What started as a month-long campaign by the Environmental Action Committee (EAC) and Harvard Students for Wind Energy to pass a College-wide referendum on instituting a term-bill fee to support a wind energy initiative has become a University effort to which the administration will contribute handsomely.

University President Lawrence H. Summers announced in March that the University would dedicate $100,000 annually for at least three years to wind energy, an amount that will be split between purchase and research.

A WINDY PATH

The road towards this effort for cleaner and more environmentally-friendly energy has not always been smooth.

Alexander L. Pasternack ’05 and Allison I. Rogers ’04 spearheaded the endeavor in a University-wide renewable energy drive that resulted in a College-wide referendum last December. The proposal was passed by an overwhelming majority of voters—82 percent of voting undergraduates.

The Harvard College administration did not originally view the proposition as favorably.

The student body passed the proposal as a $10 opt-out term-bill fee, but the administration was reluctant, saying that it didn’t want the term-bill to become a “laundry list” of charitable donations, especially after the passage of the opt-out student activities fee increase last spring.

“The term bill is to finance the educational mission of the University, not to finance social action of any kind,” Summers said at the time.

The proposal was eventually rejected by Dean of the College Benedict H. Gross ’71.

GRADUATE SCHOOL SUPPORT

The Kennedy School of Government (KSG) and School of Public Health (SPH) soon announced, however, that they would help foot the bill to pay for the development of wind energy to power the Harvard University campus.

KSG students had previously voted in favor of a mandatory term-bill fee that would pay for all of the KSG’s energy to be derived from renewable sources.

Jaclyn T. Marks (KSG ’06), Assistant for the Energy Technology Innovation Project at KSG and a Harvard College Wind Power Initiative Leader, lauded the administration, saying that there was “no resistance” and that it was “a simple process to get a vote on term-bill addition.”

She also said that SPH, which buys half of its energy through wind energy certificates, was even more amenable to the idea: the initiative there was started and supported by the administration and did not even require a student vote.

NEST EGG

The $100,000 promised by Summers is nearly double what would have been collected under the opt-out term-bill fee that undergraduates had approved in the referendum.

Summers also stated that along with the promised money, the University has created a special advisory group, made up of both students and staff, which will assist in determining how the money is spent.

In addition, a $3 million loan fund has been created to facilitate payment for the adaptation of buildings to make them more energy-efficient.

BABY STEPS AT THE COLLEGE

The College’s place in the wind energy effort is somewhat less sure. Gross has said that the College will make a contribution, but the amount has not been publicized.

Gross declined to comment on the contribution last week. In an e-mail, he wrote only that it would be made and that there would be a student-led effort to raise funds.

Both Rogers and Marks declined to state exact numbers when discussing the funds that would be dedicated to the effort by the College.

“Dean Gross showed responsiveness by showing commitment through initial funding, which was a clear sign that the administration knows that renewable energy is important and that student body thinks that it is important,” said Rogers, noting that Gross allocated money from his own budget.

However, Rogers also said that the amount of energy that could be purchased with Gross’ contribution would be only a “beginning step.”

Marks was somewhat more critical, characterizing the College’s contribution as “a minimal counter-offer [compared to the amount that would be raised by a term-bill fee]”.

Gross said that he regards wind energy as “an important campaign” whose details will be announced in the future.

Both Rogers and Marks agreed that the $100,000 promised by the University is a “sizeable” and “significant” step. They also agreed, however, that the University must do more.

Marks advocated that the University do more to be a “leader” and even recommended that the University not just purchase renewable wind energy, but also invest in its production.

Rogers also emphasized the importance of student involvement in groups like the Harvard Green Campus Initiative (HGCI) for raising funds and awareness.

Scot Miller, EAC co-chairman for this past year, was optimistic about the future of renewable energy at Harvard.

“Merely by purchasing wind power, you are also investing in it by increasing demand,” he says. “It will be interesting to see what kind of a plan the President’s office and the HGCI come up for the long-term future.”

—Staff writer Matthew S. Blumenthal can be reached at mblument@fas.harvard.edu.