Category: Sustainability

Posts relating to sustainability and the work of AIC’s Committee for Sustainable Conservation Practice.

42nd Annual Meeting – Opening Session, 29 May, "Quantifying cost effectiveness of risk treatment options (aka preventive conservation)" by Stefan Michalski and Irene F. Karsten

Preventive conservation was the topic of much discussion at this year’s annual meeting, from how to teach it to what exactly it entails. In this talk, Stefan Michalski discussed the quantification of preventive conservation.
He began by reminding us that we base our ideas of preventive conservation on the “proofed fluctuation” argument: if fluctuation in the past has not caused significant damage, then similar future fluctuations will not either. He also defined preventive conservation. First, we assess risks. Then, we ‘treat’ risks;  this second part is Preventive Conservation. We have to remember that ‘treat’ has a different meaning in this context than in remedial conservation, and despite being a loaded word, accurately describes what we do. These definitions are simultaneously straightforward and complicated; we struggle with them and yet we need them for our daily work.
Michalski continued by defining the four steps to successful preventive conservation:
1. Identify Options
2. Analyze
3. Evaluate
4. Implement
Steps 2-3 require quantification, and it’s vital that this quantification is transparent and well-documented. This is where Michalski and Karsten’s research comes in. They assessed the financial risk of every preventive option available for a variety of institutions, including an archive and a historic house.
In order to quantify reduction in risk, calculations were made using the following formulas:

  • Option effectiveness = size of risk reduction = size of original risk – size of reduced risk
  • Risk reduction / cost = [% of collection saved / $ spent] /year

I had never encountered this calculation before, or considered this as a feasible method of determining cost-effectiveness and ranking options, and I don’t think I’m alone in the conservation field in this. I wish that this had been covered by one of my graduate courses, because while it may seem obvious in some ways, the explanation was exceptionally helpful, and is something that I will take to my professional practice.
The numbers produced graphs on a logarithmic scale, in terms of percent saved per dollar. By evaluating options on this scale, it was possible to see how cost-effective various options are. What was highlighted with this calculation is that the cost effectiveness of an action is a function of the magnitude of risk – the bigger the risk, the better the return on percentage saved. This is in line with the economic principle of ‘economies of scale‘. What Michalski noted was that it is important to remember that the scale referred to is internal, not external, which means that small museums can be just as cost-effective as larger museums.
I loved this talk, and I felt like I learned a huge amount about quantification of risk. ‘Risk assessment’ is a term that we are all familiar with; to be able to go more in-depth is a skill, and Stefan Michalski did an excellent job of teaching that skill. His results are hugely applicable to museums and institutions of all sizes, and we should all learn and apply this method to aid in our decision-making for preventive conservation.

42nd Annual Meeting – Opening Session, 29 May, "Being a Gallery in a Park – balancing Sustainability, Access and Collection Care" by Nicola Walker and Ann French

This talk revolved around the Whitworth Art Gallery, part of the University of Manchester in the UK. I was interested in this talk in particular because I was interested to see the differences between UK and US approaches to sustainability, and to see how sustainability measures against other principles such as access and recommended storage conditions.
One of the central themes of this talk was that “access is central to all of the gallery activities”. This resulted in some interesting decisions, which strike a balance between practical and ideal. One that stuck out to me personally was the presence of an IPM working group which meets weekly, to discuss what needs to be done in order to ensure that events like festivals and those involving food can be pulled off. Their maintenance of a ‘can do’ attitude is inspiring, and ensures that the museum works with it’s surroundings – a park, which families want to be able to visit and enjoy in tandem with the museum.
The process which the museum went through in order to add an addition to the building was also discussed. A few points stood out there, as well:
– A new route was introduced to separate catering delivery from art movement and delivery (which is also related to the IPM working group).
– A green, bio-diverse roof was put into place on part of the building.
– Stores were relocated into a basement, where the environment can be controlled with passive techniques rather than air conditioning.
– Solar panels were added to the roof.
– Daylight was introduced into some galleries.
– A ground source heat pump was installed.
The idea of the green, bio-diverse roof was fascinating. In order to prevent it from drawing unwanted pests into the museum, they worked with entomologists to ensure that they only attracted specific insects – those who don’t want to eat their lovely textile collection. The introduction of daylight into galleries as discussed here formed a funny comparison to another talk given on sustainability and environmental consciousness.
Another aspect to sustainability was also discussed: the development of working patterns which allow the collection to be feasibly managed and kept in the best condition. One of the theories they work under is known as the Pareto 80:20 principle, which says that 80% of results come from 20% of issues, or in this case, 20% of objects. They use this principle to target their work-flow, focusing on the 20% which give the most result and working on the other 80% on a “modular” basis.
This cross of sustainable environment and sustainable work practices extends to the methods they use to package their 2D objects, as well. This category of object is packaged in a way that it can be easily switched from storage to display or vice versa, and the packaging provides a buffering layer that reduces the need for strict environmental control.
I would have loved to hear more about these storage/display procedures, as I think they could be useful for other museums. I’m also curious to have a more specific list of the plants they used in their bio-diverse roof garden, because that too could be useful in other places. Their practices seem to be very widely applicable, and their attitudes towards having a museum that works for the public and within its environment are admirable. I would love to see other museums adopt these approaches, to be environmentally friendly and to sustain the working environment of conservation professionals.

