Sustainable Museum Survey Results

Sustainability Tracking Survey Results
Summit on Sustainability in Museums
American Alliance of Museums, Professional Interest Committee on Green
Shengyin Xu, LEED AP BD+C
Minnesota Historical Society
Sarah Brophy
BMuse
Roger Chang, PE, Assoc. AIA, ASHRAE BEMP, LEED AP
Westlake, Reed, Leskosky Design
Introduction
The Professional Interest Committee (PIC) on Green is a subset of the Alliance for American Museums
(AAM) that focuses on the practice of sustainability in museums. As part of the upcoming AAM 2013
Annual Meeting and Conference (May 19 – 22, 2013), a PIC-Green project team looked to investigate
current trends in sustainability in the museum field and present this snapshot as a part of the Summit on
Sustainability in Museums at the annual conference.
In order to find out the current trends in sustainability, a survey was developed and distributed between
November 2012 and February 2013 (4 months). This survey asked participants to identify the types of
sustainability initiatives, as well as what types of certifications or metrics museums used to help guide
the sustainability initiatives. To see a full list of questions, refer to Appendix A:Appendix A:Original
survey. The hope is that the results help to begin the conversation of the state of sustainability in
museums, as well as where we’d like to go.

PIC-Green Summit on Sustainability in Museums 2
Profiles
Of the 30 survey respondents, a large majority were from institutions in the US. In the chart below,
there were three international survey-respondents from Australia, Canada, and Romania. Within the
US, there was a range of states represented in the survey, with the remaining 17 survey-respondents
covering 12 different states.
Despite the relatively small response rate compared to the number of AAM accredited museums
(approximately 986 on April 1, 2013). The wide distribution of geographies could be a fair
representation of the scope of AAM’s accredited museums. The three states with the most AAM
accredited museums is California (7.0%), New York (6.7%), and Virginia (6.0%) while the top three states
from the survey included Illinois (14%), California (11%), Maryland (11%), and Minnesota (11%). It will
be important for future distribution tactics to target responses from New York, Virginia, and
Massachusetts museums.
Most institutions that took the survey were medium to large in scale. By attendance, a majority 65% of
the institutions have over 10,000 visitors a year. By staffing, there was a wider range, with a small
majority of 55% that had 1-49 staff.
Australia
Melbourne
4%
Canada Ontario
4%
Romania Tulcea
4%
USA CA
11%
USA CT
4%
USA DC
7%
USA IL
14%USA MA
7%
USA MD
11%
USA MI
4%
USA MN
11%
USA PA
4%
USA TX
7%
USA UT
4%
USA WA
4%
USA WY
4%
Location of Survey-Takers
100-499
8%
500-
9,999
27%
10,000+
65%
Annual Attendance Profiles
1-49
55%
50-99
15%
100-499
22%
500-
9,999
4%
10,000+
4%
Staff Count

There was also a wide variation in the industries of museum represented by the 30 survey-takers. Over
a third (37%) represented organizations in culture and history, while 21% were from the arts. Natural
history (14%), science and technology (10%), transportation (4%), and literature (2%) were represented
as well. Another 12% of the respondents responded their museums represented other industries.
Currently, this set of survey results has about a 17 - 22% margin of error (based on 95% - 99%
confidence levels). Ideally, given the range of types and sizes of AAM accredited museums, the survey
could target a 5% margin of error, which would require about 275 responses total. However, if the
responses to the primary question of whether or not the museum has sustainability programs are more
clearly skewed in one direction, then in order to get the margin of error of 5%, we’d only need 225
responses. Alternately, decreasing the existing 20% margin of error to 10% would produce clearer
results and would be more attainable, requiring about 88 – 125 responses.
In conclusion, the current sample of 30 museums, while diverse in geographies, size, and industries,
does not capture enough of the museum field to make any conclusions about the trends in the wider
museum field.
Cultural / History
37%
Art /
Architecture /
Design
21%
Agriculture /
Forestry / Natural
History
14%
Other
12%
Science /
Technology
10%
Transportation
4%
Literature
2%
Museum Industries

Tracking Profiles
A majority of the 30 survey respondents did indicate some level of sustainability program or practice
within their organizations.
The respondents that indicated they have a formal or informal sustainability program or practice are
referred to as Group A in Appendix B:Methodology. This group received a different line of questions
than Group B (the 33% that responded no to formal or informal sustainability programs), and Group C
(3% that were not sure). Group A had more detailed questions regarding their sustainability initiatives,
as well as open-ended questions for descriptions of their programs and experiences with various
sustainability tracking systems. Group B and C were asked if there are future plans for sustainability
programs or practices. Those that said there would not be any future sustainability plans were diverted
to a single, open-ended question. Those that have plans for sustainability programs were asked the
same resources questions at the end of Group A’s questions. In this report, the blue graphs relate to
Group A while the orange represent Groups B and C.
Comparing the presence of sustainability programs and practices by the scale of the organization shows
that a larger subset of the high attendance organizations (10,000+ annual attendance) have
sustainability programs.
Yes
64%
No
33%
I don't know
3%
Does this museum currently have a formal or informal
sustainability program or practice?

