George Mason University is known for being a very ecofriendly and sustainable college campus, but there are still underlying issues. One of these issues is the water quality of the waterways present in the Fairfax campus. An example of this issue is the creek located between the RAC and Mason Pond parking garage, which travels all around campus and feeds into the Mason Pond.
Resource Characteristics-
It is difficult to quantify a resource such as this freshwater stream, but there are many plant and animal communities that rely upon this stream for survival. This system is right in the middle of campus and is surrounded by buildings and a construction site to the northeast. This construction site poses a major ecological threat because of the possible waste runoff that could occur. The runoff from construction sites leads to large amounts of sediment being dumped in the water which is why the waterways are so brown on campus (Controlling runoff, n.d.). There is also a huge issue with people littering in this area and if you walk through this spot, you will see trash all around the creek.
Governance/user characteristics-
This issue has a strange interaction with the users because of the stormwater nature of the creek and pond. Mason pond is a manmade water structure that is fed completely by stormwater and this can lead to major pollution of the waterways on campus. GMU has been working with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality to get the waterways within the national EPA standards. The university also plans to meet three milestones and those are: 5% reduction of nitrogen, phosphorus, and suspended solids by 2018, another 35% by 2023, and the final 60% by 2023 (Water, n.d.). The office of Sustainability on campus is working on improving these waterways, but the issue of rapid campus growth is a major roadblock for the health of this creek. Right next to this creek is a construction site that will eventually be completed and GMU is planning on keeping this area as a green space. The issue is that most of campus used to be green space until the university decided it needed more building space, so how do we know this creek is not next?
Social/cultural/economic/political settings or related ecosystems-
Economic factors play a major role in this issue because at the end of the day, the University wants to expand and make more money through more students on campus. One of the easiest, but not best, ways to do this is to destroy most of the green space on campus and construct new buildings instead. On the other side, Mason is one of the greenest universities in the state and we have somewhat built a culture around that. Personally, the green spaces on campus are my favorite part, and I know many others feel the same because you will always see people in these areas during good weather. There is still an issue of the social norm of throwing away your trash in these green spaces and especially the waterways. This creek is almost always covered in litter and this is something that Mason students need to improve on before any change can be made.
What can we Do?
There are many actions that can be taken moving forward, but one of the simplest and most effective methods is for students to simply stop littering. This is obviously not an easy task because you cannot watch every student all the time and stop them, but there are ways to mitigate this problem. My recommendations for this creek would be more trashcans in the surrounding area which should entice more people to dispose of their trash correctly. Having more trashcans present would lower the amount of litter in the creek which would also positively affect the health of aquatic organisms (Why Littering, 2018). Another idea would be some signs with pictures and descriptions of local animal and plant species around this creek. From a psychological standpoint, when you actually show people the organisms they are harming, they are a lot more likely to avoid hurting them. As a university, we definitely need continued pushing for the sustainability goals we set out for our waterways (Water, n.d.).
If relevant
The University has not acted specifically on this creek, but they have been working towards the health of Mason Pond. Working towards the three milestones talked about earlier is the main method being taken by GMU.
Sandy Creek; it’s between Enterprise Hall, Exploratory Hall, and the Shenandoah Parking Deck.
Interaction(s):
The human-environment interaction is between Mason providing a form of transportation for students and staff between locations. This is helpful for people who don’t have a way to get to campus and between locations or for people who can’t afford a parking pass. This can help cut down emissions as more people ride the shuttles.
Resource characteristics:
The environmental side of the interaction is air pollution. Studies have shown that 29% of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions are due to transportation (Federal Transit Administration, 2010). However, it’s known that public transportation can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It reduces emissions by providing low emissions alternative to driving, facilitating compact land use, reducing the need to travel long distances, and minimizing the carbon footprint of transit operations and construction (Federal Transit Administration, 2010). A private auto produces 0.96 pounds of CO2 per passenger mile, while bus transit produces 0.64 pounds of CO2 per passenger mile (Federal Transit Administration, 2010). As you can see, a bus transit can help by carrying more people to one location. Cars can carry more people, but most people use their car for themselves to go somewhere, especially during the COVID pandemic. I ride the Burke VRE shuttle to get to campus so that I can avoid paying for the parking permit. I sometimes talk with the bus driver, and he sometimes mentions he hasn’t picked up anyone for about 2 hours. Then I thought, this bus was producing greenhouse gas emissions for no reason.
