Solar power on campus just makes sense


Elizabeth Gu | Daily Trojan

Elizabeth Gu | Daily Trojan

Students of the USC Environmental Core, an organization that aims to reduce USC’s environmental impact, held a public demonstration late last month to urge USC to install a system of solar panels that would allow the University to replace 10 percent of its energy with solar power by 2020. Following the demonstration, the Environmental Core sent a comprehensive business plan to administrators that summarized its research on the idea and proposed several options for bringing solar energy to campus. Both the provost’s and the president’s offices responded, thanking the students for their hard work. However, whether USC will actually install solar panels on campus is still up in the air. Considering the financial and environmental implications of bringing solar to campus and how USC influences the development of Los Angeles, the administration should install solar panels on campus.

According to Ethan Bialick, a member of USC’s Environmental Core, installing solar panels on campus could actually be financially beneficial to USC. Some solar business models allow USC to lease unused rooftop space on campus to a solar company, which would install and maintain solar panels at no cost to the University. The energy generated by these solar panels is sent back to the city. A quote from solar company SolarCity estimated that by leasing 500,000 of square feet, USC could gain $125,000 annually, or $2,500,000 over 20 years, slightly below the average lifespan of most solar panels.

Moreover, solar power on campus brings environmental benefits. Los Angeles has historically poor air quality and regularly tops the list of Most Polluted Cities in the yearly State of the Air report conducted by the American Lung Association. By installing a solar power system, USC could curb its use of fossil fuel-based energy and, thus, reduce the city’s overall pollution and carbon dioxide emissions.

In addition, being a greener campus makes the University more attractive to college applicants. According to The Princeton Review’s 2015 College Hopes & Worries Survey Report, 60 percent of college applicants and their parents reported being “somewhat, very much or strongly” affected by “a college’s commitment to environmental issues” in their decision to “apply to or attend a school.”

Facing these convincing numbers, one might wonder why USC hasn’t already implemented solar power on campus.

“USC is a very risk-averse institution. There are potential risks from solar that they want to avoid. For instance: What if solar intensity is lower than expected? What if the solar panels stop working optimally?” said Bialick, who said he has been in several talks with USC administrators about the Environmental Core’s proposal. “When I spoke to the energy manager last time, the economics were not the problem; the problem was  the potential that something could go wrong unexpectedly.”

A reluctance to accept risk should not be the deciding factor in USC’s choice to implement solar. Yes, the University should take into account the potential failures and technical bugs that come with implementing any new technology. But as a leading research institution that claims to “[play] an increasingly important role in the development of the nation and the world.” USC needs to lead the push for solar power. USC has played a major part in the development of Southern California for over a century, and continues to impact it today. To keep in line with its mission, the University should welcome solar technology and the increased credibility, research and education opportunities that come with it.

Other colleges have already recognized the importance of leading the way to solar and have installed solar panel systems on their campuses. These schools include Stanford University; the University of California, Irvine; the University of California, San Diego and the California Institute of Technology. A case study in the Environmental Core business plan, Occidental College has supplemented a whopping 11 percent of its energy with solar power, which saves the college $250,000 annually and cuts down on carbon dioxide output by 1,250 metric tons a year. The fact that USC is not among these universities is a detriment to its reputation as a leader in the development of the region.

USC should make a decision on solar by Dec. 31, 2016, when the Solar Investment Tax Credit, a 30 percent tax credit for solar panel systems on residential and commercial properties, will expire and likely result in higher solar electricity rates. Hopefully, the administration will take heed of the research that the Environmental Core has presented and incorporate solar energy into its new sustainability plan.