Further, when analyzing by staff figures, the more popular scale (1-49 staff) shows more variation in the
presence of sustainability programs, and actually less than half of these 1-49 staff organizations have
any sort of sustainability program. The larger organizations, 50+ staff all indicate there is a program in
place, with the exception of the one very large organization that reported over 10,000+ staff.
With the exception of the one organization of over 10,000 staff, it seems the larger institutions that took
this survey all have some sustainability program or practice in place at their museum.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
100-499 500-9,999 10,000+ Not Reported
#Respondents
Annual Attendance
Relationship of Scale (by Attendance) to Sustainability
Yes
No
I don't know
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1-49 50-99 100-499 500-9,999 10,000+ Not Reported
#Respondents
Staff Range
Relationship of Scale (by Staff Count) to Sustainability
Yes
No
I don't know

Sustainability Programs
Of the 30 survey respondents, 19 indicated they have a sustainability program or projects at their
organization. Of the possible programs or projects, waste and recycling, office operations, building
operations, housekeeping, and building retrofits and new construction were above the 50th
percentile.
The 19 sustainability programs were also asked what types of tracking they utilized. There was a large
fall-off for this question, producing only 8 responses out of 17 at most.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Cultural/History
Art/Architecture/
Design
Agriculture/Forestry
/NaturalHistory
Other
Science/Technology
Transportation
Literature
Aerospace/Aviation/
Automotive
Relationship of Museum Type to Sustainability
Yes
No
I don't know
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Waste and recycling
Office operations
Building operations
Housekeeping of non-collections areas
Green building, new construction
Green building, retrofits
Food service
Education
Collections management
Other
Addressed Categories
of the 19 sustainability programs

The most popular response to the sustainability tracking systems (total of 8) was the “other” option.
There was one “other” response that indicated “energy management in-house software,” however
most of the responses for this selection included “no” or “not sure” responses, indicating there is might
be confusion around tracking sustainability or the survey question.
The second most popular selection for the question of sustainability tracking is LEED (total of 8
responses), in particular LEED for New Construction and Major Renovation (5 responses), but LEED for
Existing Buildings (2 responses) and Commercial Interiors (1 response) also were selected by survey-
takers. Custom tracking tools (3 responses) and greenhouse gas emissions inventories (2 responses)
also were represented in the answers.
There were several options that only resulted in one responses, such as Green Globes, Energy Star, and
carbon footprinting. While Green Globes does not have as much market saturation as LEED, and
methods for carbon footprinting can have a wide range of methods, it is surprising that few
organizations take advantage of the US DOE’s Energy Star program that includes their Portfolio Manager
tracking tool.
Finally, the survey also presented several other sustainability tracking systems, such as Living Building
Challenge, BREEAM, Passive House, or SCORE, which is more popular with business-oriented
sustainability programs, and several more. There were no responses to many of these.
Certifications, which involve third-party verification upon achieving particular goals established within
certain sustainability tracking systems, were also not very popular among the 19 survey respondents
that indicated they have programs in their museums and organizations. The responses dropped-off to
5, and of those, LEED programs seem most popular.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Other
LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations
Custom sustainability performance tracking
LEED for Existing Buildings
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
LEED for Commercial Interiors
Green Globes
Energy Star Portfolio Manager
Carbon Footprint
Sustainable Sites Initative
Living Building Challenge
BREEAM
Passive House
Ecological Footprint
Natural Step
ISIS Method
SCORE
Tracking Systems

