Competition to Reduce Energy Use Results In Savings for Six Brooklyn Neighborhoods - NYSERDA Sponsored Energy Competition Saves Residents Money While Changing Their Habits

http://is.gd/jRbl43
Residents in six Brooklyn neighborhoods participating in “Reduce the Use in District 39” have demonstrated how awareness, education and competition can lead to money-saving energy reductions.

The program was a year-long energy savings competition sponsored by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), Con Edison and the office of New York City Councilman Brad Lander.

A total of 158 households in Park Slope, Windsor Terrace, Kensington, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens and Borough Park took the challenge. On average, they cut their electricity usage by 4 percent over the course of the competition, compared to the previous year. Their overall savings was $2,542 and 12,108 kilowatt hours (kWh), the equivalent of the amount of electricity needed to power approximately two average-sized homes for a year.

“The competition made the participants look at their energy use in a new and different way – in comparison to their neighbors, friends, and other social connections,” said Francis J. Murray, Jr., President and CEO of NYSERDA. “It shows that this type of program can make a difference in the way people use energy. Competition coupled with awareness is a strong motivation to reduce consumption.”

Innovative initiatives, such as this contest, are becoming more common nationwide, as using behavioral economics to lower energy consumption can be a way of impacting many homes that otherwise would be difficult to reach. Participants were provided with monthly reports on how much energy they used, how much they had reduced from last year, and how their numbers compared to their neighbors’ results. They also received energy-saving tips to help them reduce their electricity consumption and ideas to improve the energy performance of their homes.
...
Two Park Slope residents won special awards – one for the household with the “Smallest Footprint” (lowest total electrical usage), and the other for “Biggest Reduction” (the greatest reduction from last year).

The “Smallest Footprint” award went to Lloyd Hicks, whose household used only 213.7 kWh per person during the competition.... The “Biggest Reduction” winner was Katherine Degn who reduced her household’s energy use by 49 percent compared to the previous year. “The competition and its monthly updates made me constantly aware of my energy consumption, more so than my monthly electric bills,” she said. “And I liked seeing my usage relative to Councilmember Brad Lander’s, so that gave me some sort of comparison.”

Residents achieved reductions by turning off lights, shutting off multiple appliances at once with advanced power strips, reducing the number of computers in use, cooking in microwaves and toaster ovens rather than full-sized ovens, using Con Edison’s free programmable thermostat initiative for central AC, and pulling down shades and closing windows during the summer days.

In addition to the Park Slope winners, Sarah Goodman of Windsor Terrace was a co-winner in each category, as she installed photovoltaic (PV) solar panels on her home in 2010 and reduced her electric bills to nearly zero. PV systems convert sunlight into electricity and generally offset 70 to 80 percent of a home’s electricity needs.

“Reduce the Use in District 39” was NYSERDA’s second pilot neighborhood energy-savings competition in Brooklyn. For more information about how you can be a part of future NYSERDA-sponsored energy competitions, contact competition@nyserda.org.  For more information on NYSERDA’s residential energy efficiency programs, visit  nyserda.ny.gov/residential. For more information on Con Edison's energy efficiency programs, visit www.conEd.com/greenteam Link opens in new window - close new window to return to this page.  or call 1-800-870-6118.

New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) www.NYSERDA.org
Press Release dated November 21, 2011

New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Launches Program To Improve Services, Lower Costs and Maintain Status ...

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dep/html/press_releases/11-98pr.shtml 

On November 7, 2011 the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) launched a new program, Operational Excellence, or OpX, to help make DEP the safest, most effective, cost-efficient, and transparent water utility in the nation. The program will enhance services, result in environmental benefits, and reduce costs for the nine million New Yorkers who rely on DEP for water and wastewater services. Veolia Water ("Veolia"), an international expert in water and wastewater utilities, has been hired as a consultant to develop recommendations to streamline workflows, boost productivity, identify opportunities for efficiency gains, and keep future water rate increases as low as possible. As the nation's largest municipal water and wastewater utility, DEP currently spends roughly $1.2 billion annually on operations and maintenance and aims to achieve $100 to $200 million in annual savings through the program. The innovative incentive-based agreement with Veolia Water delivers access to a worldwide network of water and wastewater services and technologies while ensuring continued government control, decision-making authority, and ownership, as well as public-employee status for DEP employees.

