Twelve protesters interrupted the University System Board of Regents meeting at the Georgia Center Wednesday morning to protest the use of the on-campus coal boiler and a policy that bans illegal immigrants from Georgia’s top colleges. 

Five supporters of the University’s Beyond Coal campaign joined with four banned immigrant students because both parties felt ignored by the University’s higher administration and the Board of Regents, protester and senior University student Ian Karra said. 

“We kind of teamed up seeing the common theme of not having our voices heard,” Karra told The Red & Black. “I think [the protest] sent a message to [University] President [Michael] Adams that student voices aren’t being heard. That’s where this coalition of the two organizations came from.” 

The ban on illegal immigrants attending the University, Georgia Tech, Georgia State, Georgia Health Sciences University and Georgia College & State University was implemented in 2010.

“[The banned students] have been organizing around the Board of Regents trying to get them to lift that ban,” Karra said. 

Besides protesting the ban, supporters of Beyond Coal held signs and Karra addressed the board and Adams to discuss the need for the University to commit to a deadline for shutting down the coal-fired boiler on South Campus. 

The campaign chose to protest the meeting because Adams and members of the presidential search committee would be present, Karra said. 

“Twenty schools have already won this campaign and have moved beyond coal,” he said. “So, we’ve been pressuring administration to set a date to commit to retiring the boiler and replacing it with an alternative.” 

Karra said while the campaign has collected “around 5,000 petitions, had 150 faculty endorse [it] and got the support of around 200 community members,” he has gotten little response from administration. 

He said the campaign had one meeting with administration but that it “didn’t really go anywhere.” 

“You’d think with a quarter of the undergraduate population behind us, they would address this problem,” Karra said. “However, based on [a Red & Black] article about the coal plant, they’ve been really diffident, really wishy-washy about what they’re going to replace it with.”

Karra and the rest of the campaigners are concerned because the board “hasn’t even done a comprehensive feasibility study” to find what would replace the boiler. 

Karra felt interrupting the meeting was the only way to have Adams, the board and other administration listen to these causes, he said.

“It was kind of a last resort type deal,” he said. “Our administration has become really disconnected from the student population. There’s just a lack of accountability and communication between our students and our administrators. And that carries over to the Board of Regents.”

But Board of Regents spokesman John Millsaps said the students’ message may not have been received clearly by the board or administration. 

Millsaps missed the protest but told The Red & Black that “people said it wasn’t very clear” what the group had been protesting. 

“They were guessing the environment. Somebody was talking about immigration,” he said. “So it was not very coherent, evidently.” 

Millsaps also said students have protested Board of Regents meetings before. 

“It’s nothing unprecedented or unusual,” he said.

The board had met to review a list of items including construction to Oglethorpe House, the Terry College of Business and the Health Sciences Campus at the meeting.

Despite the protest, the board moved to ratify all proposed items without protest, Millsaps said.

An earlier version of this story said there were eight Beyond Coal supporters. There are actually five. Correction appended Oct. 10, 2012 at 10:05 p.m.

(5) comments

Todd Pierson
Todd Pierson

For once, we're in the fortunate position where the interests of environmentalists coincide with the economic interests of the university. Both want to replace the coal burner with an environmentally-friendly (and more economically feasible) solution.

If it is in the school's best interest to replace the burner with an alternative form of energy--and all reports indicate that it is--, and if they've agreed to replace the burner--which they have--, why antagonize administrators with a self-indulgent protest?

I just can't imagine that this is the most logical or effective way of creating change. Tell me I'm wrong.

nocensorship
nocensorship

Way to go. These scum (the board) need a good staning-up-to.

CJS
CJS

Where will we get our electricity from if we cut the boiler? Georgia Power?

Over half of Georgia Power's electricity in this county (and virtually all of Georgia) comes from coal, whether or not we buy it or make it. No point shutting it down until we start building a new power station.

WalkerSmith
WalkerSmith

CSJ: A variety of solutions have been proposed, from biomass to solar. They will have to build a new plant anyway, it's too out of date and behind on air quality standard. The question is whether the new plant will be coal or something that doesn't give Athens lung cancer. It's already shutting down and they plan to replace it with a slightly better coal plant.

Todd: I hope you're right but I doubt it. They won't make a move that they aren't pushed to, because they have said repeatedly they don't consider any other options to be in any way realistic. You have to make trouble to make change.

MattTyler
MattTyler

CJS: The coal boiler does not produce any electricity. It only creates steam for heating systems. That being said, it only runs for part of the year--for about 8-9 months of the year, it is just running on natural gas. The next burner will likely include co-generation technology that produces both electricity and heat (although we will still be receiving most of our electricity from Georgia Power).

Walker: The University has already agreed to shut down the plant, they just haven't given a specific date (largely because they don't know). Energy Services actually has solicited proposals from different groups and has been leaning towards biomass gasification and natural gas for feasibility purposes. In all likelihood, the EPA would not approve a new coal burner in Athens, and the director of Energy Services does not want a new one.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.