There were several (5) “other” responses, of which 4 indicated “none” or “no.” One organization noted
they are in the process of “working on LEED EBOM.”
Qualitative Experiences with Sustainability Programs
The 19 surveys that represented organizations with sustainability programs were also asked qualitative
questions surrounding their experiences with sustainability tracking. The response rate from these
questions was high, with many survey takers providing key insights to their programs and tracking
capacity. These included the following:
• Description of any performance tracking, formal or informal;
• Positive aspects of any formal certification experience(s);
• Negative aspects of any formal certification experience(s);
• Reasons for informal use of certification systems;
• Aspects lacking in sustainability performance tracking.
In these questions, formal certification refers to the actual third-party verification of meeting the
requirements of a certification. For example, an organization may informally use the LEED green
building systems as a guide, or they may actually apply for formal certification that their building meets
LEED standards. The same applies to other systems included in the survey, such as Green Globes or the
Living Building Challenge.
The qualitative answers were analyzed by general theme, but all the actual responses are available in
the Appendix C:Qualitative Responses to Performance Tracking.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Other
LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations
LEED for Commercial Interiors
LEED for Existing Buildings
Green Globes
Sustainable Sites Initiative
Living Building Challenge
Energy Star Rating
BREEAM
Passive House
Certifications

Among the 17 respondents that indicated they have sustainability initiatives in their institution, the
primary themes of waste and recycling, lighting, and tracking and certification systems emerged. There
were no clear strategies or indications of a consistent tracking mechanism, although LEED does emerge
several times throughout the responses.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Waste and Recycling
LEED Certification
Lighting
Track Quantities
Track Energy
Track Utilities
Benchmarking
Solar
Water
HVAC
Staff Training
Materials
Solar
GHG Audits
Prioritization
Portfolio Manager
No Tracking
New Construction
Major Renovation
Energy
Exhibit Construction
Food
Public Education
“For any performance tracking, formal or informal, please briefly describe
the project(s).”
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
PR
Market saturation
Accountability
Quality
Demonstration
Measure progress
Staff awareness
Common sense
Reduce Costs
Please describe the positive aspects of any formal certification
experience(s).

The same group did clearly articulate that public relations opportunities were a key benefit to going
through formal certification. Other responses included accountability, quality, and reduction of cost,
but none were as popular as the communications aspect of formal certification.
On the other end, the negative aspects that came up were also varied. LEED’s certification process was
mentioned twice – one response indicated certification delays and another record-keeping
requirements. Other concerns included a range of issues from cost to complexity and a lack of
comprehensive options for tracking.
The time required for formal certification was one of the most popular responses, in particular
respondents were concerned with staffing time. High costs and lack of cost returns between informal
and formal use were also mentioned. Several very detailed responses indicated that utilizing the
certification systems informally was just as effective as going through formal certification.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
LEED certification process
Not comprehensive
Inaccurate
Not museum-specific
Obsolete
Complex
High cost
Please describe the negative aspects of any formal certification
experience(s).
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Time
Effective without certification
High cost
No requirement
No dollar return
Lack of guides
For any certifications that were used informally, please describe the
reasons for not applying for formal certification.

The survey respondents were also asked to give vignettes of their experiences with sustainability. The
following are the some key responses.
• Two museums reported lighting changes had saved them 15% and 30%, respectively, in energy
consumption;
• One museum reported the use of GHG emissions tracking resulted in $30,000 in annual cost
savings;
• One museum reported that their sustainability efforts provided positive PR and led to NEH
grant funding;
• One museum, an aquarium, noted their comprehensive water management, which includes
reusing a decommissioned seal pool to harvest rainwater, as well as cisterns. The rainwater is
used throughout the building for native plantings as well as sprinkler systems. The museum has
collected 40,000 gallons of water for these purposes thus far.
Instead of vignettes, other respondents gave comments. Below are some of the key comments.
• Two museums reported data compilation and sustainability audits are critical to achieving goals;
• One museum noted the importance of collaboration;
• Museums have been slow to take up sustainability, but “sustainability when the very heart of
their purpose is preservation and informal learning.”
To see the full qualitative responses, see Appendix C:Qualitative Responses to Performance Tracking.
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Dedicated staffing
Funding
LEED is lacking
Standards
Engagement
Lack of data
Process too complicated
Specificity to needs
Please describe the things you see as most lacking in sustainability
performance tracking.

