At first people refuse to believe that a strange new thing can be done. Then they begin to hope it can be done. Then they see it can be done. Then it is done and all the world wonders why it was not done centuries ago.
—Frances Hodgson Burnett1
REGISTRARS ARE uniquely positioned to take a leadership role in fostering sustainable behavior both within their institutions and in the profession at large. First, registrars are trained to analyze and address actions that may affect the preservation of collections. Their awareness of the connections between behavior and its intentional and unintentional consequences is a vital resource for understanding and implementing sustainable practices. Second, the purview of a registrar’s job is vast. Duties span many departments, requiring efficient communication and collaboration. Registrars’ relationships with colleagues allow them to approach an interdepartmental project with a broad point of view, an attribute complementary to the sustainability paradigm. As detail-oriented, collaborative decision makers, registrars have the potential to increase the sustainability of their institutions.
To engage in a dialog regarding sustainability, the terms green and sustainable must be defined. In reference to the environment, the notions of green and sustainable share a similar objective—to protect and conserve natural resources. Green generally refers to an end result (e.g., does this product or action have a benign or positive effect on the environment), whereas sustainability reviews an entire system and the relationship between systems (a more holistic approach). One concise definition of sustainable is meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.2 An action is rated based on whether it maintains an amicable balance among its economic, social, and environmental components—a triple-weighted scale. Therefore, a product may be green but ultimately not sustainable. Biodegradable plastic, for example, can be considered green because it degrades under certain conditions relatively safely, but it is not sustainable because more fossil fuels are consumed to manufacture biodegradable plastic than traditional polymers. Green products or actions are a step in the right direction, but sustainability is the ultimate goal.
Sustainability has become relevant within the framework of climate change. Climate change is the result of humanity’s perspective that nature should be dominated or controlled. The Industrial Revolution, for example, was based on a perceived endless supply of “natural capital” and “neither the health of natural systems, nor an awareness of their delicacy, complexity, and interconnectedness, [were] part of the industrial design agenda.”3 Humans have spanned the globe, building structures and using resources at a faster rate than can be replenished. Furthermore, the loss of natural habitat coupled with species extinction continues to occur at a rapid pace. The stress that humans have placed on our fragile ecosphere is alarming. Museums play a role in this natural resource drain; standard museum operations such as the maintenance of stable microclimates and exhibitions do impact the environment.
There is growing support, both nationally and internationally, for sustainable initiatives within the museum profession. First, a number of publications are available that discuss museums and sustainability in the areas of outreach, education, exhibit design, lighting, collections care, and food service. Important resources include The Green Museum: A Primer on Environmental Practice by Sarah Brophy and Elizabeth Wylie and Sustainable Preservation Practices for Managing Storage Environments from the Image Permanence Institute.4 Second, it is now routine for museum conferences to include some element of environmental responsibility both in program content as well as event administration. At the 2008 American Association of Museums meeting, 102 people signed up for the newly formed professional interest committee, PIC Green, now the Environmental and Climate Professional Network.5 There are now a number of online resources such as the Sustainable Design Wiki,6 the Green Museum Wiki,7 the Green Building Wiki,8 and GreenExhibits.org.9
Building green museums is perhaps the best-known initiative within the profession. Green building methods originating from the design and engineering fields are being adopted for the construction and renovation of museums and exhibits. Many museums are also seeking LEED certification.10 The LEED program was developed by the US Green Building Council to promote design and construction practices that reduce the industry’s negative environmental impact and establish guidelines for those practices. One subset of the program is LEED for Existing Buildings and Spaces Operations and Management (LEED-EB O&M).11 This program is designed to implement sustainable operations and maintenance practices to reduce the environmental impact of existing buildings and specifically addresses sustainable sites (including storm water management and light pollution reduction), water efficiency, energy and atmosphere (including indoor environmental quality and energy performance), materials and resources (including purchasing policy and waste performance), and indoor environmental quality (including green cleaning and integrated pest management).12
Creating a green committee that uses LEED-EB O&M guidelines is an excellent starting point to implement sustainable operations at a museum—even if certification is not an objective. However, it is important to tailor initiatives to the specific institution in question. In Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing, Doug McKenzie-Mohr and William Smith provide insightful strategies for instituting behavioral changes.13 The authors note the importance of determining the barriers and benefits of a particular sustainable behavior. Because noncommunal, drastic alterations typically do not result in long-term change, establishing an open forum within a museum, in which sustainability goals are defined and potential barriers and benefits are explored, is vital to accomplish successful behavioral changes. Staff members will have varying opinions and knowledge levels about today’s environmental problems, and it is important to establish an atmosphere of respect and collaboration.
