Solar energy and reduced energy consumption can save schools substantial amounts of money. ‘Green’ schools cost roughly 2 percent more to build than traditional schools, but they provide financial benefits that are 20 times greater, making energy efficiency extremely cost effective for schools, while also improving the air quality in the buildings.
Colorado Schools District 11 is a shining example of a school system that committed to energy efficiency and cost savings early on. Through their energy efficiency improvements, which they began in 2005, the district was able to significantly lower energy costs — by more than $900,000 a year — and ensure more stable energy rates for the next several decades.
This is what school districts can achieve when they put their minds to it. And they all should. Not just for financial reasons, but for the health of the students, faculty and planet — lower, efficient utility use means fewer harmful particles in classroom air, less strain on natural resources and lower emissions of harmful substances that contribute to global warming.
EEnergy costs are a significant burden for schools throughout the nation. On average, school districts collectively spend more than $6 billion on energy every year. But they could cut that collective bill by about $1.5 billion a year if they made improvements. Even if schools do nothing more than turn off lights or save electricity in other ways, such as increasing the efficiency of their buildings, they could decrease their energy bills by about a quarter, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. Unfortunately, there are still many factors that can discourage schools from going green, including higher construction costs and lack of awareness that solar energy is a financially smart way to go.
Generally, utilities are the second highest cost to schools after salaries. One good example is my district, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools in North Carolina, where the district spends more than $404 million on teachers and $23 million dollars a year on utilities. If you include weekends, nights and holidays, the school district spends more than $2,700 an hour on utilities. This is due in large part to older, leaky buildings that desperately need attention. But the more it spends on energy, the less it can spend on staff.
In last year’s budget report, district administrators wrote that “increased operating costs have exceeded our operating budget increases. As a result, we have had to make damaging cuts in staffing and programs.” And it’s only getting worse. Budgets are increasingly strained as more kids enter the school system, and utility costs rise. The result? Overcrowded buses and the loss of good teachers, who move to states with better working conditions.
The North Carolina Clean Energy and Technology Center released a report in 2016 that looked at how much money two districts could save just by installing solar panels in parking lots and on rooftops. It found that Charlotte-Mecklenburg could save more than $42 million over the next 25 years.
That’s enough money to hire 1,000 more teachers, or buy more than 700,000 new textbooks.
You can do this exercise with all sorts of school districts and the results will be the same: whatever the size, the districts (and taxpayers) will see a sizable savings. Take the Sheridan Community Schools in Indiana, where a district of only 1,000 students will save as much as $5 million in the next two decades as a result of installing solar panels.
IIt’s not just about money. Renewable energy helps protect the health of students. More than 14,000 Charlotte-Mecklenburg School students suffer from asthma, making it the leading cause of missed schools days for children with chronic diseases. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “the economic cost of asthma — including direct medical costs from hospital stays and indirect costs (e.g., lost school and work days) — amounts to more than $56 billion annually.” Solar energy contributes to better air quality for everyone by reducing the volume of fossil fuels burned.
A Solar Foundation report found that 60 percent of K-12 schools in this country could convert to solar energy at minimum cost. And some schools are beginning to do just that. Schools’ solar energy capacity grew by over 1,500 percent in just a decade, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. Still, only 3 percent of the nation’s public schools have made the switch. We need to do a lot more to make it easy for schools to go solar.
Look at California, where the California Clean Energy Jobs Act K-12 Program gives grants to schools to either become more energy efficient or invest in solar energy. The state currently allocates $550 million a year to fund schools’ transition to renewable energy and energy efficiency. So far, 52 schools have completed projects, which saves enough energy to power roughly 2,000 homes. By the end of 2016, more than 900 educational agencies submitted energy plans and many more are beginning the approval process.
Compare that to a district like Charlotte-Mecklenburg, which has no state program dedicated to helping it make the transition to solar and only small assistance from the private sector.
School districts in North Carolina are very interested in renewable energy, but the state has not created an easy market for schools to buy solar.
Currently, schools, nonprofit organizations and other organizations with tax exempt status have little financial incentive to convert to solar energy — federal and state tax credits are the primary financial benefit for using solar energy at the moment. Progressive policies like third-party leasing and state-led grants — like California’s — can be attractive, but those options aren’t available in North Carolina or in many other states.
We must create more favorable markets for buying and using solar energy. The nation’s schools deserve to have a choice about whether to convert to solar energy, but unfortunately for many schools in North Carolina and elsewhere, there isn’t one.