Future Sustainability Programs
Of those respondents that indicated they did not, or didn’t know, if they currently have a sustainability
program or project, 3 respondents indicated they may have a future sustainability program. Each of the
three organizations noted different timelines, from 6-12 months to 2-5 years.
This group was also asked about the barriers to initiating a sustainability program in the future. Only
two responses were given. One indicated they have made a “small start” with recycling and phased
implementation of energy efficient light bulbs, however, funding and time is barrier. The other response
indicated “We’re already as efficient as possible. There is nothing else on which to spend money and no
benefit from spending any more money.”
All Organizations Trends
All survey respondents were asked what types of additional information would be most helpful. The
upper 50th
percentile includes best-practices guides, tools or toolkits for implementation, case studies
from other museums, and sustainability performance tracking guidance. Respondents did not rate
customized information or specific recommendations for certifications as highly.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
6 - 12 months 1 - 2 years 2 - 5 years
Future Sustainability Program Plans
of the 11 no sustainability programs

Among the five (5) “other” responses, survey-takers also wished for the following:
• Forum debates;
• Overall definition and framework;
• Video presentations of case studies.
One institution indicated that museums were “reasonably uninterested” in sustainability except as a
cost-savings measure and other offered a suggested a list to allow material or equipment sharing to
divert waste.
Organizations were also asked for their perceived top trends in sustainability.
Some of the responses were harder to fit into an emerging trend category; however, the comments
could still be important to the survey goals. These responses included the following:
0 5 10 15 20 25
Best-practices guide
Tools or toolkits for implementation
Case studies from other museums
Sustainability performance tracking guidance
Customized information
Recommendations for a particular certification or
rating system
Other
Preferred Information
from all 30 respondents
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Evaluation
LED lighting
Audience relevance
Building automation controls
Full cost accounting
Leverage PR
Establish targets and track
Partnerships
Reuse of materials
Sharing knowledge
No standards
No trends
Emerging trends in museum sustainability

• LEED becoming the standard for publically-funded buildings;
• Collections are central to museums, sustainability is secondary until there is a mandate;
• Sustainability fits goals of public service;
• Sustainability adds value to communities;
• Museums need to widen HVAC operation standards;
• Museums have experienced a market transformation in green building initiatives.
Conclusions
All in all, the survey results give an interesting picture of sustainability across 30 museums. Some very
interesting case studies of energy, waste, and water initiatives have emerged via the qualitative
questions. In addition, museums have expressed both sides of the debate – ranging from comments
that indicate the need to be more aggressive in promoting the relevance of sustainability to museums to
other comments that sustainability is not a priority for museums among other competing concerns.
While more data needs to be collected, there were some consistent responses, especially among those
museums that report having sustainability initiatives.
• Importance of data, tracking, and benchmarking;
• Need for standards for museums;
• Emerging technologies;
• LEED, while popular, is not without drawbacks.
Further, in order to better understand the wider museum community, consisting of 986 accredited
museums, more data needs to be collected.

Appendix A:Original survey
I. Tracking Sustainability Performance in Museums
The American Alliance of Museums' PIC-Green would like to find out more about what museums are using to
implement sustainability in their operations and buildings. PIC-Green is a professional interest committee within
the American Alliance of Museums that aims to establish museums as leaders in environmental stewardship and
sustainability through education, advocacy, and service.
Please fill out this survey and share your experience tracking sustainability performance in your museums. This may
include formal certifications, like LEED, or other sustainability metrics, like carbon footprints. We'd love to hear
from in-house sustainability officers, consultants, or design professionals that have worked in museums. All scales
of museums are welcome - from the small historic house to a large institution!
As a token of our appreciation, you will be entered into a drawing for one of five autographed copies of The Green
Museum: A Primer on Environmental Practice, by Sarah Brophy and Elizabeth Wylie.
Thank you for your time and input!
Contact Information
1) Please enter your contact info.
First Name*: ____________________________________________
Last Name*: ____________________________________________
Title: ____________________________________________
Organization: ____________________________________________
Email Address*: ____________________________________________
Phone Number: ____________________________________________
Survey Instructions
2) Please enter the museum name and location.
Museum Name*: ____________________________________________
City: ____________________________________________
State: ____________________________________________
Country*: ____________________________________________
3) Please enter some basic information about your museum.
Museum Annual Attendance
( ) 1-49
( ) 50-99
( ) 100-499
( ) 500-9,999
( ) 10,000+
( ) N/A

Museum Staff Count
( ) 1-49
( ) 50-99
( ) 100-499
( ) 500-9,999
( ) 10,000+
( ) N/A
Museum Industry
Select as many that apply.
[ ] Art / Architecture / Design
[ ] Aerospace / Aviation / Automotive
[ ] Agriculture / Forestry / Natural History
[ ] Cultural / History
[ ] Literature
[ ] Science / Technology
[ ] Transportation
[ ] Other
Sustainability Initiatives
4) Does this museum currently have a formal or informal sustainability program or practice?*
This may include green committees, energy management of facilities, LEED certified buildings, or any scale of
sustainabiltiy initiatives.
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) I don't know
Museums with Sustainability Initiatives
5) Which of the following categories are addressed in the museum's sustainability program?*
Select as many that apply to your organization.
[ ] Green building, new construction
[ ] Green building, retrofits
[ ] Building operations
[ ] Office operations
[ ] Collections management
[ ] Education
[ ] Food service
[ ] Housekeeping of non-collections areas
[ ] Waste and recycling