42nd Annual Meeting – Electronic Media Group Luncheon, May 30, “Sustainably Designing the First Digital Repository for Museum Collections”

Panelists:
Jim Coddington, Chief Conservator, The Museum of Modern Art
Ben Fino-Radin, Digital Repository Manager, The Museum of Modern Art
Dan Gillean, AtoM Product Manager, Artefactual Systems
Kara Van Malssen, Adjunct Professor, NYU MIAP, Senior Consultant, AudioVisual Preservation Solutions (AVPreserve)
This informative and engaging panel session provided an overview of The Museum of Modern Art’s development of a digital repository for their museum collections (DRMC) and gave attendees a sneak peak at the beta version of the system. The project is nearing the end of the second phase of development and the DRMC will be released later this summer. The panelists did an excellent job outlining the successes and challenges of their process and offered practical suggestions for institutions considering a similar approach. They emphasized the importance of collaboration, communication, and flexibility at every stage of the process, and as Kara Van Malssen stated towards the end of the session, “there is no ‘done’ in digital preservation” — it requires an inherently sustainable approach to be successful.
This presentation was chock-full of good information and insight, most of which I’ve just barely touched on in this post (especially the more technical bits), so I encourage the panelists and my fellow luncheon attendees to contribute to the conversation with additions and corrections in the comments section.
Jim Coddington began with a brief origin story of the digital repository, citing MoMA’s involvement with the Matters in Media Art project and Glenn Wharton’s brainstorming sessions with the museum’s media working group. Kara, who began working with Glenn in 2010 on early prototyping of the repository, offered a more detailed history of the process and walked through considerations of some of the pre-software development steps of the process.
Develop your business case: In order to make the case for creating a digital repository, they calculated the total GB the museum was acquiring annually. With large and ever-growing quantities of data, it was necessary to design a system in which many of the processes – like ingest, fixity checks, migration, etc.- could be automated. They used the OAIS (open archival information system) reference model (ISO 14721:2012), adapting it for a fine art museum environment.
Involve all stakeholders: Team members had initial conversations with five museum departments: conservation, collections technologies, imaging, IT applications and infrastructure, and AV. Kara referenced the opening session talk on LEED certification, in which we were admonished from choosing an architect based on their reputation or how their other buildings look. The same goes for choosing software and/or a software developer for your repository project – what works for another museum won’t necessarily work for you, so it’s critical to articulate your institution’s specific needs and find or develop a system that will best serve those needs.
Determine system scope: Stakeholder conversations helped the MoMA DRMC team determine both the content scope – will the repository include just fine arts or also archival materials? – and the system scope – what should it do and how will it work with other systems already in place?
Define your requirements: Specifically, functional requirements. The DRMC team worked through scenarios representing a variety of different stages of the process in order to determine all of the functions the system is required to perform. A few of these functions include: staging, ingest, storage, description & access, conservation, and administration.
Articulate your use cases: Use cases describe interactions and help to outline the steps you might take in using a repository. The DRMC team worked through 22 different use cases, including search & browse, adding versions, and risk assessment. By defining their requirements and articulating use cases, the team was able to assess what systems they already had in place and what gaps would need to be filled with the new system.
At this point, Kara turned the mic over to Ben Fino-Radin, who was brought on as project manager for the development phase in mid-2012.
RFPs were issued for the project in April 2013; three drastically different vendors responded – the large vendor (LV), the small vendor (SV), and the very small vendor (VSV).
Vetting the vendors: The conversation about choosing the right vendor was, in this blogger’s opinion, one of the most important and interesting parts of the session. The LV, with an international team of thousands and extremely polished project management skills, was appealing in many ways. MoMA had worked with this particular vendor before, though not extensively on preservation or archives projects. The SV and VSV, on the other hand, did have preservation and archives domain expertise, which the DRMC team ultimately decided was one of the most important factors in choosing a vendor. So, in the end, MoMA, a very big institution, hired Artefactual Systems, the very small vendor. Ben acknowledged that this choice seemed risky at first, since the small, relatively new vendor was unproven in this particular kind of project, but the pitch meeting sold MoMA on the idea the Artefactual Systems would be a good fit. Reiterating Kara’s point from earlier, that you have to choose a software product/developer based on your own specific project needs, Ben pointed out that choosing a good software vendor wasn’t enough; choosing a vendor with domain expertise allowed for a shared vocabulary and more nimble process and design.
Dan Gillean spoke next, offering background on Artefactual Systems and their approach to developing the DRMC.
Know your vendor: Artefactual Systems, which was founded in 2001 and employs 17 staff members, has two core products: AtoM and Archivematica. In addition to domain expertise in preservation and archives, Artefactual is committed to standards-based solutions and open source development. Dan highlighted the team’s use of agile development methodology, which involves a series of short term goals and concrete deliverables; agile development requires constant assessment, allowing for ongoing change and improvement.
Expect to be involved: One of the advantages of an agile approach, with its constant testing, feedback, and evolution, is that there are daily discussions among developers as well as frequent check-ins with the user/client. This was the first truly agile project Artefactual has done, so the process has been beneficial to them as well as to MoMA. As development progressed, the team conducted usability testing and convened various advisory groups; in late 2013 and early 2014, members of cultural heritage institutions and digital preservation experts were brought in to test and provide feedback on the DRMC.
Prepare for challenges: One challenge the team faced was learning how to avoid “scope creep.” They spent a lot of time developing one of the central features of the site – the context browser – but recognized that not every feature could go through so many iterations before the final project deadline. They had to keep their focus on the big picture, developing the building blocks now and allowing refinement to happen later.
At this point in the luncheon, the DRMC had it’s first public demo. Ben walked us through the various widgets on the dashboard as well as the context browser feature, highlighting the variety and depth of information available and the user-friendly interface.
Know your standards: Kara wrapped up the panel with a discussion of ‘trustworthiness’ and noted some tools available for assessment and auditing digital repositories, including the NDSA Levels of Digital Preservation and the Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories (ISO 16263:2010). MoMA is using these assessment tools as planning tools for next the phases of the DRMC project, which may include more software development as well as policy development.
Development of the DRMC is scheduled to be complete in June of this year and an open source version of the code will be available after July.

42nd Annual Meeting – Track A: Case Studies in Sustainable Collections Care, May 30, “Boxes Inside of Boxes: Preventative Conservation Practices by Robin P. Croskery Howard”

Robin P. Croskery Howard, Objects Conservator at the Ah-Tah-Thi-Ki Museum, focused on how custom housing, in concert with climate control, can be effective preventative conservation. Three case studies highlighting specific housing solutions for different collection materials were shown.
Case Study #1: The Long Road Home/Speck Collection
Some housings need to provide safety for travel and long term storage. The Ah-Tah-Thi-Ki museum makes it a priority to repatriate any collection items that are not Seminole in origin. These items are returned untreated. The two housings used for this are either stacked layers of Volara cutouts, contoured to fit the object or ethafoam cavities lined with acid-free tissue.
Case Study #2: The Doll with the Broken Neck
The museum has a number of dolls made out of palmetto fibers. These fibers deteriorate over time and the limbs and necks of the dolls often detach. Any treatment would produce only temporary results as the doll continued to age and breakdown. Custom pillows and supports are used to support the dolls and relieve stress on their joints.
Case Study #3: Leaning Baskets
An oversized modern sweetgrass basket that had partially collapsed under its own weight was restored using an adaptive housing. The basket was put in a box with twill ties holding it in place. The ties were gradually tightened over several weeks to support and lift the basket and allow it to gently regain its shape over time. Other modern baskets are stored with ethafoam supports.
These were great, practical solutions for caring for objects by using housing to prevent or control damage. I realized while writing this post how much this session falls in line with Cordelia Rogerson’s “Fit for Purpose” talk. All of the items showcased here were cared for, but in a manner and level appropriate for long view of their “life” at the museum.