The opportunity to take a leadership role in forming a green committee is ideal for the registrar given the interdepartmental nature of the position. A green committee will be most successful with the participation and collaboration of all departments. The committee’s responsibility may include rethinking current needs, systems, and methodologies, and setting future goals and pathways to achieve those goals. Potential results of a Green Team include economic savings, diminished use of resources (including water and electricity), the formation of mutually beneficial partnerships with service providers, a reduction in museum consumption and waste, and improved standing among constituents and colleagues.
Registrars will find useful information in the aforementioned resources concerning energy efficient technologies and green consumer products to help launch green committee initiatives. However, much work is still needed both to consolidate and to build on data specifically geared for the registration department. Further research into new products and procedures, such as green archival products and alternative lighting strategies, is needed to develop new standards. Opportunities abound for museum studies students and established professionals alike to research and collaborate with service providers to develop, test, and apply alternative methods and materials. The following discussion, therefore, should be seen as one installment in a portfolio the authors believe will continually develop as museums bring their behaviors more in line with environmental sustainability. The topics included range from complex undertakings such as modifying lighting and climate control systems, to more mundane tasks such as the purchasing office paper.
As previously noted, several museums are now building green and seeking LEED certification. One key component of LEED certification is the installation of, or upgrade to, energy-efficient lighting and climate-control systems. The guidelines also promote the use of natural light and passive ventilation as ways to reduce energy consumption. Although these ideals do not completely conform to the standards of object preservation, there are ways to mix passive systems and energy-efficient technologies to reduce a museum’s energy consumption.
Electric lighting accounts for more than a third of all electricity consumed for commercial use in the United States.14 Encouragingly, “due to soaring electricity prices and ever-growing environmental concerns about energy consumption and waste disposal, lighting is experiencing a technology revolution.”15 Museums’ challenge with lighting has always been controlling the negative effects of light on objects, which must be exposed to light to be viewed, yet light damage is cumulative and cannot be reversed (see CHAPTER 5I, “Preventive Care”).
For many decades, museums have used primarily halogen or metal halide track lighting in galleries and fluorescent lighting in collection storage areas, all of which require filtering to eliminate ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Many types of filtering materials are available to protect objects from light damage, but it should be noted that the shelf life of filtering materials varies from manufacturer to manufacturer. The museum lighting paradigm is now changing, based on advances in lighting technology and the growing need to control the cost of lighting. The following presents four lighting alternatives: LED, fiber optics, hybrid solar, and diffused natural light.
Light emitting diodes (LED) are the most promising new light source with application for museum setting. LEDs consume one-fifth of energy of an incandescent bulb but last one hundred times longer. LEDs are illuminated by the movement of electrons in a semi-conductor material, which is typically aluminum-gallium arsenide. As the electrons move, photons are released—the most basic units of light. LEDs can be used in place of incandescent lights and can be dimmed without changing the color of light that is emitted—unlike incandescent lights, which become more yellow when dimmed. Although replacing incandescent lighting with LED lighting is expensive, the low-energy usage of LEDs makes them a cost-effective alternative in the long term. LEDs also produce no UV and little heat, which makes them ideal for illuminating objects.16 LED lighting systems have steadily improved over the last twenty years and are now widely used in museums.
Fiber-optic lighting, also known as remote source lighting, uses plastic or glass fibers to distribute light. The fibers can be side emitting, which means the fiber itself is lighted, or end emitting, which means the light is conducted to an attachment at the end of the fiber. The benefit to using fiber optics, as noted by the Center at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, is that locating “the light source outside of a secured enclosure, such as a display case of costly objects, means the display area doesn’t have to be opened for servicing.”17 Although fiber-optic lighting offers creative solutions, it has some drawbacks. Glass fibers dissipate UV light, but plastic fibers require UV filtering. The longer the length of fiber, the more loss of light occurs at the endpoint. Furthermore, severe bending of the fibers will result in extreme light loss, a consideration in configuring fiber placement. Finally, a museum would need to assess the environmental benefits into a cost-benefit analysis. In some cases, overall energy cost savings may not offset the expense of implementation.
Hybrid solar lighting (HSL) is one of the newest technologies in the lighting field. HSL uses solar power and fiber-optics to channel sunlight into an enclosed space while simultaneously directing infrared (IR) to a concentrating thermo-photovoltaic cell that converts it into electricity. Sunlight is tracked throughout the day using a parabolic dish. Sensors are used to maintain a constant level of illumination by supplementing sunlight with traditional electric light in special hybrid lighting fixtures.18 Because hybrid solar lighting pipes sunlight directly to the light fixture, the process is far more efficient than photovoltaic cells, which convert 15 percent of sunlight into electricity and then change the electricity back into light, resulting in the use of only 2 percent of the original sunlight. As with all fiber-optic cables, the longer the cables are the more light they lose.19 Because the incoming natural light is full-spectrum sunlight, light fixtures specifically designed for exhibiting objects and filters may make this technology applicable for museums in the near future.