[ ] Other (please specify)
6) Does the museum track sustainability performance using any of the following certifications, metrics, or
guidelines?*
Tracking may include informal internal usage, or third-party verified audits. You may select as many that apply. If
you would like more information on any of the sustainability performance tracking methods below, please see our
resources page.
[ ] LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations
[ ] LEED for Existing Buildings
[ ] LEED for Commercial Interiors
[ ] Sustainable Sites Initiative
[ ] Green Globes
[ ] Living Building Challenge
[ ] Energy Star Portfolio Manager
[ ] BREEAM
[ ] Passive House
[ ] Carbon Footprint
[ ] Ecological Footprint
[ ] Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory
[ ] Natural Step
[ ] ISIS Method
[ ] SCORE
[ ] Custom sustainability performance tracking
7) Has the museum become certified in any of the following rating systems? This question applies to formal,
third-party certification processes only.
[ ] LEED for New Construction and Major Renovations
[ ] LEED for Existing Buildings
[ ] LEED for Commercial Interiors
[ ] Sustainable Sites Initiative
[ ] Green Globes
[ ] Living Building Challenge
[ ] Energy Star Rating
[ ] BREEAM
[ ] Passive House

8) For any performance tracking, formal or informal, please briefly describe the project(s).
9) Please describe the positive aspects of any formal certification experience(s).
10) Please describe the negative aspects of any formal certification experience(s).
11) For any certifications that were used informally, please describe the reasons for not applying for formal
certification.
Informal use of certification systems may include internal audits, case studies, or any use that does not include an
application into the certifying organization.
12) Please describe the things you see as most lacking in sustainability performance tracking.
13) Please give a vignette related to sustainability and museums that would be a good to share with the market.
Please give a vignette related to sustainability and your organization that would be a good to share with the market.
Museums without Sustainability Initiatives
14) Is your museum planning on initiating a sustainability program in the future?*
( ) Yes
( ) No
( ) I don't know
Museums with No Future Sustainability Plans
15) Please describe why you believe the museum will not engage in sustainability initiatives in the future.
Museums with Future Sustainability Plans
16) When do you plan to initiate such a program?*
( ) 0 - 6 months
( ) 6 - 12 months
( ) 1 - 2 years
( ) 2 - 5 years
( ) 5+ years
17) Please describe the top trends you see moving forward for museums and sustainability.
18) What type of information might be valuable for this museum's future sustainability initiative?*
[ ] Best-practices guide
[ ] Sustainability performance tracking guidance
[ ] Recommendations for a particular certification or rating system
[ ] Case studies from other museums

[ ] Tools or toolkits for implementation
[ ] Customized information (i.e. consulting)
19) Would you be willing to participate in developing a more detailed case study?*
Case studies may range from small sustainability efforts, to large organization-wide programs - we are interested in
all scales!
( ) Yes
( ) No
Thank You!
Thank you for taking our survey. Your response is very important to us.
If you would like more information on any of the sustainability performance tracking methods mentioned in
this survey, please see our resources page.
If you have any questions, please feel free to connect with us at the PIC-Green website or follow us on
Twitter.
Follow @PICGreen

Appendix B:Methodology
The survey was developed as a PIC-Green project. Initial ideas were to develop an understanding of the
state of sustainability in museums, this includes the following:
• To understand the types of sustainability initiatives (scope and basis) museums are
implementing;
• To begin understanding the museums’ experiences with tracking sustainability;
• To gain a sense of the tools and resources that might help museum sustainability initiatives.
As such, the survey is targeted at three (3) groups of respondents. Group A includes museums that have
implemented sustainability programs. This group was asked questions regarding the specific types of
initiatives, as well as tracking systems such as certifications or metrics. Further, Group A was also asked
to give qualitative responses about their experiences with sustainability programs and tracking as well as
what sustainability resources they would find helpful.
Group B included museums that might implement sustainability initiatives in the future. Their line of
questioning included the timeframe for implementation, and the same resources questions asked of
Group A.
Finally, Group C includes museums that responded that they did not currently and will not have
sustainability initiatives in the future. They were only asked a qualitative question of why they chose
not to incorporate sustainability in their museums.
The surveys were distributed via social media, AAM PIC-Green’s mailing lists, and personal connections
through the three survey coordinators. In particular, the social media included the following:
• Twitter @greenmuseum;
• Linkedin Groups: Minnesota Association of Museums, Environmental Leader, American
Association for State and Local History, Environmental Evaluators Network.
The overall timeframe for distribution was from November 2012 to February 2013. The first launch via
social media occurred in November, and there was a re-launch in January 16, 2013. The primary
geographic focus of the survey was the U.S., however, there were also several responses from
international museums.

