MIT Climate Nucleus
Committee Meeting
Friday, November 5, 2021
Held Virtually
MINUTES
The co-chairs opened the meeting by defining a goal of further refining a set of recommendations related to standing up three working groups called for in the Fast Forward plan. (These are the working groups on education; policy; and campus carbon footprint.) The recommendations, which would be forwarded to the MIT Climate Steering Committee, cover the following areas:
- Charges for the working groups
- Membership structure for the working groups
- Names of potential working group co-chairs
- A plan for recruiting working group members
The objective is to complete this work during the meeting and, as necessary, following it via email in order to provide the recommendations to the Steering Committee, with the aim of standing up the working groups as quickly as possible.
The co-chairs also explained that they would like to begin a series of optional webinars for Nucleus members to learn about existing climate activities managed by DLCIs represented on the Nucleus. The goal is to begin those webinars in December.
Membership structure of the working groups
The first topic of discussion was the membership structure for the three working groups. The Nucleus members agreed by consent that the three working groups should include: undergraduate students; graduate students; administrative staff; research staff; postdocs; and faculty. The Nucleus members also agreed with a plan to issue calls for expressions of interest from those constituencies through a variety of different communications mechanisms.
Charges to the working groups
The Nucleus then moved on to a discussion of draft charges for the three working groups, which had been prepared by the co-chairs before the meeting and circulated to members as a basis for discussion. The co-chairs began by presenting these drafts, and described expectations for the general operation of the working groups in the context of the Fast Forward plan.
The draft charges have two parts: first, a general charge common to all three working groups; and second, for each working group individually, a specific charge detailing its roles and responsibilities. These working group-specific charges include three areas:
- New actions the working group shall lead;
- Existing actions at MIT led by departments, labs, centers, and initiatives, to be leveraged by the working group; and
- Other topics the working group may wish to consider.
At least one Nucleus member will serve on each working group in order to help ensure robust coordination across all three working groups.
Members of the Nucleus offered the following general observations about the working groups:
- The working groups should be tasked with explicitly identifying the offices, programs, or positions that would take ownership of specific initiatives (e.g., programs, offices, or positions that have the existing leadership or mandate, or that are well positioned, to take responsibility for specific action items identified by the working groups).
- One Nucleus member pointed out that the working groups will have a number of tasks (e.g., meeting regularly, collecting data, managing analyses, hosting forums, and so on), and asked whether a project manager or point person could be assigned to the co-chairs of each of the three working groups to help the working groups manage these tasks and keep moving forward.
Members then moved onto discussions about each of the three working groups: education, policy, and campus carbon footprint.
Education working group
After a brief presentation of the specific charge to the education working group, members of the Nucleus offered the following observations:
- It was suggested by a Nucleus member that the charges to the working groups could include a fourth section that would identify opportunities for integration/collaboration with the other working groups. Another member suggested that this fourth section could identify opportunities for initiatives that cut across working groups (i.e., “synergistic themes”).
- One member suggested that the education working group might consider the establishment of a MicroMasters degree on climate change. There was then discussion about the need to compile a list of existing courses, minors, and online programs related to climate, energy, and sustainability.
- It was recommended by a working group member that the working groups should have a mandate to generate new ideas that are not already included in the Fast Forward plan and bring these new ideas to the Nucleus.
- Seeing that the working groups are tasked with a number of action items, two Nucleus members suggested that the working groups should prioritize them, in order to keep an eye on the action items that should be put front-and-center and handled first.
- Given that knowledge of climate change will be essential for life in the 21st century, one Nucleus member said it is relevant to ask whether all undergraduates should have a grounding in climate science and associated systems science via a climate GIR. Another Nucleus member suggested that the GIRs can use climate and energy examples in their curricula (note: on this latter point, ESI has been working for several years to integrate climate content into GIRs).
Policy working group
After a brief presentation of the specific charge to the policy working group, members of the Nucleus offered the following observations:
- The Environmental Solutions Initiative runs a “rapid response group” in which undergraduate and graduate student provide analyses of current policy issues in short periods of time; it was suggested by one member that having this effort fit into a broader climate policy landscape at MIT would be welcome.
- There was discussion among Nucleus members about ensuring that the policy working group encompasses policy at different levels of government – not just federal, but also local, state, and international climate policy. There was also discussion about ensuring that the working group considers the interactions of these different levels.
- It was suggested that the Global Commission to End Energy Poverty, an effort based at the MIT Energy Initiative, could also be added to section two of the charge.
Carbon footprint working group
After a brief presentation of the specific charge to the education working group, members of the Nucleus offered the following observations:
One member suggested that the Nucleus could play a substantial role in helping to develop a vision and a plan for leveraging the campus as testbed for change and for the 2050 goal of decarbonizing the campus, rather than with the nearer-term tactical elements included in the Fast Forward plan.
Working group co-chairs
The final area of discussion at the meeting was a discussion of identifying and recruiting potential co-chairs for the working groups, both from within the Nucleus and outside of it. This included a discussion of names of individuals nominated by Nucleus members to serve on the working groups.
Suggestions included:
- Including a representative of MITEI and of the Washington office on the policy working group (Note: The Fast Forward plan calls for this working group and the Washington office to work closely together.)
- Having representatives from MITEI, ESI, the School of Science, the Office of Experiential Learning, and Terrascope on the education working group
- Including a systems modeler (e.g., from Sloan Systems Dynamic or MITEI) on the carbon footprint working group; including someone with experience with Cambridge city policy on the carbon footprint working group
- Having MITOS represented on the carbon footprint working group (Note: The Fast Forward plan calls for participation in this working group from MITOS.)
Next steps
Members were asked to provide additional feedback to the co-chairs by email on a proposed process for recruiting members for the three working groups. The Nucleus co-chairs will then submit the draft charges and member recruitment recommendations to the Climate Steering Committee for review and approval. The next meeting of the Nucleus will be held on Monday, November 29, 2021.
