University shuts off steam whistle because of the rising cost of gas needed for its operation
By B.J. Rains (Contact)
Wednesday, September 3rd, 2008
It appears that one of the longest and most recognizable traditions on campus has come to an end.
The steam whistle — used since the original was installed in 1912 — has gone quiet.
Because of rising energy costs on campus, the University decided that the approximately $3,000 it costs per year to run the whistle was just too much.
“It’s been shut off due to the cost of utilities,” said Doug Riat, director of Facilities Operations. “We were asked what the cost of blowing the whistle was and we provided the information and from that there was a desire in the provost’s office to not have the whistle blow, at least at this time.”
Riat estimated that it cost between $5 and $6 each time the whistle blew. When the decision to shut off the whistle was made in July, natural gas costs looked as if they were going to escalate to record highs. Natural gas is needed to boil water in a boiler that produces the steam to power the whistle.
“It looked like it was going to be a very expensive year to produce steam,” Riat said.
The current whistle was built in 2003 after the previous whistle, which had been in place since 1939, broke and was not reparable. At that time, the University had no plans of replacing the whistle because of the rising costs to run it. A donor came forward, however, and paid almost $7,000 for a new whistle to be installed.
The whistle’s sound has become almost a comforting feeling to alumni, who return to campus and hear the whistle — bringing back vivid memories of their times as students.
“It’s very unique and I definitely remember it from times at school there,” said Cesar Millan, a 1997 graduate who lives in St. Louis. “You knew exactly what it meant when you heard it. It’s very disappointing to hear this. It’s like the end of an era. I’m sure the alumni won’t be too happy to hear about this because it’s definitely one of the traditions that makes Kansas so great and historic.”
Facilities Operations deemed the price tag for the short three-second blow too much in a time when cost-cutting and energy-saving efforts are in place all over campus.
“People tend to pick the low-hanging fruit and I think the whistle is low-hanging fruit,” Riat said. “It cost us nothing to turn it off in order to generate savings. Nobody is waiting for the whistle to blow. It doesn’t seem like an essential element to signify the end of a class or that its time for a class change. Classes always begin and end whether the whistle blows or not.”
John Burnett, 1978 graduate, said the absence of the whistle would definitely be a change, especially because campus was so large. Burnett said he had class in Learned Hall but had to walk back to Phi Delta Theta between classes, and the whistle gave him enough time to make it back.
“It was a signal to tell professors when to wind it up,” Burnett said.
He said that although the whistle served a practical purpose, it also had another purpose.
“It’s part of the environment of campus,” he said.
Adam McGonigle, Wichita junior and student body president, said it didn’t seem likely that Student Senate would be able to assist in funding a possible return for the whistle.
“I don’t think so, because Student Senate typically does not allocate money towards maintenance of any part of the campus, whether it be landscaping or maintenance to a building,” McGonigle said. “But it is possible that somebody could try and look into it and make some sort of exception to that, but I’m not aware of anyone attempting to do that.”
While Student Senate won’t be funding any whistle project, one possible solution would be to formulate a resolution asking the University to reconsider and overturn the decision.
“I remember being scared to death by it during my visit as a senior in high school,” McGonigle said. “It’s certainly something that’s been important to this campus, but in terms of what Student Senate can do, I don’t know if there is anything.”
Because a donor came forward to fund a new whistle five years ago, it is possible that a donor could again help keep one of the longest Kansas traditions alive.
“How much does it cost to run that thing?” Millan said. “$3,000? I would think somebody could come up with that. I definitely would if I could. It’s just very disappointing to hear this. I really hope somebody can come forward and donate some money to the University and get it started back up again.”
- Edited by Scott Toland

Discussion
All comments are moderated by Kansan.com staff. For our full user policy, click here.
I wonder if there's any chance some of the science students can figure out a green (and economical) way to create steam for the whistle.
ShortyAsian's got a good idea.
But 3000 is such a puny amount, especially when students fork over hundreds each semester in fees. I know it may seem a pointless use of dollars, but I'd rather save a tradition than pay for a rowing boathouse. What's this cost the university? About 5 or 6 credits from an out-of-state student's semester.
Money floods in to fund the Basketball and Football programs, which is great, but we can't scrap up the cash in a multi-million dollar budget for such a long-standing icon to the campus? What's next, it being too costly to chime the Campanile's bells?
I can't remember exactly how it works but there's a solar panel energy system on the west coast that heats oil up to 300 degrees in a system of pipes. The pipes then run through cold water to create steam, which push the turbines, etc. But if all we need is steam to work the whistle, and it's only on during the day, then why not create a cost-effective solution?
Besides, universities spend millions on effective strategic planning, something like this would be a step in the right direction.
$3,000 a semester? At $5 a blow, that would give us enough money for 60 blows. Enough for what, two weeks of whistle?
The $3,000 number cannot be accurate.
My bad. I was the one who got the math wrong.
Share your 2¢
Requires free registration.