Appendix C:Qualitative Responses to Performance Tracking
For any performance tracking, formal or informal, please briefly describe the project(s). ID
We do an annual greenhouse gas emissions audit that includes our energy, water, waste, and resource-
use (fleet vehicle fuel and office paper). This allows us to prioritize hot-spots. We also use the same
metric to evaluate new sustainability initiatives.
3
Electrical usage was our biggest goal. Using locally produced wood was another. 18
Whenever possible we measure and record our conservation efforts (tons of food composted, gallons of
water used, pounds of batteries recycled, etc.). This gives us a good comparison to past yearâ€™s work
and helps us adaptively manage our efforts. This data is consolidated into annual reports on internal
conservation efforts.
20
We track the amount of material we recycle with our waster company 27
We have not tracked performance changes before and after green changes. 29
Chippewa Nature Centerâ€™s Margaret Ann (Ranny) Riecker Nature Preschool building (completed in
2009) has been awarded a LEED Gold Certification from the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC). This is
the first Gold Certified building in Midland County. There are eight other LEED certified buildings in the
Great Lakes Bay Region, only one of which is also Gold Certified â€“ the Michigan Department of
Environmental Quality (MDEQ), located in Bay City. Some features of our Nature Preschool building
include: â€¢ Solar hot water collectors to heat domestic water â€¢ 10kW solar panel (photovoltaic
array) â€¢ Geothermal wells and heat exchanger to provide heating and cooling of the building through a
radiant floor system â€¢ Locally and on-site harvested lumber for exterior and interior finishes â€¢ Use
of overhangs and windows to provide for ample harvesting of daylight, as well as use of natural
ventilation through operable windows high and low in the building â€¢ Highly insulated building through
use of Structural Insulated Panel (SIP) construction â€¢ Water conservation through use of dual-flush
toilets â€¢ Finishes are no VOC (Volatile Organic Compound) to improve indoor air quality â€¢ Rainwater
harvesting with rain barrels The building was designed by The Kubala Washatko Architects of Cedarburg,
Wisconsin. Rockford Construction of Grand Rapids, Michigan served as the projectâ€™s construction
manager. The construction of the building was completed by local contractors from the Great Lakes Bay
Region including Answer Heating & Cooling, Hatfield Construction, Harbron Electric, Helger Construction
and many other local subcontractors. The building is the home of Chippewa Nature Centerâ€™s Nature
Preschool, which serves 88 children using a nature-based curriculum. The goal of the program is to help
children build a life-long connection to nature through frequent, positive outdoor experiences. Having a
LEED Gold Certified building is an outward demonstration of the philosophy of the program housed
within.
32
The program we are planning to implement will include tracking waste and recycling statistics. Unsure
yet what other performance areas we may track. Physical plant issues are already monitored by another
department on campus.
33
The Museum's expansion/renovation project, completed in 2011, has been submitted for LEED
certification and approved at the Gold level. Because we are only three points from Platinum, we have
not yet accepted certification and are currently seeking funds for on-site power generation (solar panels)
that would qualify us for the higher rating.
44
1. Upgrade to LED fixtures in Gallery, currently up to 900 fixtures. 2.The gallery has begun tracking
metrics of energy consumption, mining 10 years of existing data to benchmark against the next 10 years.
3. The gallery has provided staff with occupancy training
56
http://fieldmuseum.org/explore/greener-field-recycling 68

