Yale Daily News

"And if Yale is going to challenge us to truly participate in this energy initiative, they should reward us if we meet the challenge...Giving colleges...a special party would be more analogous to that extra nice Christmas presents we hope to receive from our parents. If Yale really challenges us, we must be prepared to answer and together reach for the fruit at the top of the tree, and maybe find a little Christmas present underneath."

geez is this what "enlighten liberalism" has become?? pay me to become less wasteful?? I have news for you junior..when you start paying for your own gas and electricity, conservation will become it's own reward (lower utility and gas bills). Until such time as you have a job, pay taxes (and possibly tuition), grow up...become an adult, and accept that you are personally responsible for your actions. Don't expect Yale (with my tuition dollars), or the Federal goverment (with my tax dollars) to REWARD YOU FOR BEING LESS WASTEFUL....if this editorial was for real (perhaps you have a extremely dry sense of humor) your self-centeredness and greed should embarrass you.

Dear Pretentious "heartsurgeon",

I believe you are missing the point. The failure to reach Yale's goal signifies that conservation for it's own sake (no extra Christmas present, students not acting like "grown ups") does not serve as enough incentive to change the behavior of the students living in residential colleges at Yale. Therefore, if Yale desires to reach said goal, it must offer greater incentives that are more connected to the students. I agree that extra parties are a bit of a puerile solution, but an incentive system does need to be put in place.

Perhaps a cost-effective solution (ie no extra cost for Yale) would be the tough love mechanism of energy quotas per suite. If one suite should go over, then they would be blacked out. To address the inequity of energy consumption between suites, perhaps a market could be made mirroring the world carbon credit market for energy consumption credits at Yale. For example, if roommate A spends more time in a suite other than his own, he could give credits to that other suite to offset his own personal energy usage there. Is this not the same problem that we face on a global scale? Why not use analogous solutions to test out these theories? We have the minds, let us use them creatively to solve the problem.

Dear "Against Naysaying"

I must say "Nay" to your absurd idea of "blacked out" suites...it is simply undoable..

"carbon credits"..i got a good chuckle out of that...

the truly sad point you make (and i agree with), is the admission that "conservation for it's own sake...does not serve as enough incentive to change the behavior [of Yalies]"

this is the real problem..if Yalies won't embrace conservation for it's own sake, why rationally expect ANYONE to do so?

the only real way to have any effect on behavior (be it consumption of energy, or any other resource) is to have the end-user directly pay for consumption. This promotes preservation through self-interest (less cost).

Dear heartsurgeon,

On the contrary, is not the idea of a "hard cap" on carbon consumption the most progressive and most realistic one in terms of actually halting global warming?

I hope you appreciate my microcosm/macrocosm analogy between the Yale community and the world. I think a black out system could be fine-tuned to be effective starting with a lenient (high amount) energy limit for each college and then decrease and fine tune. If it's impractical to implement on the micro at Yale, why are people even talking about it globally? A working energy market at Yale would indeed signify that we are as smart as we think we are.

I also refute your idea that end-user savings will necessarily promote the ideal. In sum, I refute the idea of a perfectly rational consumer with respect to energy citing gas price inelasticity and the tendency for Americans to consume energy irrationally, in many cases. Finally, I also refute your implication that the 'Yalie' consumer is any more 'rational' than the national consumer. They/We are just as lazy and illogical as the next guy if not more wasteful based on the socioeconomic bias of the college itself.

Some sort of "best norm" situation must be put in place to attain Yale's goals. I suggest a micro-carbon cap system not only to solve Yale's conservation goals, but also to provide a working example of one for the rest of the world.