42nd Annual Meeting – May 30th, "Sustainability Roundtable" hosted by the Sustainability Committee

What does it take to get your institution to do something about sustainability? The Sustainability Committee roundtable sought to create a space to discuss facilitating change at our institutions. In full disclosure, I am on the Sustainability Committee, however my role at the Annual Meeting did not include organizing the roundtable. Jia-Sun Tsang and Sarah Stauderman lead a discussion of five sustainable issues, focusing on the Smithsonian Institution (SI) as a case study. This was followed by a discussion amongst the audience, who were divided into groups of two.
The five sustainable issues were recycling, reuse, making a difference/activism, preservation environment, and lighting. After the presentation of these five, the audience was invited to add additional issues they would like to discuss, which included planet sustainability (especially water consumption, CO2 emissions, exotoxins emissions).

  • Key factors for improving the success of recycling at the Smithsonian were improving communication between housekeeping and facilities and educating the staff about how to recycle.
  • Reuse of materials occurs at an individual level, through units, and across museums. For example, the SI has a process for reusing equipment, exhibition cases, etc. that are no longer needed at a particular branch. A
  • Activism was profiled through the experience of Eric Hollinger, an employee at the SI who has had a major impact on green issues. He sees himself as an “agitator,” “assistant,” “advisor,” and “advocate.”
  • Making changes to the preservation environment occurs best when all the relevant constituents are at the table (facilities, conservation, curatorial, etc.). An example of effective change to preservation environments was a Smithsonian wide summit that occurred last year.
  • Colonial Williamsburg recently worked across departments to make changes to their lighting system and switch to Light-Emitting Diodes (LEDs). Further information on that case study can be found on the Sustainability pages of the AIC wiki. Another case study for successful changes to lighting is the partnership between the Smithsonian American Art Museum and the Department of Energy.

Sarah Stauderman gave us a crash course in management theory to give us the tools and mindset necessary to create change. Learning to frame the conversation to effect change takes practice. These conversations work best if you have a defined purpose and engage multiple perspectives. Change happens most quickly when you can collaborate, compromise, and negotiate with your colleagues. Keeping things simple and aiming for small outcomes will help to get the momentum going on your project. When you do get a meeting, think carefully about where the meeting will be held and if you can make it an experience or in some way engage the constituents in the issue.
We then broke into pairs to discuss the following three questions. The goal of this section was to help participants practice the dialogue and thought processes that facilitate change.
1)   What do you need to achieve the goal?
2)   What in your organization is keeping you from your goal?
3)   What training/resources do you need?
Personally, I found it helpful to have a framework to start thinking about change. Talking through ideas with my partner was encouraging and provided valuable insight. I hope that the other audience participants were able to take away a feeling of optimism about their ability to implement new sustainability initiatives at their institutions.

42nd Annual Meeting – Opening Session, May 29, "Social Participation as a Way for Sustainable Projects in Conservation of Worshiping Objects: The Case of Current Mayan Communities in Yucatán, Mexico" by Giovana Jaspersen

The involvement of source communities and practices that allow conservation to be sustainable within communities are hot topics in conservation right now, and Giovana Jaspersen presented a very interesting case study that covered both of these topics in the Opening Session of the AIC Annual Meeting 2014. She discussed the ways in which her team engages with Mexican communities, spaces where religion is a center of social life, and objects of worship are in frequent use.
The objects themselves were beautifully painted sculptures, which would be paraded around and put on display within the religious community. Jaspersen noted that previous restorations had been undertaken on some objects, using non-conservation friendly materials, such as automotive paint, which apparently imparts a high gloss that is seen as desirable.
She noted some significant problems in approaching these communities about the conservation of their objects, the most important being the challenges of communication. Other questions included ongoing conservation – how do you ensure preservation after the conservator has left the community?
Using a number of different approaches, from initial immersion to assistance and then intervention, she was able to develop a methodology which utilized a number of different media to engage and teach the community – lectures, plays and skits, brochures, and involvement of children in the community.
A number of themes seen in this talk were repeated in other talks and discussions, and are really important things for all conservators to consider. Reaching out to children is a great way to ensure that the conservation profession is sustained in the future, and engaging with conservation students ensures that the message about community involvement is spread among professionals.
Overall I really enjoyed this talk, and I think the most important takeaway was the statement that our profession is not just about material conservation, but sociocultural conservation. The only way we can achieve that is by projects such as this one!
 