Governance/user characteristics:
The human side of the interaction are George Mason students and staff using shuttles to get from one place to the other. Also, Reston Limousine is involved for George Mason renting these buses from them (Reston Limousine, 2022). Students and staff are involved by using these buses to get to campus and between campuses. If students and staff have their own vehicle, they can buy a parking permit that costs around $245 (Off Campus Student General Lot Permit), and it’s about the same for staff members. This helps students and staff to save some money or if they just need a ride to campus. As long as people need a way to get to and from campus, George Mason will continue to rent buses from Reston Limousine, and Reston Limousine will continue to see a form of profit while school is in session.
Social/cultural/economic/political settings or related ecosystems:
There are economic, demographic, and pollution factors in this human-environment interaction. The economic factors are George Mason students and staff going to class. Only people who have a Mason ID can ride the shuttles. To receive a valid Mason ID, students pay for tuition and staff working on campus. As long as people are paying tuition, then it allows them to have access to services like riding the shuttles. The demographics are people having different reasons to ride the shuttle, like not having a vehicle, not being able to afford the parking permit, people living close to one of the bus stops, etc. The bus will always emit greenhouse gas emissions, but its considered better when there are more people on the bus than a vehicle having one person.
What can we do?:
The main implication of this interaction between humans and the environment is air pollution. One way to help reduce CO2 emissions is by having more people ride the bus. When more seats are occupied, CO2 emissions get reduced. I think bringing more awareness about the shuttles can help because I really did not want to pay for a parking permit, so I was searching for an hour for other options. It took me awhile to find that I can go to Burke VRE and get on the shuttle to go to campus. There’s a good amount of people who ride the shuttle. In Fall 2021, there weren’t a lot of people, but this semester of Spring 2022 there were more people.
Another option to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation includes increasing vehicle efficiency, lowering the carbon content of fuels, and reducing vehicle miles of travel. On the Reston Limousine website, it doesn’t mention how efficient the buses are. But if buses use compressed natural gas over diesel, it can reduce emissions. Emission rates for the Compressed Natural Gas bus were approximately 60% lower than those of the diesel bus (Rosero, et al., 2021). The use of diesel in buses is gradually decreasing and natural gas and hybrid buses are slowly increasing (Department of Energy, 2021).
If relevant:
The university has information on their website, but they should bring more awareness to it. I feel like people know that the shuttles are there, but don’t know too much about them like the locations they stop at and if they can even get on.
Citation formatting:
Department of Energy. (2021, July). Alternative Fuels Data Center: Maps and Data – Transit Buses by Fuel Type. U.S. Department of Energy – Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy. https://afdc.energy.gov/data/10302
Rosero, Fonseca, N., López, J.-M., & Casanova, J. (2021). Effects of passenger load, road grade, and congestion level on real-world fuel consumption and emissions from compressed natural gas and diesel urban buses. Applied Energy, 282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.116195
My Mapping Mason area that I decided to focus on is the Rain Garden located by the Johnson Center, and its function as a natural pollutant filtration system, as well as its function as rainwater retention. As previously stated, the Rain Garden acts as a system that filters out pollutants from ground runoff and stormwater. It mimics the same filtration system as a forest, while it is less effective than a forest, in areas such as GMU wherein having a forest in the middle of campus may be unfeasible a Rain Garden is an excellent option. The Rain Garden also reduces flooding on footpaths by soaking the water and allowing it to penetrate back into the water table. Most Rain Gardens feature a simple water diversion system that directs excess water absorbed in the ground to a sewage system. (EPA, 2021)
Resource Characteristics:
The Resources involved would be the perennial plants used, the water diversion system, as well as the land involved. The plants used take relatively low maintenance and operate using a natural filtration system that can help to protect more pollutant sensitive plants in other areas. “Environmental benefits such as wildlife value, and reduced energy use and pollution, because atmospheric pollutants are captured in leaf canopies and the soil. The shading effect of plants creates a more pleasant microclimate.” (Dunnett et al. 2007)
Governance/ User Characteristics:
The construction of the Rain Garden and the water diversion system are taken care of by the Mason Land Development team. Maintenance is also taken care of by Mason Land Development as well as volunteers from campus residents (Mason Land Development Division, nd). Thankfully the plants involved with the Rain Gardens usually require low maintenance to maintain. There are no political institutions involved, as Rain Gardens fall under the Mason MS4 Stormwater Program. The drivers for the Rain Garden would be the desire for an aesthetically pleasing preventative measure for sidewalk flooding. It also gives the campus an environmentally friendly, low maintenance solution. “Replacing paved surfaces, or intensively managed grass areas, with mixed naturalistic plantings not only results in overall reduced needs for maintenance, and inputs of fertilizer, water and energy, but will also greatly increase the wildlife and habitat value of a garden.” (Dunnett et al. 2007)
Economic setting /Related Ecosystems:
The low upfront cost and maintenance cost for maintaining Rain Gardens makes them an economically attractive investment, it also reduces upkeep costs of the surrounding terrain since the Rain Garden reduces runoff. Plants used for Rain Gardens are typically native plants, which survive quite well in the area being adapted to the land’s natural rain patterns with less need to artificially keep them sustained (like lawns in desert areas). (Emery, 2006). The usage of native plants also allows the Rain Garden to assimilate quickly to the local ecosystem.