... DEP Commissioner Carter Strickland said "Faced with unfunded mandates that have driven up costs, as well as the need for reinvesting in our basic infrastructure to ensure reliability for the next generation, and our desire to keep water rates in check as much as possible, now it is our turn to take our agency to the next level. The Operational Excellence program pairs us with a firm that brings a comprehensive portfolio of best management practices, a track record of boosting productivity while reducing expenses across the globe, and all while protecting existing workforces. Through this new innovative partnership, teams of DEP employees will work with Veolia to look for efficiencies across the board in operations and maintenance and then implement the best recommendations over the next four years while protecting our existing workforce and maintaining our level of service. We also know that the success of this program requires the help of the unions that represent our nearly 6,000 employees; so in addition to briefing them ahead of time, we will be working closely with them as the program moves forward. Bold steps like these are the responsible thing to do to lessen the burden on our 835,000 customers who have been absorbing several years of significant water rate increases."
...
The company's selection followed a Request for Proposals issued in April by the New York City Water Board and a competitive review process that focused on a contractor's ability to assess all aspects of agency operations for potential improvements, including labor productivity and processes, inventory management, chemical purchasing and usage, sludge digestion and disposal, and energy efficiency and management. The Veolia team includes McKinsey & Company and ARCADIS, both serving as subcontractors.DEP will draw from the Veolia team's portfolio of best management practices, including implementing system-wide improvements and saving up to 15% of operations and maintenance costs for utilities including Berliner Wasserbetriebe in Berlin, Germany and Thames Water in London, UK.  Veolia is the global water industry leader, managing more than 5,200 water facilities and 3,200 wastewater facilities around the world.
...
The OpX program is divided into two phases. First, DEP and its partner Veolia will conduct an initial evaluation and recommendation phase that will result in a final report in 2012 of recommendations on how DEP can improve productivity and reduce costs. Based on that report, DEP has the ability to accept or reject any of the proposed operational changes and cost-saving measures. Improvements that DEP chooses will be implemented over a four-year period.  Compensation for work performed includes a combination of a fixed fee and an incentive-based compensation that is calculated based on recurring savings achieved and documented.

The main objectives of the program are to:

• Review current operations and maintenance for potential improvements with a particular focus on energy usage and production opportunities, chemical usage and pricing, labor productivity, inventory management, and optimal sludge processes.
• Recommend implementable measures to improve and/or streamline operations and maintenance, increasing efficiencies, enhancing productivity, and reducing costs.
• Support public outreach, legislative initiatives, and other processes required to implement recommendations.
• Work with DEP staff to manage the implementation of the recommended initiatives.

Improving operational productivity and efficiency is a part of several goals outlined in Strategy 2011-2014, a far-reaching strategic plan that lays out 100 distinct initiatives to make DEP the safest, most efficient, cost-effective, and transparent water utility in the nation. The new plan, the product of nearly one year of analysis and outreach, builds on PlaNYC, Mayor Bloomberg's sustainability blueprint for New York City. The plan is available on DEP's website at www.nyc.gov/dep.
...
DEP manages the city's water supply, providing more than one billion gallons of water each day to more than nine million residents, including eight million in New York City. The water is delivered from a watershed that extends more than 125 miles from the city, comprising 19 reservoirs and three controlled lakes. Approximately 7,000 miles of water mains, tunnels and aqueducts bring water to homes and businesses throughout the five boroughs, and 7,400 miles of sewer lines and 95 pump stations take wastewater to 14 in-city treatment plants. DEP employs nearly 6,000 employees, including almost 1,000 in the upstate watershed. DEP has a robust capital program, with a planned $8.9 billion in investments over the next five years.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection www.nyc.gov/dep
Press Release dated November 7, 2011