42nd Annual Meeting – General Session, May 29, "A LEED Primer for Conservators: Or, What Should I Do When the Architect Proposes Daylight in Our New Galleries, by Scott Raphael Schiamberg and Rachael Perkins Arenstein"

Both Scott and Rachael emphasized the importance of working together. This is NOT the attitude they endorsed.
Both Scott and Rachael emphasized the importance of working together. This is NOT the attitude they endorsed.

When I perused the list of talks for this meeting, the subtitle of this one immediately caught my eye. In fact, I used it as one of the justifications for my Museum to support my attendance. There have been many skirmishes in the ‘natural light in galleries’ tug of war at the Penn Museum lately. It turns out that the light issue was peripheral to the LEED discussion but I’m so glad I was drawn into this fascinating and useful talk.
Scott started off explaining that to be good clients for architects, conservators should have a basic understanding of LEED. Like all of us, I’ve been seeing LEED mentioned in every building project I read about or walk past but I never really knew was it was or how it worked.
From the US Green Building Council website: “LEED, or Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design, is a green building certification program that recognizes best-in-class building strategies and practices. To receive LEED certification, building projects satisfy prerequisites and earn points to achieve different levels of certification. Prerequisites and credits differ for each rating system, and teams choose the best fit for their project.”
With gentle humor, Scott filled out this definition for us. He compared LEED to eating one’s vegetables: sometimes a challenge but good for us. Considering LEED factors is Doing the Right Thing (something conservators always strive for, right?). He explained that the system is constantly evolving and getting better. There are five different ratings systems but none of them is a perfect fit for museum buildings; he hoped that there might be a special system for our special needs. Until then, we need to understand how the system works and how it can be used for and against conservation factors. Scott explained that sometimes architects (not his firm, of course) ‘game’ the system – using LEED to justify things like the aforementioned natural light in galleries: “if you don’t give in on this, we won’t make our LEED rating”. But the LEED system is point-based and natural light only counts for 1 point out of a possible 110. Putting a bike rack outside the building gives you the same point with much less impact on artifact preservation.
Scott emphasized that it’s not our jobs as conservators to be intimately acquainted with LEED, just to understand enough to work effectively with the construction team.
Scott’s takeaways before handing over to Rachael included:

  • The reminder that the client is always right. The Museum is the architect’s client.
  • Do your homework; it’s important to select the right architect. Check with colleagues and previous clients. (Speaking of someone who has been working with an absolutely stellar architectural firm recently and has coped with the results of less successful choices, I can’t emphasize this strongly enough)
  • Work closely with the architect
  • LEED is not perfect but is a good starting point and is getting better.
  • It’s more important to get things right than to chase LEED points, if they don’t align with your needs.

Rachael began by pointing out that new construction should be exciting but in her and many colleagues’ experience, it turns out to be more stressful than joyful. She theorized that the problems many of us have faced are not inherent in the LEED system but in the design process. We (and she included in this pronoun conservators, facilities staff, administrators, and donors) make our lives difficult. Rachael suggested some strategies for reducing the stress for everyone.
The most important factor is probably effective project management. All the stakeholders should be involved early. Rachael referred to the trap many of us have experienced: being told that it’s ‘too early’ to be involved in the process then, when we are allowed a seat at the table told that it’s too late to change the problem items. She reiterated the importance of wise choice of architect; the right architect needs to be responsive to the client’s concerns and this should be just as true of ‘STARchitects’. To be an intelligent client we need to be prepared to sit through a lot of meetings and to have done our homework. Rachael provided some resources she’s found useful:

