the remnants of household objects – a bedspring;  an oil can;  even a shopping trolley – formed an eerie assemblage that could have been on display in the Tate Modern.

Any old iron.

Any old iron.

I noticed that the architecture is very blunt and ‘to the point’.  I recently visited the Victorian sewage pumping station at Crossness in South-East London (not for work, I’m just that tragic), which abounds with brightly painted wrought-iron flowers set into railings, and where even industrial crank shafts are elegantly formed and decorated.  This contrasted sharply with the uniform, corrugated iron structures of Ecopark, which served as an interesting reminder of how the social expectations of municipal infrastructure shift over time.

Our last stop on the tour was the compost tunnels.  Long, high sheds are filled with such large volumes of green waste that it reaches around 60°C.  The sheds are pressurised like an aircraft cabin to keep bad smells in, and the air filtered through bark chips to absorb the odours.  After spending about six weeks moving through a succession of tunnels, the compost is ready for use in gardens and farms.  According to a friendly passing compost engineer, the smell is seasonal, and with a slight time-delay: March compost smells of discarded Christmas trees, and May compost smells of grass cutting from March.  Ecopark do a monthly compost giveaway, where local residents are invited to bring a shovel and help themselves from a 15 tonne heap of compost.

Compost tunnels.

Compost tunnels.

Ecopark isn’t content to rest on its laurels – it has big plans for future development.  Designs are underway for a District Heating Network that will supply warmth to local homes and businesses with heat given off by the incinerator.  There are even plans to develop amphibious vehicles that could transport materials from Ecopark to manufacturers along the canals.  If this idea comes to fruition, I can imagine it actually making big changes to the way that industrial transport infrastructure as a whole operates in the capital – a really interesting opportunity to watch out for in the future.

All photos courtesy of London Waste Ltd, except group photo of LSE staff, by Neil Lawrence.

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: , , ,

May 19 2014

EAUC Annual Conference 2014

Leave a comment

Elena Rivilla-LutterkortElena Rivilla-Lutterkort, Sustainability Officer at LSE, looks back at the annual conference of the Environmental Association of Universities and Colleges (EAUC), a national network that drives sustainability in further and higher education.  She found optimism, stimulating debate, and ideas for action…

Last week I attended my first 3 day-long EAUC conference. Waking at an ungodly hour to arrive in Nottingham just in time for a cup of tea, we (the team) were off to the first conference session.  A challenge on what motivates us to do what we do. Though the speaker tried to keep things simple (it was before 10 am), talking about universal values and attitudes leading to types of behaviour, the lively discussion soon had everybody re-assessing this simple approach and thinking about a shifting prioritised scale of values, with some delegates arguing values make us who we are, and others proposing that values are about how we would like to be seen.

With no agreement reached, we moved onto the first main plenary, joined by other arriving delegates. My takeaway thought from this was Andy Nolan (Director of Sustainability, University of Nottingham) exhorting us to “Think big. Don’t be afraid to try and make those bigger things happen.” In fact one of my recurring thoughts throughout the conference was that as a sector, sustainability in higher education is now starting to reach a maturity point, where we should start pushing boundaries. The progress in forwarding the sustainability agenda and the availability of new technologies means the timing is almost right (if it weren’t for our financial woes) and that as a sector we should be preparing these big ideas, crazy projects to go ahead in the near future.

It really wasn’t till the second day that it hit me for real, that it wasn’t just greenwash and optimism. The higher education sector and the influence of sustainability professionals is key to the whole environmental mess. This golden thread of what our students could achieve with knowledge, tools and understanding underpinned most of the sessions I attended. The message was clear, if we really engaged at a whole different level with our staff and students, we could be talking with the people whose new sustainable habits and thoughts could literally save the planet. I kept thinking of LSE with its 140 nationalities represented – say only 2 people per year go back to each country. Over a decade that would equal 2800 students spread across 140 nations. Now consider that LSE has 9,500 students, with around 2,000 students leaving each year. And then scale up nationally, and then globally. The potential to influence humanity in general is huge!

Probably realising this, one of the delegates spoke of a new survey for students  conceived during the 2012 Rio+20 summit. The test is aimed at students to take as they arrive/leave to measure what they’re learning on sustainability just by being at our institutions, and is soon to be advertised among universities with 6 language options. Hopefully it will provide a benchmark of general sustainability knowledge around the world. Cambridge University spoke of emulating American universities in turning their buildings into a “Living Lab”, something I hope we can also develop at LSE; though perhaps with a different angle to it – after all our students are social scientists, not mechanical engineers!


The power of storytelling was first mentioned at the bittersweet pre-dinner event, highlighting how to use stories as an ice-breaker to deeper conversations. I admit to being more interested in the story behind the sustainable table centrepieces (pictured above), made by a local charity from reused materials. Storytelling appeared again at the close of the conference, where Prof. Damien Hughes highlighted PIXAR’s ‘storytelling template’ as perhaps one of the most successful (no I didn’t use it in this blog!).  It also left us with the somewhat challenging headline statistic that it takes at least 5 repetitions in the sales world to get consumers to buy the advertised product (and even then, only about 8% of the target audience buys the product), leading me to think that I’d better come up with a different strategy when addressing my daily problem of people putting the wrong items in bins.

What else is there left to say? The conversations were stimulating, the company pleasant and the catering (which used seasonal and local products where possible) was fabulous. All in all a very productive conference – of course, now we need to put ideas into action!

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: ,

May 12 2014

LSE Green Week 2014

Leave a comment

Vyvyan EvansVyvyan Evans, LSE Sustainability Assistant, looks back over the thrills and spills of our Green Week 2014 (28th April – 2nd May).  From bikes to bees to bins, it had a little bit of something for everybody.

18 mended bikes, 52 honey-dipped bread sticks, and many a bag of waste later, we have come to the end of the 2014 Green week.  Here’s a quick review of what we got up to…

We started the week with an electricity generating bike. Staff and students were able to see exactly how much oomph (technical jargon, describes the measurement of pedal power) it takes to charge their gadgets, thanks to an ingenious contraption borrowed from Global Action Plan, a sustainability NGO.

Pedal-powering a light bulb.

Pedal-powering a light bulb.

Electric car

Test-driving our solar-powered car.

There was also a Sinclair C5 electric car charged by a solar panel, which a few brave souls took for a spin around campus courtesy of Jellytree. It was a brilliant afternoon which allowed people to really engage with the topics of carbon and energy.

Tuesday saw a Food Cycle information stand. Food Cycle is a UK charity which works to reduce food poverty and social isolation by serving delectable nutritious food to vulnerable people around the country using reclaimed surplus food. As well as telling people about the project, the stand informed people on the subtle difference between ‘display until’ / ‘best before’ labels on food.  It also encouraged people to flex their culinary skills in a green sustainable way by trying a suggested dish. (Click here for more recipes.)  All the recipes are designed to help you use up what you have in the cupboards, (a ‘chickpea chuck in’ recipe as my mum calls it, where whatever you have goes in a pot with a few herbs and spices, and voilà.)ddle power) it takes to charge their gadgets. There was also a Sinclair C5 electric car charged by a solar panel, which a few brave souls took for a spin around campus. It was a brilliant afternoon which allowed people to really engage with the topics of carbon and energy.

On Wednesday we borrowed a bit of Houghton Street to show anyone and everyone walking past what 3 hours’ worth of LSE waste looks like. The purpose of this very visual display, as well as engaging people on the topics of consumption and recycling, was to highlight the many problems of contaminated waste we see on campus, with things put in incorrect bags. (Over the years we’ve seen it all – from misplaced plastic bottles, to fishing out an IKEA lamp shade still in the packet, and even an electric guitar amp put in the general waste bins). Wednesday’s waste day was graced by the presence of the LSE Beaver mascot, who, in cahoots with a couple of other ‘Bin Detectives’, loitered around the bins ready to pounce into action when someone put their items in the wrong section of the bin, and guided them to the correct choice.

1 day's waste at LSE 2014

Green Beaver shows us one morning’s waste at LSE.

By Thursday we turned our focus to travel. We had a brilliant Dr Bike maintenance session. Many tenacious ‘all weather cyclists’ had battled through the temperamental showers and made it to the bike clinic. Chains were ratcheted, saddles adjusted, and stubborn reoccurring punctures were finally repaired.


A queue builds up at Dr Bike's waiting room

A queue builds up at Dr Bike’s waiting room.

The mystery of the slipped chain...

The mystery of the slipped chain…









The week of eclectic events came to a buzzing finale with an ‘LSE bees’ stall.  Unfortunately due to the inclement weather, it was a little too cold from the bees to come out (I know how they feel!). But we had our practised beekeeper Luke Dixon who was armed with lots of information on the hives, and the life cycle of bees. There was a brilliant competition to spot the queen bee in a photo, and contestants (even those who needed a little help in spotting the Queen) were rewarded with a taster of some delectable LSE honey.

We are looking forward to hosting the next Green Week. If you would like to be involved, or have an idea, please let us know in the comments below!

Posted by: Posted on by Jon Emmett Tagged with: