Gina Siepel | Museum for Art in Wood
Climate Impact Report
gina siepel 'To understand a tree'
Museum for art in wood
1 mar – 21 jul 2024 
To Understand a Tree (Time): One Year, 2024. Composite image of video stills, Video, 35:00 minutes (looped). Videography and editing by Gina Siepel, original music composed and performed on the cello by Vernon C. David. Audio recorded and mixed by Karinne Keithley Syers and Vernon C. David.
Gina Siepel: To Understand a Tree, installation view, Museum for Art in Wood; Photo: John Carlano.
To Understand a Tree (Time): One Year and To Understand a Tree (Time): One Day, installation view, Museum for Art in Wood. Photo: John Carlano.
Introduction
To Understand a Tree is a multi-disciplinary project that focuses on the dignity of a living tree, its network of eco-systemic relationships, and the ubiquity of the material of wood in design and daily life. Developed and executed by Gina Siepel as an artist-in-residence over five years at the MacLeish Field Station of Smith College, the project culminated in a five-month solo exhibition at the Museum for Art in Wood in Philadelphia, curated by Jennifer-Navva Milliken. This exhibition featured an immersive video installation, functional and sculptural greenwood chairs, a project herbarium with specimens collected at the field station, and artworks and artifacts developed through direct engagement with a living forest tree and its habitat. Both the larger five-year project and the exhibition involved many collaborations and public engagements with artists, ecologists, students, and other specialists, including composer and cellist Vernon David and naturalist Kate Wellspring, who has been a key participant of To Understand a Tree since the initial stages of the project.
To Understand a Tree focused on a single, living northern red oak tree, located in a mixed deciduous second-growth forest in western Massachusetts, on land held in trust by the Kestrel Land Trust and owned by Smith College. To Understand a Tree was originally inspired by the tensions Siepel felt acutely as an ecologically-engaged artist who works with wood. Although their practice had long employed sustainable strategies in its approach to the use of wood, the artist had not previously centered conceptual questions regarding the ecological impact of the sourcing of wood from the forest. To Understand a Tree began in 2019 with a focus on this concern, starting with an intention to spend a significant period of time in study and contemplation of a single tree in the forest and its immediate ecosystemic community, accompanied by the creation of artworks and ephemera through this forest engagement. The tree was then to be harvested, and its wood incorporated into artworks that would bring questions about ecological relationships and human accountability to a broader viewing public.
After spending several years at the site, engaging directly with the tree and the many forest organisms whose lives are entangled with the tree, and undertaking intensive study of forest ecology, environmental philosophy, and indigenous teachings on human-nature relationships, the artist changed course and chose not to cut the tree. This very significant artistic decision exerted a profound impact on Siepel’s practice and altered the course of the project. Pivoting to working with ash trees killed at the same site by the invasive insect known as the emerald ash borer, the project came to include a focus on invasive species biology as well as climate change and interspecies relationships. The decision not to cut the oak tree was an important marker of transition in the artist’s relationship to nonhuman life, and it exerted a direct and positive effect on the climate impact of the overall project.
Traditional greenwood chairmaking techniques played a key role in this work, the wooden chair functioning as a pivot point between the body of the tree and the body of the human, and between nature and culture. Notably, all of the sculptural and functional chairs and other artworks in “To Understand a Tree” were made from oak and ash wood salvaged from fallen trees or trees killed by invasive insects. This choice emerged out of a desire to place the project in reciprocity with forests, directly connecting object-making to questions of forest ecology, climate change, and more-than-human personhood. At the same time, pedestals, shelves, and some artworks used modern, highly processed industrial wood products like OSB and MDF, a conceptual choice intended to juxtapose the material realities of contemporary society with the raw salvaged greenwood material used in the chairs.
While this project has had a long life before the exhibition at the Museum for Art in Wood, this climate impact report will focus on the five-month exhibition and related programming. The five-year project also generated climate impacts, including mostly local travel by car, and some minor effects on the forest due to bringing people regularly to the site. These impacts were distributed over a long period of time and were difficult to clearly delineate, and so they have not been assessed as a part of this report. Importantly, while this report brackets the longer ambit of To Understand a Tree due to practical limitations, the intellectual network which formed around the project has been invaluable to assessing the impact the exhibition has had in ecological terms.
At approximately one hundred years old, almost ninety feet tall, and over two feet in diameter, the red oak tree is an enduring and imposing character and muse in this work. For this reason, we have centered the red oak in this climate impact report, translating the carbon emissions equivalents generated by the exhibition into fractions of the carbon known to be sequestered in this particular tree. The artistic intention of the project was always to concretize human relationships to environment, ecology, and more-than-human life. Similarly, this report attempts to concretely visualize climate impacts and emissions of the exhibition.