An Analysis of Radiant Barriers Finds Significant Energy Savings

http://www.swinter.com/Collateral/Documents/English-US/PWJuly2011.pdf
Steven Winter Associates (SWA) recently evaluated the energy penalty associated with the recessed convectors found in many older masonry buildings. In this construction, the heating source is partially buried in an uninsulated wall. After a collaboration with Jonathan Flothow of The Steam Balancing Company (http:// steambalancing.com/), [they quantified] the benefits of ... [installing] a double bubble foil radiant barrier behind convectors to minimize heat loss to the outside. For the analysis, SWA assumed an average winter temperature of 35° F (NYC average winter) and an average convector surface temperature of 110° F (which accounts for some hours where the convector is not filled with steam).

They looked at a building section that is typical to many older pre-war buildings with a 3 wythe-brick bearing wall and recessed cast iron convectors. Energy modeling and analysis was performed using THERM v6.3. Simulations were run analyzing heat transfer across the wall assembly with and without the radiant barrier.

The model demonstrated savings due to the radiant barrier of approximately 3.4 herms, or 2.25 gals of #2 fuel oil, per typical convector over the course of a 160-day heating season. At current NYC fuel prices, fixing this energy loss equates to an operating cost savings of approximately $9.70/convector for an oil heated building and $4.50/convector for a gas heated building. At an installed cost of approximately $23/convector, these savings would result in simple payback periods of 2 – 5 years. The $23 installed cost is based on a bid by a NYC plumbing contractor coordinating radiant barrier installation work with other plumbing work. If work is performed by in-house maintenance staff, the installed cost is only a few dollars for materials per convector.
Operational variables will, of course, impact real world results. This model is built upon a 24/7 convector run-time during a 160-day heating season. In the real world, occupants may valve-off convectors in an effort to reduce over-heating in their dwelling unit; the extent to which this happens was not quantified. Also, the effect of dust accumulation on the vertical radiant barrier is unclear. Studies of horizontally installed attic radiant barriers performed by the Oak Ridge National Laboratory have determined a decrease in the effectiveness of radiant barriers by approximately 20% over time due to dust build up. With this in mind, it is reasonable to expect a dust-related degradation of radiant barrier effectiveness over the course of several years that may impact realized energy savings. Related to this, a maintenance plan may be necessary to remove dust every few years.

Initial indicators demonstrate that the installation of a post-convector radiant barrier is a cost-effective energy conservation measure, especially in buildings that use expensive heating fuels such as #2 oil. Further investigation is planned for the upcoming heating season in an effort to true-up model data with real world temperature data.

Steven Winter Associates (SWA) www.swinter.com
Party Walls
Volume 7, Issue 7; July, 2011; Page 1

Getting Beneath the Veil of Effective Schools: Evidence from New York City

http://papers.nber.org/papers/w17632
Abstract: Charter schools were developed, in part, to serve as an R&D engine for traditional public schools, resulting in a wide variety of school strategies and outcomes. In this paper, we collect unparalleled data on the inner-workings of 35 charter schools and correlate these data with credible estimates of each school's effectiveness. We find that traditionally collected input measures -- class size, per pupil expenditure, the fraction of teachers with no certification, and the fraction of teachers with an advanced degree -- are not correlated with school effectiveness. In stark contrast, we show that an index of five policies suggested by over forty years of qualitative research -- frequent teacher feedback, the use of data to guide instruction, high-dosage tutoring, increased instructional time, and high expectations -- explains approximately 50 percent of the variation in school effectiveness. Our results are robust to controls for three alternative theories of schooling: a model emphasizing the provision of wrap-around services, a model focused on teacher selection and retention, and the "No Excuses'' model of education. We conclude by showing that our index provides similar results in a separate sample of charter schools.

by Will Dobbie and Roland G. Fryer, