Students’ fees for this semester were $5 cheaper than expected.

The green fund — a proposed… Students’ fees for this semester were $5 cheaper than expected.

The green fund — a proposed $5 increase to the Student Activities Fee — was initially slated to finance environmentally friendly projects on campus, but the Student Government Board decided against the fee increase.

Although some still refer to the initiative as the “green fund,” there is no extra fund that will finance sustainability projects on campus this year.

Instead — just like with student organizations — approved proposals will go through the allocations process.

Molly Stieber, a current Board member, said that the current SGB will probably not increase the Student Activities Fee in the future. Instead, the SGB created the Student Sustainable Projects Committee, which will screen projects before they reach the allocations committee.

“We came to the idea that the green fund should be an initiative of the Environmental Committee of the Student Government Board,” Stieber said. “The eventual goal is for the green fund to become its own entity.”

Currently, the Student Sustainable Projects Committee — or, the green fund as some call it — is still looking for more sustainability proposals.

Although they received seven proposals by their original deadline of Oct. 15, they will continue to accept project proposals until Nov. 19.

So far, no proposal has received funding.

“We hope to increase awareness and show students that the University does listen to them and that they can make a change,” said Pitt junior Allison Plummer, the head organizer for SSPC.

“It’s really all about student involvement and that’s what we’re looking for,” she said.

Plummer said the group extended the deadline to get more student groups involved in the program, and not just environmental groups.

Students and faculty with ideas for how to foster a more environmentally friendly campus can find the SSPC Guide and Grant Application on pittgreenfund.com and submit it to the SSPC for review.

Plummer said the nine-person committee — the members of which applied for their positions and were then interviewed by Stieber and Rebecca Schroeder, SGB Environmental Committee chairwoman — will examine the proposals for thoroughness and whether the applicants had planned all the steps and spoken to administration for approval.

There is no specific administrator applicants must speak to — it depends on the nature of the project.

“We try to make sure that the project is going to make an impact — that it’s education, it’s functional and it’s visible,” she said.

Projects accepted by the SSPC then undergo a research period which lasts for about three weeks. The committee peruses the application and goes over the details of the project and the budget.

Although five of the submitted projects are still under review, SSPC discovered that two did not need funding to be enacted.

These projects — which will work with the housing department — will implement new recycling containers on campus, as well as low-flow faucet aerators in sinks in Tower C.

Plummer said Tower C was chosen because it is a public location, so they didn’t have to wait for students to leave before installing them, although she’s not sure when they will be installed.

Tower C will be the only building to receive the aerators because Pitt wants to know how effective they are before installing them throughout campus, Plummer said.

Engineers for a Sustainable World will introduce a plan entitled Pitt-Stop Outdoor Recycling designed to place “trendy recycling bins” made of recyclable materials within sight of every outdoor trash bin on campus, according to the proposed budget.

The proposed budget for this project is $4,970.90, but Pitt will cover the bill without dipping into the Student Activities Fee, Plummer said.

Schroeder was the creator of the faucet aerator proposal.

Faucet aerators decrease the flow rate of water that comes from the faucet, which decreases the amount of money used, and Schroeder’s plan could potentially increase conservation efforts.

She said the aerators will result in a 77 percent reduction in water flow, replacing 2.2-gallons-per-minute aerators with .5-gallons-per-minute aerators, at the cost of a little more than $1 per aerator.

Pitt will cover the cost of the aerator project as well.

Schroeder, who was one of the original founders of the green fund, said the proposal project of SSPC allows ideas to become a reality.

“It basically provides a set process and an institution to facilitate students in being the change they wish to see on campus, and that’s what made me so eager to jump on this opportunity,” she said. Schroeder is an active member of the environmental community at Pitt and is also a member of Pitt’s environmental group Free the Planet.

David Palm, a sophomore and member of Engineers for a Sustainable World, submitted the outdoor recycling proposal as well as a “Go Green!” proposal on behalf of his organization.

The “Go Green!” proposal involves the creation of octagonal “Go Green!” signs to alert the student body and faculty of areas where they have the potential to make an environmentally friendly decision.

An example of a proposed sign included within the application to the SSPC suggested a notification on the hinged doors of the Pete stating “revolving door use saves energy costs.”

“In implementing our ‘Go Green!’ signs campaign we hope to give people an idea of the individual decisions that they make and how that affects sustainability and how each and every one of their decisions really makes a difference,” Palm said.

In the “Go Green!” proposal, the applicants estimated their budget to be about $2,101.71. If accepted by SSPC, SGB could potentially allocate that money from the Student Activities Fund.

Schroeder said the application process might seem lengthy, but it helps to make sure that the applicants have adequately considered all aspects of their proposal.

In the three-page application form, applicants must answer 24 questions as well as provide a detailed budget, among other things. Some of the questions ask who will benefit from the project, what methods would be used and how the materials will be obtained and discarded.

“If you get through the whole application with no problem, you know you’ve got a strong, detailed, understandable and comprehensive plan outlined — and if you do have some issues then you know exactly what aspects of your plan you need to flesh out more,” Schroeder said.