Improvement:
My main suggestions for improvement would better maintenance of the areas and wider spread usage of this idea for runoff solutions, and further development into Rain Gardens as to further improve them. The current stations are littered and dirty but if taken care of they have so much potential. It is a proven effective system which can solve flooding issues around campus while being environmentally friendly. “The storage capacity of rain gardens can be fully utilized to reduce flooding in residential areas or for commercial application in an environmentally friendly manner.” (Guo et al. 2018)
Is the University acting?
George Mason University currently has five Rain Garden systems throughout campus. Current development of new buildings and walkways throughout campus could facilitate the creation of more Rain Garden systems.
Photos
References
Dunnett, N., & Clayden , A. (2007). Rain Gardens Managing water sustainably in the garden and designed landscape. Timber Press.
Emery , C. (2006). Rain Gardens Harvest Pollution . Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4(2), 64.
The composting area at the Innovation Food Forest provides a prime opportunity for the sustainable reuse of organic waste. Students come to this area of the food forest to contribute their individual waste to the communal composting piles, providing an opportunity that is not present within normal dorm living. The compost produced here is utilized within the food forest to plant propagules and supplement plant beds, providing essential nutrients every year.
Communal composting provides healthy soil with minimal work required. Generally, when soil is degraded consumers will turn towards commercial solutions like fertilizers to provide nutrients to their plants, but these options are generally expensive and are reliant on global logistics, meaning there are fossil fuels being burnt to transport them. Local composting removes the reliance on commercial soil additives. Not only is the compost useful for nutrient supplementation, compost has been shown to reduce the populations of pathogenic fungi, allowing for reduced usage of fungicides on crops (Milinković et al., 2019). Composting is not only a sustainable method of reusing organic waste, but it also reduces the overall carbon footprint of the Innovation Food Forest.
The Innovation Food Forest is managed by the Office of Sustainability, with volunteer workers making up most staff working within the forest. The composting area itself is open to the public, allowing anyone to add their waste to the piles. Working the piles is done infrequently by volunteers, and involves turning the piles and removing any contaminants, like plastics. While there is signage throughout the composting area educating visitors on what is can and cannot be composted, the responsibility of putting in appropriate materials is entirely based upon the honor system. Signs of healthy compost is a close to neutral pH in the soil, and a balance of carbon and nitrogen (Zhang et al., 2019). This introduces a major difficulty with communal compost, managing what is added to the piles. Additions to the compost are completely unregulated, and there is potential for the quality of the compost to become skewed, and ineffective as a supplement. While previously there have not been many issues with contamination, there is a major risk of leeching plastics into the environment, as often compostable materials like cardboard have plastic aspects within them, like plastic strands for reinforcement.
Culture determines a lot on how people view composting. For many growing up, leftover food or food that has gone bad has always been trash, and nothing more. Composting offers an alternative to this organic waste going to landfills, but only if people choose to use it instead of traditional waste disposal. Urban applications of compost are also less researched and well known than more traditional applications like agriculture (Kranz et al., 2020). There are stereotypes of compost being stinky and essentially just trash, and many do not see the beneficial aspects directly. In addition, many students are not aware that there are public composting options available at Mason, leading to many continuing to throw their organic waste into trash bins that lead to the landfill.
The major action that mason can take is to increase the knowledge of this opportunity throughout campus. Advertising and promoting the option of composting is essential, as many students still utilize the standard waste bins for most of their trash, while many items could be composted instead. In addition to just advertising the space, educating users is just as important, as there are potentially damaging items that some might think are compostable. A common example of this are products that are industrially compostable, but do not biodegrade within a standard compost pile, but require specialized processes. At the core of all these issues is education, and the university can directly address them by increasing the advertisement of composting opportunity, along with educating volunteers on the correct processes.