For any performance tracking, formal or informal, please briefly describe the project(s). ID
ComEd Smart Ideas for your Business audit. Lighting and HVAC energy efficient opportunities evaluation
Energy Star utility consumption trending
71
Internal Recycling Use of energy efficient bulbs Energy Audits in past Installation of wi 74
Exhibition construction and build out 80
LEED 81
The Museum's Sustainable Initiatives Team focuses on encouraging positive staff behaviors and selects
various in-building projects annually. The team is made up of one representative from each department
and is staff-run.
94
Resource Conservation Project with ASHRAE audits level 1, 2, rxc, capital improvements for HVAC and
lighting upgrades leading to LEED EBOM, Portfolio Manager used for self comparison for LEED
98
Utility consumption is bench marked on 2007 and each of the following years is compared to the bench
mark utilizing actual consumption data measured by respective utility metrics.
101
Please describe the positive aspects of any formal certification experience(s). ID
Easy to communicate sustainability efforts when you can cite that you are "___" certified. If the
certification is popular enough (such as LEED), it is a good selling point for new audiences.
3
We found no reasonable way to spend money tracking common senese. 18
We have not done any formal certifications. 29
We are pleased to demonstrate in a public way our support for green construction and environmental
design. We strive to be a model for other individuals and institutions in our region.
32
n/a 33
Uniformly positive. Our commissioning agent was able to hold the engineer's feet to the fire until we
finally got modifications (paid by the engineer!) to the HVAC which permit it to operate properly. This
would not have happened if we had not embraced the LEED process.
44
n/a 56
Outside recognition lends credence to our attempts to green the building's operations 68
No formal certifications pursued 71
Ability to benchmark progress 80
PR 81
none 94
Raise awareness through out staff. 98
Avoid Cost has far outpaced industry increase in all areas. 101
Please describe the negative aspects of any formal certification experience(s). ID
No single certification is comprehensive of all sustainability initiatives, so there has to be multiple. The
cost involved is also a negative.
3
Obsolete or inaccurate standards orther than Energy Star 18
We have not done any formal certifications. 29

While our building construction was completed in 2009, the LEED certification process was just finalized
in mid-2012. There were several problems with the LEED system not recognizing our detailed monitoring
process, which led to delays and three years of frustration.
32
Though we haven't started one, most seem incredibly complex. 33
Really, none to speak of. 44
n/a 56
No formal certifications pursued 71
Formal certifications fail to address adequately the unique aspects of museum operations and
environments
80
none 94
LEED review period is very record keeping heavy, creating stress amoung staff. 98
Program restraints have been in area of capitol funding not being available to maximize energy
conservation project implementation
101
For any certifications that were used informally, please describe the reasons for not applying for
formal certification.
ID
The LEED checklist has been used in the design process for several renovation projects without moving
forward to formal certification.
3
No local boards or guides. 18
In 2011, the Aquarium engaged a third-party group to perform a sustainability review using the LEED-EB
program as a template. Various aspects of the buildings, including mechanical, electrical and plumbing
systems, operational schedules and policies and the site itself were evaluated. A feasibility report for
certification was created based on this information, on-site visits, and interviews with 20 Aquarium
stakeholders. The report outlines what sustainable processes are already in place, what policies need to
be defined, and what opportunities lay ahead. At the time, it was decided not to pursue certification.
While we were well within reach of certification, large-scale capital improvements to energy
performance are needed. However, the review has been very beneficial: it has served as a framework as
the leadership team develops short and long-term goals; Capital Projects plans to use the report to
explore feasibility of major recommendation to re-commission all major systems or options for solar
energy; and a well of information for the Conservation Task Force.
20
The cost of certification has kept us from applying for formal certifications. 29
n/a 33
Not required by University at design/development stage 56
Short staffed and not able to get to this. 71
Time and budget and certifications that don't apply to the main emphasis of our work- exhibitions. 80
none 94
Staffing restrictions is primary reason for not applying for formal certification. Man hours have been
devoted to implementation providing positive cash flow, vs formal certification which has no monetary
value
101

