by Laura Velarides 

The Rose Valley wetlands, owned by the Rose Valley Swim Club, sprawl across approximately two acres, complete with a tumbling waterfall over a natural stone wall and lush greens as far as the eye can see. However, due to the introduction of non-native plants 
called “invasives,” the wetlands are overgrown with unruly plants that the ecosystem is ill-Dr. John Smith, a biology professor emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania, is working on restoring the wetlands of Rose Valley, which happen to be in his own backyard Wetland areas are crucial for controlling floodwaters during storms as well as purifying the water that’s flowing, which in this case is Ridley Creek. According to Dr. Roger Latham, an ecologist and conservation biologist of Rose Valley, “Wetlands provide a habitat for native plants and animals that are found in no other kinds of habitats; those plants and animals have declined as wetlands have disappeared as a byproduct of human activity.” 

Smith first started working on the wetlands in 2008 while on the Rose Valley Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), of which he is still a member. At the time, the EAC was working to remove invasives from the Saul Wildlife Sanctuary and the Long Point Wildlife Sanctuary. Smith saw the same need in the Rose Valley wetlands. He began by simply pulling English ivy off tree trunks so the weight of the ivy would not pull the trees down. Each year since, he has accomplished the bulk of the wetlands work, along with help Smith’s goal is to gradually reintroduce native plants as invasives are reduced. 

According to the Rose Valley EAC’s website, “Invasive species typically harm ecosystems by killing off or crowding out native species. They disrupt mutually beneficial relationships between native species.” While native plants are naturally controlled by local insects and other animals that eat them, non-native plants have no checks and balances, and therefore “Invasive species are one of the earth’s severest threats to biodiversity,” says Latham. The invasives that are most harmful to the Rose Valley wetlands include Norway and Japanese maple trees, multiflora rose, English ivy, and unidentifiable grasses. 

At the center of multiple adjacent neighborhoods, right next to the swim club, the wetlands is a common path for neighbors and for children walking to school. “My kids would run around here for hours,” says Linda Doyle, Smith’s neighbor and a fellow member of the Rose Valley EAC.  “They used to run down here to be the first ones to swim in the waterfall. They took some awfully cold swims.” Branching off the long-established main trails, some of the paths used by Doyle’s family and the rest of the community were created 

Smith grew up on the “edge of wild country” outside Toronto. During World War II, he helped train the Canadian Air Force in aircraft recognition. After the war, he moved to the countryside, where, he says, “There were no airplanes, but there were other flying 
things – birds.” Thus he began a study of birds. Smith can identify birds by just their songs. “Listen to that,” he says, cocking an ear 
out his open window. “That’s a house wren. I named him Einstein because he’s not so Many birds in the area make their nests in the banks of the wetlands, such as water thrushes, but have been unable to nest due to invasives. As Smith begins to clear the area again this year, he urges residents to plant only native species. A list of invasive plants to avoid can be found on the Rose Valley EAC’s website.“Preserve what can be preserved,” Smith advises. “There are so few wetlands left. You want to grab every one of them and protect it.

”Laura Velarides is an intern at the local environmental group aFewSteps and a rising senior at the University of Delaware, studying Professional Writing and Journalism.

by  Alexander Kirschner


The fossil fuel divestment movement is moving more quickly than any divestment movement of the past. Starting at Swarthmore College in 2010, the movement exploded on university campuses and among other institutions that manage large investment funds, such as philanthropic organizations and varying levels of government, when international environmental organization 350.org launching a worldwide campaign in 2012.

Activists and supporters of the campaign, myself included, argue that divestment is a tried and true strategy that environmental activists can use to initiate necessary structural change via governmental policies to reduce our dependence on dirty fuels.

Beyond government, institutions that lead our society--universities in education, philanthropies in altruism, and economic organizations in growth--combat climate science denial funded by the fossil fuel industry and manipulated by politicians, raise public awareness on the human rights implications that arise from a changing climate, and support economic and environmental priorities for sustainable living.