Lastly, museums have experimented with natural light use in galleries. By diffusing direct sunlight and creating complex systems that track and control sunlight, museums can take advantage of natural light while simultaneously avoiding the harmful effects of UV rays. A report by David Behar Perahia on the use of daylight in museums cites several institutions in Europe and the United States that have successfully integrated architectural designs that use natural daylighting. The Menil Collection in Houston, Texas, uses a system of ceiling louvers, skylights, and large windows that allow for diffused full-spectrum natural lighting in the galleries. The Beyeler Foundation in Basel, Switzerland, has a glazed ceiling that also employs the use of louvers and brise-soleil.20 Brisesoleil, an ancient architectural shading technique, appears to be experiencing a revival and is used in the new wing of the Milwaukee Museum of Art and the Louvre Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates.
Ultimately, a suitable compromise between the needs of objects and museum visitors must be achieved. A report produced by the Getty Museum Lighting Research Project noted that “when applying light damage mitigation techniques simultaneously to maximize conservation, compromises are necessary—display times are limited, and light levels may be so low that they challenge perception through skewed color rendering and reduced detail.”21 David Behar Perahia attributes this challenged perception caused by inadequate lighting to museum fatigue, a well-known phenomenon identified by Benjamin Coleman in 1916.22 David Clinard stated that “traditionally, color quality has been and still is one of the most critical concerns for displaying art objects.”23
Creative lighting strategies throughout a museum building can benefit an institution’s budget, staff, visitors, and collections. The use of motion sensor lighting and dimmers reduce both object exposure time (thus, slowing deterioration) and energy use (thus, lowering electricity bills). Other forms of nontraditional lighting such as the Solatube, a lighting strategy that redirects sunlight down a reflective tube and diffuses light within an interior space, can incorporate natural light into non-art spaces such as offices, cafes, museum stores, or meeting rooms, creating a more appealing atmosphere for staff and visitors. LEDs, fiber-optic lighting, HSL, and natural light have the potential to benefit museum objects as well as the Earth’s natural environment.
Museums use twice as much energy as typical office buildings because while office buildings usually cool, heat, and illuminate from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, museums often have extended hours and maintain constant climate control for collections.24 Museum HVAC systems are complex, require constant monitoring, and are one cause of museums’ excessive energy use.25
A typical HVAC system adjusts air temperature and humidity. The air is first heated or cooled (the cooling removes humidity from the incoming air), then may be humidified by water heaters or boilers before entering the galleries or storage areas. In most systems the air passes through three filters: the first removes large particulates, the second removes fine particulates, and a carbon filter removes some vapors. These processes are controlled by electronic sensors or a central computer system. Clearly, HVAC systems use a great deal of resources and electricity.26 Nevertheless, even in an HVAC system, there are opportunities to reduce waste and decrease costs. One alternative is the carbon filter change-outs. Usually, carbon filters are changed every twelve to eighteen months. The old filter, made of plastic, metal, cardboard, and carbon, is disposed of in its entirety. However, the carbon could be exchanged for fresh carbon and the used carbon could be sent to a reclaiming company for reactivation (discharging of the contaminants) so that it could be reused.27 In addition to saving money and keeping filters out of landfills, this method would establish a waste-free recycling system for carbon.28 This is just one example of how creative thinking could reduce the overall cost of operating HVAC systems.
Temperature and humidity guidelines also offer energy and cost reduction possibilities. The mechanisms of decay for objects can be attributed to three situations in humidity and temperature control—too low, too high, and too much fluctuation. The resulting damage can be chemical, mechano-physical, or biological.29 Most museums follow the guidelines for humidity and temperature control as presented by Garry Thomson in The Museum Environment, first published in 1978, with a second edition in 1986.30 Based on what was then known about how materials interact with their environment and the limitations of museum HVAC equipment, Thompson recommended a narrow range of fluctuations of humidity of ± 4 percent or 5 percent. However, Thompson stated that “the tolerance usually quoted of ± 4 or 5 percent RH is based more on what can be expected of an air-conditioning plant than on what exhibits can actually stand without deterioration, which is not known in any detail.”31 Despite this, museums long adhered to narrow ranges of fluctuations, sometimes even implementing stricter guidelines of ± 2 percent. Research published in 1994 on the specific properties of materials by Marion P. Mecklenburg, Charles S. Tumosa, David Erhardt, and Mark McCormick-Goodhart of Conservation Analytical Researchers (CAL) widened the range of humidity control to 50 ± 15 percent.32 Although the results were considered highly controversial at the time, gradual acceptance has yielded the current Smithsonian-recommended ranges of 45 percent ± 8 percent relative humidity and 70° ± 4°F, and further research has reinforced the rationale for relaxing the old guidelines (see discussion in “The Constancy of Change and Occurrence of Challenges” in CHAPTER 1A, “A Very Brief History of the Profession,” and “Section 4: Additional Information” in Sustainable Preservation Practices33).
Applying more realistic guidelines nationally could result in significant energy savings. Mecklenburg, Tumosa, Erhardt, and McCormick-Goodhart note that “ongoing implementation of the new guidelines in Smithsonian museums resulted in cost savings of $2.7 million in just the second half of 2006 (out of $32 million total energy costs for all of 2006), and $1.5 million in the first quarter of 2007.”34 Ad ditionally, allowing for seasonal drift to occur (a slow adjustment in the humidity and temperature set points to allow for seasonal change) can result in monetary savings by maintaining an environment that correlates more closely to outside temperature and humidity. The building envelope (the separation between the interior and exterior environments) must also be considered, especially in older buildings, because introducing high humidity into the air can cause condensation to develop within the building envelope, which can then freeze and cause accelerated deterioration of the façade—thereby promoting mold growth. Acceptance of the Smithsonian-recommended temperature and humidity ranges and seasonal drift can produce substantial savings from diminished energy usage while still maintaining safe environmental controls for the objects.35
Along with lighting and HVAC systems there are other operations under a registrar’s purview that can become more environmentally friendly. One way to review daily tasks is to apply the familiar “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle” mantra, maximized by a fourth “R”—Rethink. Ask questions related to the three R’s when deciding how best to accomplish a project. What is the minimal amount of material needed to properly store, display, or ship an object? Will waste be generated from the action and are there systems in place to store, recycle, or dispose of that waste properly? Is the product needed for long-or short-term use? Answers to these questions will often lead to sustainable alternatives, and such analysis is far more manageable than detangling the web of issues posed by the question, “What are the economic, social, and environmental costs to executing this task?” The following will discuss potential products and practices registrars should explore to align their departments with the goals of sustainability.
As indicated previously, there are differences between purchasing green versus sustainable products. Locating a collection care product that balances the triple weighted scale of sustainability—economy, society, and environment—is difficult in today’s global economy. Comparisons between raw materials are dependent on specifying the geographic location and manner in which the resource is obtained, followed by how it is processed, where, and by whom. For example, one group claims that the agricultural plants hemp and kenaf, both rapidly renewable resources, have high yield rates, require minimal amounts of fertilizer, and have lower lignin contents than wood from trees, thus requiring fewer chemicals in the pulping process. A different group of people claims that tree plantations certified by the Forest Stew-ardship Council (FSC) prevent soil erosion, provide habitat for more species, and typically apply fertilizer once every crop rotation (every seven years) compared to once a year with annual agricultural crops.36 Common among both groups is an argument against overconsumption and monoculture and agreement that even the greenest pulp mill generates some form of pollution. Ultimately, product choice is an act of compromise. However, if consumption is warranted—having first taken “Reduce, Reuse, Recycle, and Rethink” into account—it is important to support companies that have made the effort to incorporate some form of sustainability rather than none at all. The following will place the tasks of purchasing archival products, and packaging and shipping loans under the lens of sustainability.
Plant fibers are key ingredients in many archival materials. Sustainable alternatives to conventional paper products and textiles are available to other markets, but further effort is needed to bring appropriate products to the museum profession. It is possible to produce organic, nonbleached cotton cloth and to produce American National Standards Institute (ANSI)-certified archival paper from 100 percent postconsumer content without the use of chlorine.37 Museums recognize their responsibility to educate and promote sustainability in the public sphere, so alternative products should be tested and everyday practices should be reviewed to determine their environmental impact.
Registrars can ask vendors if sustainable alternatives are available. The more the profession requests sustainable alternatives, the more industries will seek them out to maintain and build their customer base, such as the B- and E-fluted corrugated boards distributed by Gaylord Brothers are made with postindustrial waste.38 These products meet the same archi val standards as corrugated board made from single stream pulp, however, their environmentally friendly qualities are not advertised due to concerns over a potential reduction in sales. This is a good example of the importance archival vendors place on consumer trust and how the industry could be encouraged to seek sustainable alternatives with collaboration and support from registrars.
The archival industry is considered a niche market. Due to its small size and specific product requirements, the industry is not able to withstand economic forces from larger competing markets. Suppliers struggle to maintain product quantity and quality as mills close down, merge, or move overseas.39 However, the archival industry’s small scale may lend itself to the support of smaller localized farms, manufacturers, and businesses. For example, the rapidly renewable plant—kenaf—used for paper production at mills with strict environmental standards is seen as an alternative to current archival paper sources and production. The potential for creating a sustainable, archival market, integrating local suppliers, could increase with support and demand from the museum, archive, and library professions.
Switching from traditional products to green products does not necessarily solve the sustainability issue, however. Product change does not equal behavior change. For example, using bio-composite board or the FSC-certified wood products for crate exteriors instead of traditional plywood does not reduce the amount of natural resources consumed and wasted. It is the system in which crates are used that is unsustainable, not the crates in and of themselves. Although it is important to incorporate more sustainable and green products and methods into the profession, such alternatives lose their luster if used within an inefficient and wasteful system. As with product choice, registrars could fill an important leadership position by fostering the development of new norms through collaborative research with service providers.
Loans and traveling exhibits are two systems managed by registrars. These systems have an admirable, educational mission but consume physical and financial resources in a single-use manner, producing a significant amount of museum waste. Three pitfalls of the current loan system that make it unsustainable are (i) a lack of support to facilitate the reuse of packaging and crating materials; (ii) the inefficient and polluting manner in which loans are transported; and (iii) the lack of environmental responsibility when creating and disposing of museum generated products.
The Guide to Organizers of Traveling Exhibitions lists exhibit agencies serving museums nationwide.40 The amount of materials consumed and discarded each year is enormous if one considers that the Smithsonian Institution Traveling Exhibition Service (SITES) currently travels more than 50 exhibitions to 250 communities each year, and ExhibitsUSA travels more than 25 exhibitions (requiring nearly 200 crates).41 Crating and packaging is expensive and a large amount of museum resources are used to fund loans. Results from a 2007 online survey showed that out of 105 participating institutions, 29 reported ordering a total of 426 crates in 2006 for a cost of $412,108. Unfortunately, disposal fees are inexpensive, and once-valuable materials are routinely thrown away with no regard to the associated environmental costs.
There is a significant price difference between purchasing new crates and retrofitting used crates. Results from the aforementioned survey show that 30 participants reported retrofitting 510 previously used crates for a total of $38,563. This equates to an average of $75.62 per crate instead of an average $967.39 per newly built crate.42 Retrofitting crates not only reduces waste but also saves a significant amount of money. The argument could be made that costs associated with storage, and transporting empty crates would decrease any monetary savings. However, before adequate feasibility studies have been undertaken and a true life cycle analysis between reusing and building new crates occurs, it is premature to assume that crate retrofitting would not yield savings.
To facilitate reuse, crates must be stored. The National Gallery of Art retains a large collection of crates (approximately three hundred) that are stored and managed by a local fine art shipper. The museum typically retains medium-sized crates for ver satility of reuse and as a rule does not use a crate if it is more than twelve inches bigger than the artwork in any one direction. Although neither the museum or the shipping company keeps track of the number of times crates are reused or which ones are used the most, the museum estimates that 95 percent of single-object loans travel in retrofitted crates, at a third less than the cost of a new crate.43
For those institutions that cannot afford storage, a cooperative warehouse system could be developed, managed, and collectively funded by local or regional museums. Crates could be leased, with resulting funds returning to the cooperative or to the participating museums. Alternatively, an independent third party could purchase, warehouse, and either lease or sell materials, similar to a construction salvage center. Art handling and exhibition companies could form similar partnerships and devise ways of profit-sharing when resources are needed by clients outside of the contractor’s immediate service area. Although such systems would not satisfy every situation, they could reduce the production rate of new materials and provide a means for organizations to retain valuable resources. This model could also be followed for commonly used and discarded exhibition support materials beyond crates.
It is important to note that the European museum community has successfully instituted a crate leasing program. Several European crate companies have designed reusable crates, especially for two-dimensional works.44 In general fine art crating companies in the United States do not believe a leasing system would be efficient because of the country’s larger size and museum density differences in comparison to Europe. However, a modified system that approaches leasing from a regional perspective and promotes cooperation among independent crating companies should be explored in the United States if museums wish to carry out loans in a more sustainable manner.
