Dye Weighs In, Defends Lewis Center Energy Use

To the Editors:

Professor John Scofield is correct when he states in his letter to the Review of Oct. 12 that several of the important original objectives of the Adam Joseph Lewis Environmental Studies Center have not been met. Most notably, the Center has not reached its targets for energy use and efficiency. I agree with Professor Scofield that it is important that we be open about the shortcomings as well as the successes of this building.
Oberlin College has been acknowledging publicly for well over a year that this new building has fallen short of its energy goals. Although some part of the explanation for these shortcomings lies in the fact that the HVAC control software needs further adjustment, it is also the case that there were some serious engineering mistakes and flaws in the building's design. One such mistake is the electric boiler beneath the atrium that Professor Scofield mentions. Spokespeople for the College and I have spoken and written publicly about these shortcomings since they were identified after the building's construction.
I have commissioned a study of the Environmental Studies Center's design and construction records in order to learn exactly how and why the energy systems in the building were designed as they were. This study is being conducted by the firm of Facilities Resource Management (FRM), which currently manages Oberlin's physical plant. Once this study is complete, I will communicate its findings to the campus and to the larger Oberlin community, as well as to the many others who have taken an interest in this building.
In the meantime, the College is moving forward with the first stage of a mechanical upgrade to this building. Specifically, we have engaged a new engineering firm to design a replacement of the electric boiler with a set of water-to-water heat pumps.
I think that it is important to recognize that despite the shortcomings, there is much to praise about this building: the imaginative and rigorous efforts of the many faculty and several generations of students who dedicated themselves to its planning, and the visionary leadership Professors David Orr and David Benzing have continuously brought to this enterprise. The fundamental mission of the Center is to teach and, indeed, the entire building teaches us all a great deal about the possibilities of sustainability. That the building did not open with all of its systems working as hoped and intended does not mean that the building is a failure. Far from it. In fact, it seems to me that the Center's imperfections offer that many more opportunities for Oberlin faculty and students to understand the real problems involved in trying to create completely sustainable structures and to work to find realistic and effective ways to solve them.

–Nancy S. Dye
College President
I think that it is important to recognize that despite the shortcomings, there is much to praise about this building: the imaginative and rigorous efforts of the many faculty and several generations of students who dedicated themselves to its planning, and the visionary leadership Professors David Orr and David Benzing have continuously brought to this enterprise. The fundamental mission of the Center is to teach and, indeed, the entire building teaches us all a great deal about the possibilities of sustainability. That the building did not open with all of its systems working as hoped and intended does not mean that the building is a failure. Far from it. In fact, it seems to me that the Center’s imperfections offer that many more opportunities for Oberlin faculty and students to understand the real problems involved in trying to create completely sustainable structures and to work to find realistic and effective ways to solve them.

–Nancy S. Dye
President