But some are unconvinced, including journalists covering the campaign, and the fossil fuel industry, which funds studies finding divestment to be ineffective. This skepticism comes from the difficulty in measuring divestment’s impact, as well as powerful stakeholders’ ability to manufacture doubt.

I often talk with my professors to convince them to throw their support behind my university’s campaign. One in the economics department exemplified the difficulty in understanding the power of divestment. He stood up, switched off the light in his office and stated matter-of-factly, “Now that’s real.” Never mind that roughly half of Illinois’ electricity comes from nuclear energy or that the money saved from switching off the light might be put toward one of the university’s never-ending, energy-intensive construction projects.

This encounter demonstrates the gap in understanding of how best to fight climate change. In economic terms--something this professor would understand--it involves opportunity cost. Any little action (like turning off the lights) is good, but environmental activists need to focus on tactics that effect the most change in the shortest period of time. My professor contends that even if every university divested, the direct impact on fossil fuel stock prices is likely to be negligible. But making this argument, as a reason to oppose divestment, is fundamentally wrong in that it is incomplete, which is why fossil fuel companies support studies stating this argument but at the same time worry what this divestment movement might do to their companies. Activists pursue divestment because it is a highly effective means of publicly denouncing companies that put profits over people and the planet, as well as increasing public pressure for political action on climate change.

Thus far, policy to mitigate and adapt to climate change and alleviate issues of environmental injustice has been vastly inadequate. Further, politics of the 1990s and 2000s have led to the fossil fuel industry being subsidized $10 million every minute, per an International Monetary Fund estimate. The IMF also found that the richest twenty percent receive over two-fifths of the benefits of these subsidies, while the poorest twenty percent cash in at only seven percent. Climate change modelling also predicts the poor will also suffer the most from the effects of continued fossil fuel use. The finding debunks industry rhetoric that environmental activists are ignoring the needs of the poor. Under a business-as-usual scenario for fossil fuel consumption, industrialized countries will continue to pollute the planet with the poorest being subjected to the worst of its effects.
 
The bottom line is that divestment campaigns have proven to be a successful approach for global change. Research conducted by Oxford University in 2012 found, “In almost every divestment campaign we reviewed… [the movements] were successful in lobbying for restrictive legislation.” Such legislation may incorporate a carbon tax or limitations on emissions from power plants and automobiles. Specific examples from past divestment campaigns include the Comprehensive Anti-Apartheid Act of 1986 and the Sudan Accountability and Divestment Act of 2007. Such policy for fossil fuel divestment would look like a carbon tax or legislation restricting emissions from power plants and automobiles.

The capability of divestment to create the political change we need is why influential leaders have backed the movement. Desmond Tutu, a renowned activist who promoted divestment from the Apartheid regime, wrote an op-ed in The Guardian supporting a similar campaign for action on climate change. Likewise, President Obama, possibly drawing from his experience as an anti-Apartheid college activist, encouraged college students at Georgetown University to push for divestment in 2013. Georgetown divested from coal this past June after an extensive campaign by the student-led organization GU Fossil Free.

While one university or other institution may not have an impact, as institutions divest, they can create a domino effect. I have witnessed this personally in discussion with my university’s CIO and Trustees, which routinely features Stanford’s divestment decision.  The power of divestment comes from the collective action of activists and institutions, which is notable because the fossil fuel divestment campaign has been moving faster than any movement of its kind. Despite all the criticism and industry opposition that the movement has received, it will continue to grow and, along with the broader climate action movement, spark sorely needed international action on climate change. Those who oppose divestment, from the individual belittling it as a feel-good action to those making decisions for their respective institutions, will not stop it. However, they are casting doubt on a proven and powerful tactic for change. And in turn, this doubt slows down the movement by giving reluctant investors a pass for inaction. The last thing we need to be doing when acting on climate change is slowing down.

Sheila Magee, gardener with the Scott Aboretum, took aFewSteps summer interns Alex Kirschner and Laura Velarides on a tour of Swarthmore’s green roofs and explained how the vegetative roofs have become an important feature of the college buildings. “I think that it is important for places like Swarthmore College to model creative methods for keeping our planet as cool as it is,” said Magee. “We are well positioned to experiment with technologies and to educate people about what we find.”