Location of the Human-Environment interaction
References
Milinković, M., Lalević, B., Jovičić-Petrović, J., Golubović-Ćurguz, V., Kljujev, I., & Raičević, V. (2019). Biopotential of compost and compost products derived from horticultural waste—Effect on plant growth and plant pathogens’ suppression. Process Safety & Environmental Protection: Transactions of the Institution of Chemical Engineers Part B, 121, 299–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2018.09.024
Zhang, J., Yue, Y., & Yao, X. (2019). Effects of turning frequency on the nutrients of Camellia oleifera shell co-compost with goat dung and evaluation of co-compost maturity. PLoS One, 14(9), e0222841. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0222841
Kranz, C. N., McLaughlin, R. A., Johnson, A., Miller, G., & Heitman, J. L. (2020). The effects of compost incorporation on soil physical properties in urban soils – A concise review. Journal of Environmental Management, 261, 110209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.110209
The human-environment interaction that’s my topic is littering. The reason that this issue is so prevalent in the area that I chose to take my picture in is because the surrounding buildings don’t have any sort of trash room. While most dorm buildings have a room where you can bring your garbage bags once they’re full, half of the buildings in President’s Park don’t have this, causing hundreds of students to have to throw their trash away in one dumpster. The specific dumpster that I chose for my topic may look like a normal dumpster, but there are several reasons why it’s not. For one, it’s actually only meant for recycling, more specifically for recycling that’s in large plastic bags only. The actual dumpster is so out of the way that a lot of people don’t even know that it exists, thus throwing all of their garbage into the recycling, instead of where it should go. Second of all, due to there only being one place to throw stuff away for so many people, it always ends up overflowing at night, oftentimes causing random trash to drift throughout the entirety of President’s Park.
Littering is a safety hazard and a source of visual pollution(Crump et al.). It’s also shown that litter being present makes people more likely to be willing to litter themselves, which creates a cycle of more and more people littering(Crump). Due to these factors, people find themselves not caring about litter, as it becomes something normal, rather than something that should be looked down upon. By not throwing away the trash correctly, this can cause incorrect materials to be thrown away and taken to landfills, where they won’t decompose properly. This also causes trash to be thrown in the recycling, which makes the entire load of recycling bad, causing it to have to be thrown out, as that’s easier to do than sort through the entire load of recycling.
Additionally, younger people typically litter more(Al-Mosa et al.), so it makes sense that a college campus is prone to more littering than most other areas. However, this isn’t an excuse, but rather just some rationale behind why there is litter here. One of the key drivers behind why there’s litter in the area I chose is because the dorms surrounding the dumpster have nowhere else to throw trash, causing the dumpster to quickly fill up and overflow. This overflowing, combined with no other place to throw away trash in the area, limits the options for the students, and they often choose the easiest option, which is to litter.
I would say, like I mentioned in the last paragraph, that demographic trends play a large role in why people litter. The college’s demographics is primarily people aged 18-23, especially with the area where the dumpster is skewing more towards the 18-20 range. Another factor that likely plays a role is cultural factors. For one, Mason is extremely diverse, and littering is viewed very differently in different cultures. As another presenter mentioned, their culture(Nepal) views littering very differently than the US does.
There are a few potential solutions that could be implemented to reduce littering in the President’s Park area. First of all, the first step taken should be to add very clear signs on the dumpsters saying what’s meant to be thrown away in them. Next, the easiest solution would be to add another dumpster or two to the area, causing there to be ample areas for people to throw their trash away. Another solution is to repurpose certain rooms in the dorm buildings as “trash rooms.” These rooms would have garbage bins in them where people can easily throw their trash away. Lastly, people are less likely to litter with other people present(Bateson et al). Due to this, some sort of 24 hour surveillance in the park with signs saying that there’s 24 hour surveillance and that littering will be punished would likely greatly reduce littering in this area.
At this current point in time, the University does not seem to be acting on the issue. Even something as small as signs denoting what the bins are for would be a good addition from the University.
Photos
Location of the Human-Environment interaction
Works Cited
Al-mosa, Y., Parkinson, J., & Rundle-Thiele, S. (2017). A socioecological examination of observing littering behavior. Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 29(3), 235–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10495142.2017.1326354
Bateson, M., Robinson, R., Abayomi-Cole, T., Greenlees, J., O’Connor, A., & Nettle, D. (2015). Watching eyes on potential litter can reduce littering: Evidence from two field experiments. PeerJ, 3. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1443
Crump, S. L., Nunes, D. L., & Crossman, E. K. (1977). The effects of litter on littering behavior in a forest environment. Environment and Behavior, 9(1), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391657791009
Image from PGF Site (Terracycle-Beauty-225×300.Jpg (225×300), n.d.)
Recycling is one of many sustainable ways for our environment and in residential buildings, many bins have been placed in the trash/recycling rooms on all floors. Beauty and personal care products are always used by college students that live in residential dorms. In the Piedmont Lobby, Johnson Center, the MIX, and the Student Involvement Office in the Hub, there are boxes that are from a program called TerraCycle (PGF Recipients – Office of Sustainability, n.d.). This recycling program has a variety of boxes available to collect different types of products and reusing those recyclables to create a sustainable packaging from many brands. The specific part of the Patriot Green Fund TerraCycle Waste Boxes, introduced by Dann Sklarew, that was the most interesting was the beauty products boxes.
Putting the beauty and personal care packaging into the waste boxes will help reduce the chance that the recycling ends up in a landfill. It is said that an industry that focuses on skincare can produce over 120 billion units of plastic packaging per year, and out of that amount, 70% of the recycling ends up in the landfill (Naclerio, 2020). TerraCycle Waste boxes would help this problem because they are able to use the recycling products, even the ones that are the hardest to break down and create new sustainable packaging. With the efforts of creating a more sustainable place, they have partnered with many brands to encourage making packaging with recycled materials rather than continuing the trend of plastics (Discover Our Recycling Process, n.d.). Social settings are the residential students that live on the campus and these boxes also prevent plastics from ending up in a landfill creating more pollution in the environment.
To prevent from plastic packaging to not be recycled properly, Mason could continue the project that was created and funded by putting a TerraCycle Zero Waste Box for beauty products on the main floor in each of the residential buildings. Since the status of the project is in progress, the Patriot Green Funding staff could reevaluate the project and put the boxes in each of the residential buildings, along with creating flyers to spread the word about putting the products into the boxes rather than in the plain recycling (PGF Recipients – Office of Sustainability, n.d.).
George Mason University’s largest athletics and recreation complex on the original eastern portion of campus, the Recreation & Athletic Complex (RAC), has many entrances from the street. There are sidewalks and stairs from the rear, sides, and of course the bus dropoff area. What’s missing, though, is a direct connection to a boardwalk through the woods immediately in front of the building. This is an important omission because that boardwalk is part of a straight-line path from the core campus residential area, so it’s the route most residential students take to get to the gym.
The path running up the middle of the hill
A full view of the area, showing the abrupt end of the boardwalk
There are sidewalks connecting to marked crosswalks at either end of the bus dropoff zone, but those require a small amount of doubling back most students avoid. Instead, they jaywalk across Patriot Circle and climb the hill immediately across from the boardwalk. Over time, this has created a “desire path,” which in urban planning is the name for the worn hard-packed surface that develops along the easiest path to the most popular destination, even if sidewalks are laid out differently (Scovanner & Tappen, 2010).
Resource Characteristics
This hill may appear to be a manicured landscape home to nothing but grass, garden beds of invasive daffodils, and a few dozen trees, and it’s true that this forest understory has been completely denuded by human activity. However, it still has several roles to play as an ecological resource. The vegetation and soil absorb water to lessen overflowing of a nearby stream, and the vegetation also reduces erosion (Grace, 2002). Earthworms, beetles, ants, moles, and many other animal species live beneath the surface and thrive best in loose, easily-tunneled soil. Birds eat the worms and insects, and although far from their only source of food, deer also obtain food by grazing the grass.
Resource Governance and Social Context
When the RAC’s last major renovation – executed in 2009 (George Mason Athletics, 2009) – would have been proposed in 2007, the bulk of the campus resident population lived in President’s Park or The Commons, which are closer to the Aquatic & Fitness Center (AFC). The Rappahannock neighborhood, from which the shortest route to RAC runs through the center of campus and up the hill, was still mostly under construction. The Student Apartments, which have since been demolished, had a path running from the center of that neighborhood to the side of the RAC’s grounds, meaning the shortest path for those students was actually the official sidewalk.
GMU campus in January 2007, with the Student Apartments still standing, the core campus dorms still under construction, and RAC only a few months away from starting renovations.
Nowadays though, the vast majority of central and north campus students pass through the boardwalk path, which abruptly ends at the hill, to get to RAC. The renovation planners made the choice not to put a sidewalk with stairs at the end of this boardwalk, so people just climb the hill. The resource governance here is a tragedy of the commons: if individual students don’t climb the hill, they won’t save the grass or the wildlife because other students will still climb the hill, but they’ll give themselves a longer walk to the gym. Most students do avoid this path when rain makes it slippery and squishy, mitigating the problem somewhat, but those who don’t degrade the path further for other users and worsen erosion.
The model of building infrastructure for what you want people to do rather than what they actually do has failed here as everywhere. Although urban planners often have lofty ideals of changing human behavior, making us healthier and subordinating function to form, in reality the path of least resistance is usually taken by the users, whether it’s intended by the designers or not. The aesthetic and social visions of urban planners and architects move architecture and society forward, but in doing so must compromise with the realities of how people actually use space. The questionable legacies of Le Corbusier’s towers-in-parks (Samuel, 2007) or Washington, DC’s socially dead L’Enfant Plaza are a case in point.
What Has Been Done, and What Needs to Be Done
There are pieces of gravel scattered around, showing that the university has acknowledged people are going to walk that way and tried to make it safer, but the missing link in the sidewalk still isn’t patched, and the rut will deepen faster as the GMU student population continues to grow. Until there’s an asphalt path or concrete stairs, the hill will continue to erode, the subterranean animals will keep being hurt, and a small part of the RAC parking lot could eventually be structurally undermined. I use that path just like most residential RAC users do, and I’ve noticed the rut getting deeper and the dirt pulling away from the RAC parking lot’s curb more over time. There’s also another desire path along the right side of the hill going to an outdoor football field, but it runs diagonally over a flatter area and isn’t in a major runoff zone, so it doesn’t need to be turned into a sidewalk. Scattering some gravel should suffice there.
The desire path running along the flatter area to the right, with football field fencing in the background
Location of the Human-Environment interaction
Works Cited
George Mason Athletics. (2009, September 2). Mason athletics celebrates grand opening of the RAC. George Mason University Athletics. Retrieved April 5, 2022, from https://gomason.com/news/2009/9/2/205045098
Grace, J. M. (2002). Effectiveness of vegetation in erosion control from Forest Road sideslopes. Transactions of the ASAE, 45(3), 681–685. https://doi.org/10.13031/2013.8832
Samuel, F. (2007). Le Corbusier in detail. Routledge.
Scovanner, P., & Tappen, M. F. (2010). Learning pedestrian dynamics from the Real World. 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision. https://doi.org/10.1109/iccv.2009.5459224
1) Interaction(s)—Describe the human-environment interaction(s) that are the topic of your map addition. (2 points)
The development of the GMU campus has caused disturbance and destruction to the natural environment. Many impervious surfaces were created, such as parking lots, sidewalks, and roads. Such surfaces increase the amount of runoff.
2) Resource characteristics—Describe the characteristics of the resource systems and/or units, e.g. the environmental side of the interaction. What aspect of the environment is involved? How? What are some of the critical ecological factors? Cite at least one academic source supporting your description (in addition to any course readings cited). (2 points)
The water of the environment is involved in surface runoff pollution. The systems involved are the water cycle and the cycle of road runoff. The road runoff cycle starts with cars driving on the roads. Cars can leak oil and gas. They also leave rubber from tires and dust from brake pads on the road. All of these pollutants are washed away when rain runs over streets (Muschack, 2003). Similarly, pollution from sidewalks such as litter, fertilizer, and sediment is washed away into storm drains (Rath, n.d.). This pollution gets into our waterways and harms the quality of the water and the health of wildlife that lives in it.
3) Governance/user characteristics—Describe the characteristics of the governance systems and/or users, e.g. the human side of the interaction. Who is involved? What political institutions? How are they involved? What might be some of the drivers? Cite at least one academic source supporting your description (in addition to any course readings cited). (2 points)
Agencies such as the Department of Transportation and the Environmental Protection Agency are involved. The DOT is involved in the system of run off because they are the ones who help plan roads and give permits. The DOT is very aware of the issues with run off. They have been working with universities to study runoff and how to mitigate the effects (Grant et. al, 2003). The EPA is involved because it enforces environmental regulations by requiring permits for “stormwater runoff from municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s), industrial activities, and construction activities” (Environmental Protection Agency, n.d.).
Politics around stormwater runoff is involved with the people who run municipal companies. They are the ones who decide how and when to maintain and upgrade stormwater systems. Politics also involve who the public utilities hire to inspect, monitor, and enforce pollution regulations (Karvonen, 2011). For example, a municipal company that does not upkeep or restore stormwater systems unless absolutely needed will hire people who are lax on their viewpoint of pollution. This will result in company standards to just be the minimum required by government agencies. They won’t try to implement new technologies to improve stormwater treatment performance.
4) Social/cultural/economic/political settings or related ecosystems—Do any of the following play a role? [Social context] Cultural factors, economic development, demographic trends, political stability, resource policies, market incentives, media organization; [Related ecosystems] Climate patterns, pollution patterns, ecological flows in/out of the SES. (2 points)
Economic factors play a role in why many roads and sidewalks are not permeable. The major reason is that regular asphalt is cheaper than the alternative eco-friendly option. A study done in North Carolina stated that one of the green sites built cost about 25% more than a standard asphalt parking lot (Hunt, et. al., 2012). However, some people argue that permeable surfaces have a higher upfront cost, but saves money in the long term on “maintenance and repair on storm water drainage systems and storm sewer extensions” (Permeable or Pervious, n.d.).
States are trying to incentivize people to construct permeable surfaces by allowing people to apply for up to $4,000 rebates in properties located in specific areas. This is done through the Department of Energy and Environment (Permeable surface rebate, n.d.). I am unsure if it includes businesses though. However, the savings on maintenance may be worth the cost for businesses even if they are not eligible for the rebate.
American cultural factors are related to pollution patterns. Americans are more likely to drive to work in their own car rather than use other forms of transportation. A 2013 study showed that 76.4% of workers drove alone, 5.4% used public transportation, and 3.4% biked or walked (Florida, 2015). It is safe to assume that owning a car is a basic necessity in American culture. Most of these cars are gas powered, so 76% of people driving to work in their own cars results in a lot of dripped oil and brake pad dust being washed off into waterways.
American culture is widely accepting the EV industry and is quickly switching over. Big car manufacturers such as Ford and Jeep are pushing out their own EVs. However, having the majority of the population owning EVs will take time. One of these reasons is that they are very expensive right now. Switching over to EVs will reduce the amount of road runoff pollution significantly because the brake pad wear is reduced significantly due to regenerative braking (Car maintenance, 2022) and they do not use oil in the same way traditional cars do (Cotta, 2022).
5) What can we do?—What are the implications of this interaction on humans and the environment? How could we do differently at Mason to improve them? Cite at least one academic source supporting your description (in addition to any course readings cited). (2 points)
The implications of this interaction between humans and the environment is that human development increases natural ecological processes to the point where damage can be done to the ecosystem. George Mason can add more porous pavement to the Fairfax campus. They already have one acre, but it is mostly in low-traffic areas. I think it would be beneficial to have a permeable surface design where grass grows in between pavers.
Permeable surfaces work by allowing the precipitation that falls onto it seep into a reservoir that is filled with rocks, gravel, and soil. The water is filtered through this system and then it is discharged into an underdrain (Fassman & Blackbourn, 2010). Studies have shown that permeable surfaces discharge just 37%-61% of precipitation. Non-permeable surfaces discharge about an equal amount of precipitation (Fassman & Blackbourn, 2010).
If these are also installed in high-traffic areas, it would reduce GMU’s runoff impact significantly. In areas with steep hills where only pedestrians are, gravel could be placed and permeable surfaces can be installed at the bottom of the hill. I also think that more trees should be planted on campus, particularly near where the giant painted mural stones are. This would add a more natural look to our campus, help absorb runoff, and create shade.
6) If relevant—Is the university acting on this issue? State any actions that are already underway or have been taken by the university. (1 point)
George Mason is aware of this issue and has taken action. Gravel paths, such as the ones next to Enterprise Hall and David King Hall, have been placed on steep hills. Mason has also encouraged students to implement their ideas by giving funding through The Patriot Green Fund. Such projects include the creations of rain gardens. Rain gardens help absorb runoff in urban settings. As stated in question number 5, permeable surfaces have been constructed as well.
Hunt, B., Stevens, S., & Mayes, D. (2012, April 26). Permeable pavement use and research attwo sites in eastern North Carolina: Global Solutions for Urban Drainage. Proceedings. Retrieved April 4, 2022, from https://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/40644(2002)39
Figure 1: The Presidents Park Hydroponic Greenhouse
Interactions
The GMU greenhouse currently uses non-renewable energy sources to power the greenhouse (Office of Sustainability, 2022). The development of the greenhouse is not sustainable to the environment. While providing over 2,000 pounds of produce, it is still a large, intensive building that emits greenhouse gases.
Resource characteristics
Fossil fuels are being burned to run the greenhouse at GMU. Meaning natural resources and direct impact to the environment is involved. The burning of fossil fuels can increase temperatures (both on land and in water), increase precipitation, raise sea levels, impact human health, and much more (Sommer, 2016). The ecological factors such as light, temperature, soil, and water are all affected since the emissions effect all organisms, biotic and abiotic. Around 30,000 of kilowatt hours are used in electricity and approximately 18,000 pounds of CO2 were emitted just last year from the GMU greenhouse. Although the greenhouse is helping plant and grow diverse plant species, the indirect effects outweigh the positive, local benefits.
Governance/user characteristics
At our local level, the GMU hydroponic greenhouse was originally owned by the College of Science. The main use of the greenhouse was to provide plants to biology and environmental introductory courses. Now, the Office of Sustainability took over and uses it to produce food that is either sold to the public or given to GMU’s dining halls. Not only do Mason students rely on the greenhouse for food, but staff who work in the greenhouse get paid by the profits (Office of Sustainability, 2022). Also, when producing energy at the greenhouse, there is a link between the human output/input energy and the measurement of efficiency, which is all regulated through the power grid which extends beyond George Mason Universities campus and into the state of Virginia (GiamPietro & Pimentel, 1991).