Transport is the second aspect of loans that makes them unsustainable. Traveling exhibitions produce greenhouse gas emissions. Just one SITES exhibit, “The Burgess Shale: Evolution’s Big Bang,” traveled 20,044 miles, producing 38 tons of carbon dioxide. This is equivalent to 80 barrels of oil, and 6.3 passenger vehicles traveling 12,000 miles per year.45 If traveling exhibitions are to continue, the field must develop alternative methods to rotate and transport them. Currently, where and when an exhibit travels is the outcome of variables presented by both the exhibit lender and the borrower. The content, cost, and size of an exhibit generally determine the borrower and hence the location, while the borrower’s internal exhibit schedule—which may or may not be planned in advance—typically determines the dates. These variables often cause exhibits to travel great distances back and forth across the country. A new system in which lenders direct how exhibitions circulate based on geography, not time, could be developed. Exhibit companies often advertise works in progress to judge interest levels. This business strategy could be a means to establish schedules based on the location of interested borrowers. Exhibit websites could indicate when a particular exhibition would be available in a certain region. Such a system would continue to allow advanced planning for both lender and borrower but would reduce the frequency of long-distance round trips.
In conjunction with improved scheduling methods, exhibits could be transported using more energy-efficient technologies. For example, low to moderate security exhibits, especially those that do not contain collection objects, could travel by train. Comparisons between highway and rail transport have shown it is more economical to use trains for distances beyond 500 miles.46 On average, railroads are three times more fuel efficient than trucks; railroads move a ton of freight an average of 404 miles on a single gallon of fuel. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that for every ton-mile, a typical truck emits roughly three times more nitrogen oxides and particulates than a locomotive.47 Museums and art-handling companies should consult with the railroad industry to explore current options and encourage the development of equipment and services that would facilitate a variety of museum shipments. Fine art transport companies could, therefore, expand their services to include intermodal transport. When highway transport is necessary, support should be given to companies that use energy-efficient technologies such as vehicle idling reduction initiatives and auxiliary power units that reduce greenhouse gas emissions.48 The EPA’s website lists transport companies (e.g., rail, truck, and intermodal) that are a part of their Smartway Transport Partnership Program.49
Finally, museum loans and exhibitions produce vast amounts of waste. Again, reuse is rare due to a lack of storage space, and the true cost of land-filling our waste is masked by inexpensive disposal fees. Recycling packaging components, which for the purposes of this essay means implementing a secondary use for a material, is rarely practiced. There are bins for soda bottles and office paper, so why not for foam and metal? There are regionally based online recycling communities such as Freecycle, so why not “Museumcycle”? The use of various museum forums and listservs often serve as a great registrar tool to reuse or find crates, material, boxes, and even museum furniture that can be reused by other museums.
There are options to reduce the amount of waste generated from loans. Scott Carlee of the Alaska State Museum stated the following about resource-saving practices in his museum:
We probably do more than most museums just because it is so expensive to get materials shipped up here. Therefore, material is more precious to us than to most museums. We will take apart a crate and reuse the wood for some other task or we will take apart exhibit walls and make crates out of them. For our traveling exhibits we have reusable crates that were custom-built for the shows that travel. We reuse whatever we can and when something just can’t possibly be used one more time it is disposed of in a landfill. All burnable wood is usually given to someone to burn in their wood burning stove for heat. The biggest drawback is space to store the material before we can reuse it.50
Museums in the lower forty-eight states should perhaps adopt an Alaskan state of mind when it comes to the life cycle of museum-generated products. Redesigning crating and packaging systems to increase recycling is a necessity. For example, gluing crate joints in addition to using typical metal fasteners impedes the breakdown of crates. Wood from crates has been used by art organizations and businesses for sculptures and cabinetry or as fuel in ceramic kilns or furnaces. The use of cardboard instead of Coroplast or Gatorfoam would increase the percentage of packaging material that can enter the conventional recycling stream. Before purchasing a product, a registrar should determine whether or not the manufacturer has a recycling program. Sealed Air Corporation, the manufacturer of both Ethafoam and Bubble Wrap, for instance, has a mail-back recycling program.51 Materials sent back to one of their seven receiving facilities is reprocessed within the company or by an outside company. DuPont has a similar mail-back recycling program for Tyvek.52 Additionally, pack-and-ship centers frequently welcome packing supplies to support their operations, and the cleanliness and integrity are often not an issue.