The college installed the first green roof in 2002, and has since expanded the project to include five buildings on campus, including the Wister Center, Alice Paul Residence Hall, David Kemp Residence Hall, Papazian Hall, and, the newest, Lang Performing Arts Center.


“I believe that we should be innovating less consumptive practices anywhere and everywhere that we can,” said Magee. “Green roofs are a step in that direction.” These roofs have significant advantages over traditional roofs: they can absorb an inch of water, which helps to control the flow of storm water runoff; they provide buildings with protection from the weather, decreasing the need for air-conditioning and heating; they need very little maintenance; they are natural and beautiful; and they extend the life of the roof itself by 30 years or more.

Click here to watch a video of the green roof installation at David Kemp Hall.

For a second straight summer, aFewSteps, the local environmental group, is helping area houses of worship reduce their energy use and save money.  According to Phil Coleman, president of aFewSteps, most churches and synagogues in our community could expect to save 10% or more on their energy bills just by tracking their energy use and making two or three minor no- and low-cost improvements.

Sometimes the savings are more than that.  Beth Israel Synagogue in Media cut over 40% (more than $8,000) off its annual bill after pursuing a fuel switch (oil to natural gas) and a major equipment change-out inspired by suggestions from aFewSteps.  While working with Swarthmore United Methodist Church (SUMC), Coleman spotted big increases in natural gas consumption, on the order of several hundred dollars per month, the winter before last and alerted the church.  It turned out that the SUMC’s aging boiler had been malfunctioning.  A quick fix created a short-term remedy and, more recently, the church replaced the boiler.  “It’s kind of like forcing yourself to get on the scale every morning – sometimes just paying attention and monitoring is half the battle,” says Coleman.

“This summer we’d like to help a few more HOWs save money.”  Coleman and aFewSteps summer intern, Alex Kirschner, a rising junior at Northwestern University, use ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager software to track the energy consumption of local houses of worship and compare that usage to peer facilities, adjusted for size, weather, hours of operation, etc.  “We can usually get a pretty good idea of how much a facility could be saving if they made a few small changes,” says Coleman.  “Our goal is to help church and synagogue administrators better understand their usage and how to go about achieving those savings.”

The Portfolio Manager software assigns buildings a percentile (1-100) score that provides a benchmark to comparable facilities, and, just as importantly, allows the house of worship to track its progress against itself over time (adjusted for changes in weather and any other relevant variables).

aFewSteps will create a Portfolio Manager account and enter the first few years’ worth of usage data for any house of worship in the WSSD footprint.  Afterwards, Kirschner and Coleman will train one or more individuals designated by the HOW in how to maintain the tracking (it takes about two minutes per month).  The only requirement to participate is to provide aFewSteps at least a year’s worth of the facility’s energy bills, grant access to the facility for roughly an hour (in order to measure the building and assess how heating and cooling are handled), and answer a few questions about typical operations (hours of use, etc.).

Houses of worship interested in reducing their energy use should visit aFewSteps’ website or contact Phil Coleman directly at [email protected].

With the official start to summer just a couple of days away, aFewSteps is once again offering block party organizers “Waste-Free Party Kits” at no charge. Each kit contains tips for hosting a waste-free party, large plastic bags for collecting recyclable waste, and very importantly, laminated signs for labeling trash and recycling receptacles. Research shows what experienced organizers have found to be true: if trash and recycling bins are more than six feet apart, everything ends up as trash.

For more tips can be viewed on our waste-free page, including having partygoers provide their own dishes and silverware, and serving drinks in large containers.

Swarthmoreans continually come up with creative ways to reduce waste, including this idea to avoid disposable vinyl tablecloths. Adorning tables with old sheets, Stacy Clements, in charge of decorations for her block party, left fabric markers for neighbors to write messages on them, adding messages with each new year.

  To request a “Waste-Free Party Kit,” please send us an email.

Laura Velarides is a rising senior at the University of Delaware, studying Professional Writing and Journalism.