Both the books are available on amazon.
She suggested that we as conservators need to have a voice in broader preservation concerns and emphasized that this is best done by contributing positively: “be an ally not a critic”. [Later several of us were discussing this profound fact at the lovely evening reception and Terry Drayman-Weisser shared her technique for responding to suggestions from non-conservators that horrify her conservatorial instincts: “That’s a good idea, let me work with you to figure out how we can manage that” I may not have the quote exact but you get the gist.]
Rachael’s LEED specific tips included the insight that there were three of the six LEED rating categories that tended to have the most potential for contention with conservation concerns: Energy and Atmosphere; Materials and Resources; Indoor Environmental Quality. But these are only contentious if the team is choosing to chase LEED points without considering the Big Picture.
Finally Rachael reminded us that all the planning in the world will not help if the plans are not followed through or carried out properly. Perhaps the most important tip was to ensure that the construction plan included an independent commissioning agent. Building commissioning (Cx) is the process of verifying, in new construction, all (or some, depending on scope) of the subsystems for mechanical (HVAC), plumbing, electrical, fire/life safety, building envelopes, interior systems (example laboratory units), cogeneration, utility plants, sustainable systems, lighting, wastewater, controls, and building security to achieve the owner’s project requirements as intended by the building owner and as designed by the building architects and engineers [thank you, Wikipedia]. An independent commissioning agent is one who ensures that everything has been done as laid out; clearly an outside specialist is to be preferred to the contractors who have an understandable vested interest in passing their own work.
I’ve tried to do justice to this very informative presentation but I’m sure I’ve left out or misrepresented some vital facts. This blogging stuff is hard – I don’t mean to discourage others from doing it; I’m really glad I did so but it’s just that it’s always harder to take coherent notes for others who weren’t there. So, if any of you who were there read this and have additions, emendations or suggestions, please do so. Until then, I’ll leave you with Rachael’s last slide:
blog

Get Ready for San Francisco with the Sustainability Committee: Come see us!

AIC's 42nd Annual Meeting - 2014
This is the fourth in a series of posts by the Sustainability Committee in the run-up to the 2014 Annual Meeting, describing sustainability issues and initiatives in the city of San Francisco. The first blog post explained plastic bag and container laws. The second described the water crisis in California. The third post was about the California Academy of Sciences: The world’s greenest museum. Here, I will tell you about the activities the Sustainability Committee will be involved in during the conference.
1. We will be sharing a booth with the Health & Safety Committee. Stop by! We will have samples of sustainable materials and handouts on various topics relating to sustainability in conservation.
2. On Friday, May 30th from 1-2 PM, we will host a Sustainability Roundtable Discussion in the Hospitality Room: How Do We Support Meaningful Change in Our Cultural Institutions? It’s free! Come check it out. It will be a conversation about engaging decision-makers in museums, libraries, and archives on the topic of sustainability.  How do individuals rally interest, build momentum, and transition from well-meaning intentions to meaningful action in their cultural institutions at large? During this informal discussion, members of the sustainability committee along with facilitators Sarah Stauderman, Collections Care Manager at the Smithsonian Institution Archives, and Jia-Sun Tsang, Senior Paintings Conservator at the Smithsonian Institution will share real-life examples of the sustainability movement in cultural heritage. Bring your questions and ideas to share!
3. Some members of the committee have put together a poster for the poster session. The poster session will be divided into two venues. Our poster will be #46 in the SeaCliff Foyer: Life Cycle Assessments: Lighting, HVAC, Loans, and Treatments by Sarah Nunberg, Pamela Hatchfield, Dr. Matthew Eckelman, and the AIC Sustainability Committee. Check it out if these questions interest you: What is the environmental impact difference between LEDs and Halogen lamps? What aspects of a loan have the biggest environmental impact? How much energy does regularly shutting down, or coasting, the HVAC system save? Silanes vs B-72 in Acetone:Ethanol vs B-72 in Xylene: Which Has a Higher Human and Environmental Impact? The poster session runs from 10 AM Thursday through Friday evening. For those unable to see the poster in person, it will be available to download from the AIC website sometime in June.
4. At the CIPP Seminar on Wednesday from 1-5PM, two of our committee members will take part in a panel discussion on Greening your Business. AIC Sustainability Committee Chair Betsy Haude (Senior Paper Conservator, Library of Congress) will present an overview of the committee’s work and Sarah Nunberg (Objects Conservation Studio LLC, Brooklyn, NY) will speak on sustainable practices in the conservation studio.
5. Committee member Christian Hernandez has prepared a talk for the StashFlash Session on recycled materials and long-term storage. Christian will not be attending the conference, but is sending is PowerPoint.
 

Get Ready for San Francisco with the Sustainability Committee: The World's Greenest Museum

AIC's 42nd Annual Meeting - 2014
This is the third in a series of posts by the Sustainability Committee in the run-up to the 2014 Annual Meeting, describing sustainability issues and initiatives in the city of San Francisco. The first blog post explained plastic bag and container laws. The second blog post described the water crisis in California.
Did you know that the California Academy of Sciences, located in San Francisco, is the world’s greenest museum? It is also the largest public LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Platinum-rated building in the world. Designed by architect Renzo Piano, it was built from recycled materials where possible, it has a green ‘living’ roof with six inches of soil for insulation and skylights that open to vent hot air, solar panels, radiant heating in the floors, and insulation made from recycled denim (yes, denim!).
The green roof is comprised of seven hillocks to pay homage to the landscape of San Francisco, and also to blend in with the setting of Golden Gate Park. It also has weather stations to provide data to the automated passive ventilation systems. The benefit of a living roof is absorption of moisture and carbon dioxide, and natural cooling of the building.  It was planted with native plants intended to survive well in the San Francisco climate. There has been some critique of that idea, because native plants may not be suited to a city environment, but any new idea takes a while to be perfected. Hopefully, green roofs will become more and more common within the next decade and difficulties will be smoothed out.  If you visit Golden Gate park, check out the building and see for yourself.
For more information on the LEED program and how it relates to preservation concerns take in the talk by architect Scott Schiamberg and conservator Rachael Arenstein at AIC’s Opening Session, May 29 10:50am – 11:10am  A LEED primer for conservators: or, what should I do when the architect proposes daylight in our new galleries?
I also recommend the de Young Museum, with its copper exterior that is intended to turn green over time to match the park setting, and the Japanese Tea Garden because it is beautiful.
 

Get Ready for San Francisco with the Sustainability Committee: California Water Shortage

AIC's 42nd Annual Meeting - 2014This is the second in a series of blog posts by the Sustainability Committee in the run-up to the 2014 Annual Meeting, describing sustainability issues and initiatives in the city of San Francisco. (The first blog post, regarding plastic bag and container laws, can be read here.)
Over the last six months, we have been hearing about the water shortage in the state of California, and this post will attempt to answer: what is the cause, and how will it affect us when we are in San Francisco? According to the California Department of Water Resources; “There are many ways that drought can be defined. Some ways can be quantified, such as meteorological drought (period of below normal precipitation) or hydrologic drought (period of below average runoff), others are more qualitative in nature (shortage of water for a particular purpose). There is no universal definition of when a drought begins or ends. Drought is a gradual phenomenon.” The website also explains that cyclical droughts have been common in California since records have been kept. Paleo-climate research has shown that in the more distant past, California has experienced much more severe droughts than those in the recent centuries.
So, this is a normal cycle, but there are two major differences that make this drought more worrisome. The first is that many more people and industries are dependent on the water supply than ever before (38,332,521 people at last count, according to the Census Bureau). This article from Energy & Environment Publishing explains “The state’s population has shot to 38 million people today, compared with 22 million during the last record-breaking drought in 1977. Meanwhile, the state’s farms increased their revenue to $45 billion from $9.6 billion over the same time period. The earlier figure is in that year’s dollars.” Secondly, the just-released 2014 National Climate Assessment (see ‘Water’) predicts that droughts can be expected to intensify in the 21st century.
The governor declared a state of emergency on January 17th. This asked all Californians to reduce water use by 20%, brought contingency plans into effect, made financial assistance available for those most affected, and created a task force. The most notable effects of the water shortage state-wide have been: a predicted 7% loss of farmland and a corresponding increase in prices (not just in California, but worldwide), especially for avocados, tomatoes, almonds, lettuce, cotton, rice, melons, and peppers; drastic lowering of water reservoirs; loss of wetland habitat (many salmon will have to be trucked to spawning grounds this year); lowering of groundwater quality; and increased chance of wildfires.
Locally, San Francisco has not been feeling the effects as much as southern and western portions of the state. Already, city residents have an excellent record of conserving water, and the public utilities commission continues to encourage water-saving through voluntary initiatives.
What I predict we will notice while we are there is a parched landscape viewed through the airplane windows or on sightseeing forays into the surrounding region, higher than usual prices on produce, and lower levels in the surrounding bodies of water. The worst case scenario would be a concurrent wildfire in the region that affects air quality, flight schedules and/or camping plans.
The good news is that The Hyatt Regency San Francisco (the conference hotel) has a list of green practices that includes water saving features such as low-flow showerheads and toilets, aerated faucets, towel/sheet reuse, and drip irrigation.
Information Sources:
 California Drought Updates by the Association of Water Agencies
California Water Science Center
NBC News: California Drought
New York Times: California’s Thirsting Farmland
The Guardian: California’s Drought Portends High Prices for Cinco de Mayo Favourites