Paving the Way to Environmental Hypocrisy

Alison Kaiser

She/Her

Opinions Editor

3/4/25

I arrived back on campus last August to discover that a large section of brick walkway through campus, from Prospect Dining Hall past Hyde Hall, had been replaced with fresh pavement. Ironically, it runs directly past the Office of Environmental Sustainability. For a university that is situated in close proximity to the White Mountain National Forest and offers degree programs such as sustainability, environmental science and policy, and climate studies, this was a surprising and disappointing decision.

As a junior environmental science and policy major at this university, I have spent time studying the albedo effect and impact of building materials like pavement and concrete on the environment. Pavement has low albedo, meaning it absorbs and re-emits a large amount of the Sun’s energy and causes temperature rise in the surrounding area.

Its dark color means it has low reflectivity, or ability for light to bounce off of it, which is especially concerning because of the lack of tree cover in this stretch of campus. Trees help to absorb and reflect heat from the sun, providing shade and resulting in cooler temperatures. As climate change continues to cause temperature rise in New England every year, we cannot afford to be investing in materials that will worsen these impacts.

Is this the future of infrastructure on campus, as the brick walkways continue to deteriorate? Widespread use of pavement on campus without exploring other alternatives would be detrimental to ecosystem health and ultimately mental and physical health of all members of our community. Increased temperatures cause strain on tree species not adapted to warmer climates, and would cause our campus’ impressive greenspaces to suffer more than they already are. Access to greenspace and fresh air is directly correlated to good mental and physical health, both of which are on the decline in students today as it is.

I’m not claiming to be an economist, but it seems to me much more cost effective to have the foresight to maintain the existing brick walkways than to rip them up and pave. Regardless, is cost more important than preserving our campus’ historical integrity? Apart from environmental concerns are those of aesthetics and culture. Pavement is ugly, yes, but the brick is historic. It’s reminiscent of classic New England, another selling point used often by the university. The Plymouth State University campus has been used as an academic institution in some capacity since the early 1800s. I recently saw a promotional video of our campus shot from a drone, getting a birds-eye-view of these iconic paths. It’s unfortunate to me how much decision makers at PSU take what we have for granted, advertising features that will cease to exist without active maintenance and care.

I’m curious who makes these decisions, their qualifications, and motives. Obviously decision makers cannot be expected to know everything, but it is negligent to default to pavement, especially with a wealth of information available from professors in the Boyd Science Center and Office of Environmental Sustainability. I reached out to Physical Plant staff to have a discussion about this issue, but did not receive a reply. I’m sure, much like many other departments on this campus, that they are understaffed, underpaid, and trying their best. This is not meant to be an attack on any one party, but a call to action for us to work together as a community for the betterment of the institution in which we live, work, learn, and love. However, it is not lost on me as an environmental science and policy student that Plymouth State University advertises itself as an environmentally conscious university while simultaneously making management decisions that harm the environment they profit off of.