Please describe the things you see as most lacking in sustainability performance tracking. ID
Transparency of method and consistency of method. Transparency and consistency would allow for
benchmarking across institutions and organizations. Whereas, right now, we only benchmark internally
with our campuses of buildings.
3
For smaller public places--the lack of real goals that show up in the bottom line. 18
â€œGreen Teamsâ€
place where ideas for green projects & programs are identified and expertise from individual
departments is offered. But the team is only the resource â€“ the job, such as documenting and tracking
performance, must lie within assigned staff. Many certification programs require extensive
documentation and tracking that already packed workloads cannot take on. Dedicated positions with
decision-making authority, such as a Sustainability Coordinator or Sustainability Department, can
facilitate this, but not many organizations provide this support.
20
Funding to perform. For instane, it would be good to have funds to do a carbon footprint analysis 27
We don't have the people to enter the data that would get us started with our sustainability tracking. 29
The certification process was overly complicated and lengthy. Having to jump through so many hoops
and go back and forth so many times led to a process which would be overly difficult for many.
32
Perhaps some lack of standards or standardization in what or how things or measured. For those
standards that do exist, an inability to measure them in the conventionally accepted means for that
standard.
33
we don't do it! 38
LEED: Lacking is an appropriate recognition of the value of re-use of existing structures. No penalty for
tearing down one building in order to build a "green" one in its place.
44
Inconsistent amount of base data for ten year period of trended information 56
Internationally accepted standards/benchmarks. Both for a baseline as well as progress-oriented. 68
The time to formally track sustainability initiatives 71
Questioning of conservation standards and a one size fits all approach 80
LEED is a marginal system that only addresses Sustainabilty in a superficial and short term manner. 81
For those of us at small sites, the staff time to manage tracking is difficult to allocate and maintain
consistently.
92
As far as I am aware, we do not track our sustainability performance. Beginning such a program would
be beneficial to strengthen the Museum's mission.
94
Education-social interation 98
Having the time and the funding to dedicate staff to this imitative, knowing the end result shows not
contribution the budget bottom line
101
Please give a vignette related to sustainability and museums that would be a good to share with the
market.
ID
Our sustainability tracking has allowed us to identify over 50 sustainability strategies that saved us over
$30,000 a year on utility bills, and diverted 300,000 kg of greenhouse gas emissions. This was done with
a targeted effort, using greenhouse gas emissions and return-on-investment measures to find the best
initiatives for our organization.
3

Please give a vignette related to sustainability and museums that would be a good to share with the
market.
ID
The quickest and best thing for our museum was to switch out the lighting to natural light bulbs with
about 30% lower energy usage.
18
At the Aquarium, we are committed to conservation. It is in everything we do. But this is no small task.
As we care for thousands of animals, repair aging buildings, provide for millions of visitors and engage
hundreds of staff, we must use our resources wisely and hope we inspire others follow our lead. One
example that we are proud of is one that began as a way to reduce waste and found future life saving
one of the most essential natural resources â€“ water. Our seal pool exhibit was once a major attraction
to Baltimore Inner Harbor visitors and the sight of a famous "swim" by then Mayor William Donald
Schaefer on our opening day in 1981. When the seal pool was covered over to make room for the
expansion in 2005, it was decided not to demolish it, but to harvest rainwater in the pool to irrigate
native plants in our plaza. Rainwater is collected from our roof into a cistern, which is connected to the
sprinkler system in the waterfront park. We estimate conservatively that we would use 40,000 gallons of
collected water each season. Unless we have a severe drought, we will not have to use domestic water
to irrigate the plaza area at all! As we share this story, we hoping guests will be inspired on many levels:
to find new use for old items, to create their own rain barrel at home, and choose native plants for their
home gardens.
20
We've replaced almost 3000 of our gallery halogen bulbs with LEDs, and we're expecting a 15%
reduction in our electricity costs.
29
We're too infant in our progress to have any good stories. 33
Our goal at Yale University Art Gallery is to be the most sustainable/Green College Art Gallery in the U.S.
We plan to achieve this goal through collaborations with students, staff, and colleagues, in and out of
the University environment, to pull data and compile it into a basic picture of our last ten years of
consumption. From this compilation we can move forward with tracking and eventual mass reductions
leading towards our ultimate goal of sustainability
56
The Field Museum constantly strives to improve our building operations so that they match our
commitment to improving sustainability locally and internationally.
68
It's taking a long time for Museums to live up to their potential to lead in sustainability when the very
heart of their purpose is preservation and informal learning.
80
Our sustainability efforts have gained us positive PR in the community, and helped us acheive NEH grant
funding.
92
A Frank O Geary designed museum, which has obtained LEED EBOM certification. 98
Base line facility audit is critical to any sustainability program and the accuracy of metrics to measure
achieved results, positive or negative.
101

What type of information might be valuable for this museum's future sustainability initiative?* Other Responses ID
As far as I know, this museum remains reasonably uninterested in sustainability, except as a cost-saving
measure
103
Is there list to offer material or equipment that is not any more usefull: e.g. crates used for loan, really
nice but we have no storage space and rarely re-used them. It ould be noce t ofind a way to give them
away.
35
More forums for debating this topic- go Sarah! 80
overall definition and framework 81
Video presentations with case studies on how to get started 33

Sustainable Museum Survey Results

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie Sustainable Museum Survey Results

Ähnlich wie Sustainable Museum Survey Results (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Sustainable Museum Survey Results