Artist’s Climate Policy
Over the course of Siepel’s career, their work has engaged both directly and indirectly with environmental and ecological concerns. In recent years, they have chosen to focus on the relationship between humans, trees, and forests. As an artist who works with wood, a material which is sourced from a living organism, they recognize that their impacts on climate change and more-than-human life are direct. They see this as an opportunity to engage with the issues, exploring possibilities for more equitable and ethical ways of working with and relating to more-than-human life.
Recognizing the paradoxical and problematic nature of engaging with climate issues as an artist working within the current unsustainable art system, they have set out some goals for their own practice. These fall into four areas: place, materials, energy, and community. In regards to place, Siepel focuses on the local ecology of the region in which they live, and works primarily with materials that come from that region. Their use of materials similarly focuses on local, sustainable sourcing, and deep engagement with the trees and forests from which the materials originate. Following that, the artist maintains a commitment to practices of re-use, the avoidance of toxins, and the minimization of waste. Energy efficient practices and renewable sources are chosen wherever possible, in the studio and in shipping and travel. Lastly, Siepel regularly holds public events, talks, and dialogues in which trees, forests, forest ecology, and sustainability are centered and openly discussed, out of a desire to raise awareness and create space for public conversation on these topics. Siepel also engages in local environmental volunteer work and donates a percentage of funds from sales of work to indigenous and land conservation organizations.
These goals are a work-in-progress and are in a state of continual development, and Siepel has not been able to entirely eliminate waste, emissions, or other negative climate impacts from their artistic practice. The underlying commitment is to stay actively engaged with questions of sustainability and ecosystemic stewardship, thematically, logistically, and in dialogue with project collaborators, professional partners, and public audiences and participants.
Key Findings
The project emitted 4.6 tCO2e* or the equivalent of 88% of the carbon sequestered in the roots, trunk and canopy of the red oak tree at MacLeish field station.
The choice to maintain the red oak tree will sequester 3 tCO2e over 30 years and will completely offset the emissions generated by To Understand a Tree within 40 years.
Gallery energy use accounted for 72% of emissions.
Travel by train saved almost 0.5 tCO2e or about 9% of the carbon sequestered in the red oak tree.
Major sources of landfill waste stemmed from painting walls and signage but single-use fabrication waste was avoided. Electronics waste was minimized by acquiring equipment that aligned with future museum needs.
Public programming sustained discussions about climate change and the relational processes that govern human and more-than-human ecologies.
* tCO2e stands for metric tons of Carbon Dioxide Equivalent. Carbon Dioxide Equivalent is used as a standard metric to compare the warming effects produced by molecularly distinct gasses which possess different mass. Based on this measurement, the warming effects of various Greenhouse Gases such as methane emissions can be interchangeably represented through their equivalence to Carbon Dioxide. Here, because carbon stored in the tree appears in different molecular forms, CO2e is helpful to demonstrate the warming potential of this carbon if it were in the atmosphere.
Emissions Impact
Centering the living red oak tree that lies at the heart of To Understand a Tree, this report approaches emissions impact through a comparison of the project’s carbon emissions to the carbon sequestered by the tree. During photosynthesis, trees and other plantlife engage in a metabolic process that utilizes carbon held in atmospheric carbon dioxide for the production of energy and complex sugars. As these sugars, known as polysaccharides, form cell walls during the growth of plant tissue, the carbon that was formerly part of the atmosphere remains within the tree. Bob Leverett, an ecologist, engineer, and a leading national expert in tree measurement, measured the red oak tree at the MacLeish field station as a part of the public event series in 2023, and has estimated that it sequesters the equivalent of 11,300 lbs of atmospheric CO2 or 5.2 tCO2e. Below, we list the atmospheric carbon emissions from different categories of the exhibition using the red oak as a representation of this carbon, materialized in its roots, bark, and leaves, its cambium, pith, and fiber.
Total Carbon Emissions: 4.58 tCO2e | 88.7% of the carbon contained in the tree
Carbon Emissions from Travel: 0.52 tCO2e | 9.6% of the tree
Carbon Emissions from Shipping: 0.65 tCO2e | 13% of the tree
Carbon Emissions from Energy Use: 3.3 tCO2e | 64% of the tree
Emissions - Other Categories:Printing 0.11 tCO2e | 2.1% of the tree
Emissions – Accuracy: The information used to calculate these emissions were collected through receipts, billing statements, inquiries to service providers, and federal databases for fuel efficiency data and Greenhouse Gas conversions. The processes used to make these calculations is included in the methods section below.
Emissions Graphic
Caption: Visualization of major categories driving emissions for exhibitions and programming. Gallery energy use stands out in its emission contribution.
Caption: Breakdown of carbon emissions by category and purpose.
Caption: Travel for planning, installation, and programming broke down evenly by train and car.
Caption: However, the miles traveled by car disproportionately contributed to emissions. Although the train accounted for 48% of the distance travelled during the project, it only contributed 12% of the total emissions.
Emissions Calculation Methodology
To calculate and visualize the carbon emissions associated with To Understand a Tree, we decided to focus on travel, shipping, energy use, and printing pertaining to both the exhibitions and programming hosted by the museum. Importantly, we chose to report the emissions related to the exhibition and programming in two units: first, the standard of metric tons of CO2e; second, the experimental metric of percentage of carbon sequestered in the red oak that anchors To Understand a Tree. Working off of data collected by ecologist and engineer Bob Leverett (and interpretive assistance provided by Paul Wetzel, manager of the MacLeish field station), this metric showcases how choices made during the execution of the exhibition might be grounded, conceptualized, and materialized in the roots, trunk, and canopy of the iconic tree which sequesters the equivalent of nearly 11,400 lbs of CO2.
In order to calculate travel related emissions we determined the fuel usage for the vehicles used by the artist for travel (a 2015 Toyota Prius C and 2019 Toyota Tacoma) based on the Fuel Economy Database maintained by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency. For the share of emissions comprising train travel, we used a distance based calculation that indexed the passenger miles per trip with the EPA’s carbon calculations for intercity rail in the North East Corridor, found in their GHG Emission Factors Hub.
Because shipping for the exhibition differed for the incoming and outgoing trips, we estimated the emissions for each of these trips based on distance traveled for a box truck using unleaded gasoline and a Freightliner M2106 consuming diesel fuel. Interestingly, freight shipping created nearly double the amount of emissions than the unleaded—and comparatively more fuel efficient—alternative.
Finally, we determined energy use by reaching out to the museum’s utilities provider and dividing the kilowatts used during the duration of the exhibition (inclusive of installation and de-installation) by the square footage of the gallery space. Emissions associated with printing were determined using the approximate weight of exhibition catalogues and gallery guides and Gallery Climate Coalitions carbon calculator.
Waste Impact
Waste Report Methodology
We found it helpful to analyze our waste through the primary frame of consumption/”one exhibition use” versus reuse. To track the material used through the project, we collected the digital and paper receipts which corresponded to new materials and we inventoried the materials that were already part of the Museum’s stock for exhibitions and programming. While we tried to provide a detailed account of all the items that went into fabrication for the exhibition, some materials used in trace quantities and taken from the museum’s stock, such as spackle, were not included in the report. While this waste report does not track emissions related to supply chain production, where possible, the museum chose local suppliers for new materials and resources to cut down on freight shipping.
For materials headed to the landfill or consumed in use, we found that painting and wall graphics contributed the most to the exhibition's waste. One primary driver for this use of paint in the exhibition was the decision to create a darkened room for the video installation To Understand a Tree (Time): One Year and To Understand a Tree (Time): One Day which involved painting the interior of three movable walls with a dark green latex paint. However, the exhibition did not contain any painted platforms or pedestals which reduced some of the paint that would normally be used to create a uniform appearance between display furniture. Further, we avoided the fabrication of single use exhibition furniture, acrylic vitrines and temporary walls for the project. Phototex, a 100% polyester fabric adhesive material, was used for the exhibition’s entry panel, title wall, and exterior banner. This material was chosen both for the ability to print large scale graphics and for the ease of installation compared to traditional vinyl. To reduce the use of plastics in signage, we opted to print didactic texts and labels on mid-sized cardstock panels rather than vinyl or foamcore.
Many of the new items purchased for the exhibition were chosen so that they could join the museum’s inventory for future installations. While this category comprised a diversity of items ranging from drill bits to acrylic sheets, electronics and metals required for the video installation formed a large portion of the re-useable equipment. By choosing projection equipment that complements our existing projection tools and by acquiring mounting systems that provide the most flexibility within our gallery space, we aimed to ensure that new materials would have an afterlife beyond To Understand a Tree. The use of canvas drop cloths during painting, the recycling of pine dowels for public programs, and the re-use of non-stripped drywall screws showcases this practice.
Climate Action Impact
Climate Actions Taken:
Directly engaging publicly with the issue of climate change was a fundamental goal of the project from its inception, and in that spirit, climate-conscious actions were taken throughout the development of the work. These actions fall into three major categories: materials, energy, and public dialog.
In the area of the materials, Siepel’s decision not to cut down the red oak tree at the center of the project was an impactful climate action. There were many reasons for this choice. The Northern red oak species has a positive prognosis during predicted upcoming climatic warming in Massachusetts, and for this reason, it made sense to reconsider the harvest of a healthy and mature tree with a long life in front of it. In addition, through dialogue with ecologist and engineer Bob Leverett, Siepel came to understand the critical timing of the act of cutting the tree in relation to climate change. A tree takes a long time to grow to a mature size in which it contains a lot of atmospheric carbon, and there is a much narrower window of time in which to meaningfully reduce atmospheric carbon. If a large tree is cut and its carbon is released through decomposition of much of the material, its carbon sequestration capacities will not be replaced by a small tree during this critical window of time. Lastly, the relational aspects of the project, in which Siepel spent many years in the company of this tree and its forest environment, exerted a strong influence on this decision. Following ideas based on indigenous teachings on “the Honorable Harvest,” as described in Robin Wall Kimmerer’s book “Braiding Sweetgrass,” Siepel engaged with a process of asking permission of the tree to harvest it. They ultimately felt they received an answer of “no,” and changed the course of the project as a result.
Other material choices made with climate and environment in mind included working with repurposed OSB for some of the work, and the use of post-consumer recycled/FSC certified paper for the catalog production.
In the area of energy conservation, the artist works with energy efficiency integrated into their studio practices (see artist’s climate statement). Lower waste choices were made wherever possible in packing and shipping the work: using reusable packing blankets, biodegradable materials, minimizing the use of disposable plastic, and driving the work in a one-way rented UHaul truck. Several trips were made from Massachusetts to Philadelphia as a part of the exhibit, and whenever it was possible, Amtrak was taken in place of a car.
Public programming connected to the topic of climate and forests occurred throughout the project over a five year period, including many Smith College class sessions, talks in colleges and universities nationwide, and local events in the community. Siepel curated a public event series sponsored by Smith College, with additional collaboration from the Kestrel Land Trust, the Hilltown Land Trust, and the Insight Meditation Community of Western Mass, bringing in guest experts to lead engagements around themes of carbon sequestration, climate change, and interconnection between humans and trees. Psychologist and climate writer Michele Wick wrote an essay on the project which was included in the anthology “Elementals,” edited by Gavin Van Horn and Bruce Jennings, published by the Center for Humans and Nature.
In direct association with the Museum for Art in Wood exhibit, we held a public conversation between the artist and University of Pennsylvania climatologist Dr. Michael Mann, focused on the exhibition’s exploration of the topic and the broader potential for cross-disciplinary engagement on climate issues between practitioners in the arts and science fields. We held a co-sponsored event with the historic Lewis and Clark Herbarium (housed at the Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia), in which we discussed the role of plant collections in the exhibition and in history. We hosted an experiential workshop in the forest at the Schuylkill Center for Environmental Education, focusing on the interaction between woodworking and the forest, starting with a naturalist walk and ending with the splitting of a section of log using traditional hand tools. The museum sponsored a herbarium creation workshop in which participants learned about local plants, built and used a plant press, and learned about ecologically-conscious plant collection practices. Additionally, the museum published an exhibition catalog with contributions by Jennifer-Navva Milliken, Michele Wick, Deirdre Visser, and Siepel and collaborators, bringing the concerns of the project to a broader audience in an enduring way.
Learnings & Notes
Reflections From Gina:
The process has illuminated some specific and surprising aspects of climate impact that I would never have been aware of without the formal assessment
The CIR has provided a way to further engage in conversation with a wide variety of people around working sustainably within the art system.
It’s difficult to draw boundaries around what is to be assessed in a report like this, and certain impacts are too interwoven with the fabric of everyday activities to be realistically assessed. The act of drawing some boundaries around the exhibit helped us cultivate awareness of our overall impacts.
The process of writing a CIR has enabled me to think concretely about things I’d like to do better on in my next exhibition opportunity. Specifically, reducing emissions and waste from shipping, the use of latex paint, and the use of vinyl wall text.
Reflections From the Museum for Art in Wood:
The CIR reporting process has helped us conceptualize the broad range of choices that facilitate exhibitions and programming with an attention to how these decision points harbor environmental consequences.
Although we learned from other CIRs that gallery energy use was a large contributing factor to emissions, seeing how stark of an impact it made in our our space was illuminating.
Looking to the future, the Museum is interested in exploring energy efficiency within the gallery space, reducing our use of freight shipping when possible, and continuing to support rail transportation in exhibition and public program planning.
Exhibition credits (Curators, Producers, Assistants, etc):
This report was prepared by Gina Siepel (Artist), Amrut Mishra (Exhibitions Manager), and Jennifer-Navva Milliken (Curator) using a template from Artists Commit. Artists Commit CIR Mentor Jessica Gath offered guidance and editing support. Many Museum for Art in Wood staff members as well as Fabricators, were engaged in our process.
Link to exhibition page: https://museumforartinwood.org/exhibition/gina-siepel-to-understand-a-tree/