Many museums and service providers are adopting green and sustainable practices. For example, Arthowe Fine Art Services uses solar panels on the company’s roof, biodiesel in its fleet of vehicles, and recycles cardboard, wood, foam, and Bubble Wrap. In September 2008, the California Academy of Sciences opened the doors of its new museum, which received a LEED Platinum rating from the US Green Building Council and a second LEED Platinum award in 2011, making it the world’s first double-platinum museum.53 The building includes a 2.5-acre living roof, sixty thousand photovoltaic cells, denim insulation, and natural lighting from skylights and exterior walls of glass. The academy has an official statement on sustainability approved by its board of directors as well as a green team. Initiatives developed by the academy’s green team have altered many routine operations and include the elimination of plastic bottles at all staff meetings; the reuse and recycling of packing supplies; bulk ordering; and the elimination of antibacterial soap, which is harmful to marine life. The academy recycles 60 percent to 65 percent of its garbage.54 These institutions and individuals have taken a leadership role in the sustainable movement, and their efforts will help facilitate sustainable practices across the profession.
As stewards of the past, present, and future, registrars must continually assess how the products created for and by museums affect the world. They can update accepted standards of collection care and management to reflect environmental stewardship and take a leadership position in forming and managing a green committee within their institutions. Registrars can be active participants in the pursuit of a sustainable future by being open to new technologies, working with service providers to bring new products to the market, and collaborating with colleagues throughout the museum world. •
1. F. H. Burnett, The Secret Garden (New York: Stokes Publishing Company, 1922), 353.
2. World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987).
3. W. McDonough and M. Braungart, Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things (New York: North Point Press, 2006), 26.
4. S. Brophy and E. Wylie, The Green Museum: A Primer on Environmental Practice (Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2008); P. Ford, P. Herzog, J. Linden, J. Reilly, and K. Smith, Sustainable Preservation Practices for Managing Storage Environments (Rochester, NY: Image Permanence Institute, 2012).
5. Available at: http://ww2.aam-us.org/resources/professional-networks/pic-green-network.
6. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_design.
7. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_museum.
8. Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building.
9. Available at: http://greenexhibits.org/.
10. Available at: https://new.usgbc.org/leed.
11. Available at: https://new.usgbc.org/leed/rating-systems/existing-buildings.
12. US Green Building Council, LEED V4.1 Operations and Maintenance. Available at: https://new.usgbc.org/leed-v41#om (accessed August 6, 2019).
13. D. McKenzie-Mohr and W. Smith, Fostering Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing, 3rd ed. (Gabriola Island, BC: New Society Publishers, 2011).
14. US Environmental Protection Agency, Energy and the Environment. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/energy/electricity-customers (accessed August 6, 2019).
15. J. McKenzie and M. Zoorob, Design Considerations for Intelligent Color-Changeable LED Luminaires, LEDs Magazine, October 2008, 33. Available at: https://www.ledsmagazine.com/architectural-lighting/retail-hospitality/article/16695863/design-considerations-for-intelligent-colorchangeable-led-luminaires (accessed August 6, 2019).
16. Lighting Design Lab, Advantages of LED Lighting. Available at: http://www.lightingdesignlab.com/articles/LED_fund/led_advant.htm (accessed September 19, 2008).
17. Lighting Research Center, Lighting from Afar, Renssalaer Polytechnic Institute, no. 3 (1998). Available at: http://www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/Futures/LF-RemoteSource/index.asp (accessed August 6, 2019).
18. US Department of Energy, Solar Energy Technology Program, Solar Lighting Research and Development. Available at: https://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/pdfs/39081.pdf (accessed August 6, 2019).
19. US Department of Energy, Solar Energy Technology Program, Solar Lighting.
20. Behar, D. C. Capeluto Guedi, and L. Michael. 2007. Light in the Art Exhibition Space. Faculty of Architecture and Town Planning, Technion Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
21. The Getty, Museum Lighting Research. Available at: http://www.getty.edu/conservation/science/lighting/index.html (accessed September 15, 2008).
22. David Behar Perahia, PhD, Technion Israel Institute of Technology (Haifa, Israel). Telephone interview, April 15, 2007.
23. D. Clinard, Show & tell: Museum lighting, Architectural Lighting 17 (2002): 59.
24. S. Brophy and E. Wylie, It’s easy being green: Museums and the Green Movement, Museum News, September/October 2006, 39.
25. Ford et al., Sustainable Preservation.
26. Garth Elliot, Chief Engineer, Nevada Museum of Art. Interview February 15, 2007; S. C. Sugarman, HVAC Fundamentals (Lilburn: The Fairmont Press, 2005).
27. The granular carbon reactivation process renders saturated carbon into reusable carbon through thermal reactivation. The spent activated carbon is treated in special kilns with steam that are devoid of oxygen at 850°C or more to release organic compounds. The volatized organics are destroyed in the furnace’s afterburner. Volatile inorganics are then removed by a wet chemical scrubber. A complete description can be found at https://www.calgoncarbon.com/reactivation-services/.