Social/cultural/economic/political settings or related ecosystems
The reason the GMU greenhouse is run like it is because of financial reasons. It is cheaper to use fossil fuels and take energy from the grid, as most of the university already does. Creating a solar powered greenhouse has been attempted, but things have fell through, and the project was dropped. The greenhouse would also take near $90,000 to get it completely offset. However, American culture has been slowly switching to solar energy, especially with houses. The problem with all the technologies is that they are new, and Mason prefers trustworthy technology that will not inconvenience GMU Faculties, The Office of Sustainability, and whoever else is involved.
What can we do?
GMU has committed to be carbon neutral in 2050. Although this statement was released about ten years ago and updates should be coming out this month, Mason needs to move up that deadline. GMU needs to start looking into renewable energy sources and reading research being released, not just on solar power. There has also been new research coming up with new and innovative ways to create smart local electric grids (Ouammi, 2021). Making the Greenhouse completely carbon neutral, along with the greenhouse on top of exploratory, it is a step in the right direction. GMU students need to advocate and push the higher up individuals to accomplish and start creating real change.
If relevant
A team of undergraduate and graduate students have been currently working alongside the Office of Sustainability to install solar panels next to the Presidents Park Greenhouse. The PGF has granted them $20,000 to offset a portion of the greenhouse. Facilities have also been involved and are pushing to offset the whole greenhouse with additional funding. The Office of Sustainability should continue this work with other “green” projects around campus that rely on non-renewable energy sources.
Figure 2. Location of greenhouse shown in red “x”
Citations
GiamPietro, & Pimentel, D. (1991). Energy efficiency: Assessing the interaction between humans and their environment. Ecological Economics, 4(2), 117–144. https://doi.org/10.1016/0921-8009(91)90025-A
Ouammi, A. (2021). Model predictive control for optimal energy management of connected cluster of microgrids with net zero energy multi-greenhouses. Energy, 234, 1. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2021.121274
Sommer. (2016). Burning Fossil Fuels: Impact of Climate Change on Health. International Journal of Health Services, 46(1), 48–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020731415625253
The environment is the pizza boxes at Johnson Center. Blaze Pizza puts all their pizzas and bread in cardboard boxes. The pizza boxes pile up on top of the trash cans in the Johnson Center as customers place them there when they are done eating the pizza.
Pizza boxes cardboard packaging is made from virgin fiber paper, which contributes to deforestation. Pizza boxes that come into contact with grease and natural oil from food are unsuitable for recycling. The grease binds to paper fibers, but the recycling process requires water to break the fibers apart. Grease and water don’t mix well and therefore greasy fibers don’t break down. Therefore, pizza boxes have to be trashed or composted unless the pizza box is clean. Over 3 billion cardboard pizza boxes end up in landfills each year in the United States. It usually takes around 90 days for pizza boxes to break down or biodegrade if properly made (Skipthe pizza box: The misfortune of paper in the Fast Food Industry).
George Mason University has a Blaze Pizza in the Johnson Center. Blaze Pizza uses eco-friendly packaging that allows the pizza boxes to be compostable and are made from post-consumer reclaimed materials. George Mason dining is in charge of choosing what type of food is sold on campus to students and faculty. Therefore, it seems like George Mason University can make the difference, but it might be difficult because Blaze Pizza is a corporation (Fast-fire’d custom builtartisanal pizzas).
Economic Development and market incentives play a role in Blaze Pizza boxes at George Mason University. Economic Development happens when Blaze Pizzas are sold to customers and profit is given to Blaze Pizza Company and George Mason University. The pizza boxes contain the words “Blaze Pizza” to market the item to consumers and are a marketing strategy.
Solutions to reducing the amount of pizza boxes that end up in landfills at George Mason University and to create a more sustainable way, one way is to partner up with World Centric PizzaRound. World Centric PizzaRound is the first 100% tree-free, compostable, plant-based pizza container that is made from renewable fibers such as bamboo. By using non-timer materials, the forests and nearby communities are protected. Also with a fully compostable container, pizza crust that is leftover can get composted as well (Closing the loop on pizza boxwaste). Another way to serve pizza, while keeping it sustainable is to use food trays. By placing the pizza on top of parchment paper with a tray below will reduce cardboard boxes by a significant amount. Moreover, give students cardboard boxes if the pizza is being eaten somewhere else besides the cafeteria, and if the students are eating at the cafeteria, give them a tray. Another solution to create a more sustainable way is to have the pizza boxes composted. Composting pizza boxes will reduce landfill waste, create space in waste bins, and provide a carbon compost material to offset “green” ingredients (Nadine, 2021).
The University isn’ currently acting on the issues. However, it seems that it was an issue brought up to George Mason University Senate and possibly the GMU Senate is working on solving the issue.