28. Garth Elliot, Chief Engineer, Nevada Museum of Art, Interview October 6. 2008.
29. A. W. Brokerhof, Applying the Outcome of Climate Research in Collection Risk Management. Available at: http://www.padfield.org/tim/cfys/mm/brokerhof/brokerhof.pdf (accessed November 11, 2008).
30. G. Thompson, The Museum Environment, 2nd ed. (London: Butterworths, 1986).
31. D. Erhardt, C. S. Tumosa, and M. F. Mecklenburg, Applying Science to the Question of Museum Climate (November 2007). Available at: https://www.conservationphysics.org/mm/brokerhof/brokerhof.pdf (accessed August 6, 2019).
32. Originally named Conservation Research Laboratory (CRL), it was renamed Conservation Analytical Laboratory (CAL) in 1963 and Smithsonian Center for Materials Research and Education (SCMRE) in 1998. It is currently named Museum Conservation Institute (MCI); available at: https://www.si.edu/mci/.
33. Ford et al., Sustainable Preservation.
34. Erhardt et al., Applying Science.
35. See also the Getty Conservation Institute newsletter, Conservation Perspectives, for Fall 2018, devoted to research on managing collection environments. Available at: https://www.getty.edu/conservation/publications_resources/newsletters/33_2/index.html (accessed August 15, 2019).
36. The Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) is an international organization that has established policies and standards to protect forest ecosystems. Available at: http://www.conservatree.org/paperlisteningstudy/LSForests.pdf (accessed August 6, 2019).
37. American National Standards Institute (ANSI) oversees the creation, promulgation, and use of thousands of norms and guidelines. Cascades Fine Papers Group includes Rolland Enviro100, which is made of 100 percent postconsumer waste that is processed chlorine free in a plant that uses biogas and is a certified Permanent Paper by ANSI.
38. Postindustrial waste is leftover material created when manufacturing a product. This type of waste can be collected to be used in-house or by an outside party to make a similar or different product. In contrast postconsumer waste is material that has been used by a consumer and discarded at a recycling center such as used newspapers, plastic hordes, or aluminum cans.
39. Dolores King, Product Manager, Gaylord Brothers; interview August 25, 2008.
40. Available at: https://www.americansforthearts.org/by-program/reports-and-data/legislation-policy/naappd/guide-to-traveling-exhibition-organizers (accessed August 14, 2019).
41. ExhibitUSA, available at: https://eusa.org/exhibitions/ (accessed August 6, 2019), and SITES FAQs, available at: http://sitesarchives.si.edu/about/faqs2.htm (accessed August 6, 2019).
42. Twenty-nine museums reported ordering a total of 426 new crates in 2006 for a cost of $412,108, which averages to $967.38.
43. Johnnie Mizell, interview March 2007; Sally Freitag, Chief Registrar, National Gallery of Art, e-mail correspondence September 26, 2007.
44. Hasenkamp, two- and three-dimensional (2-D and 3-D) crates, available at: www.hasenkamp.com; Turtle Box by Hizkia Van Kralingen, Netherlands, available at: www.turtlebox.com, also www.vankralingen.com; Pegasus Packaging Crate by Helicon: The Conservation Specialist, Netherlands, available at: www.helicon-cs.com.
45. The average tractor trailer, fully loaded, gets six miles per gallon. Carbon dioxide data was calculated using “The Greenhouse Cas Protocol Initiative’s Sector Tool, CO2 Emissions” from Transport or Mobile Sources, available at: http://www.ghgprotocol.org/calculation-tools/all-tools (accessed August 7, 2019), and and US Environmental Protection Agency Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator, available at: http://https://www.epa.gov/energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator (accessed August 7, 2019).
46. H. Conlon, Hub Croup, Inc., interview April 5, 2007.
47. US Department of Transportation, Freight movement and air quality. Available at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/Environment/air_quality/research/effects_of_freight_movement/chapter02.cfm (accessed August 7, 2019).
48. Environmental Protection Agency, SmartWay Transport Partnership. Available at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/smartway/index.htm.
49. Available at: https://www.epa.gov/smartway (accessed August 14, 2019).
50. E-mail correspondence (Warden) April 19, 2007.
51. Available at: https://sealedair.com/recycling-plastic-foam-and-paper-packaging (accessed August 14, 2019).
52. Available at: https://www.dupont.com/products-and-services/packaging-materials-solutions/industrial-packaging/articles/recycling-information.html (accessed August 14, 2019).
53. Available at: https://www.calacademy.org/press/releases/the-california-academy-of-sciences-receives-second-leed-platinum-rating-from-us-green (accessed August 14, 2019).
54. Available at: www.calacademy.org (accessed August 6, 2019).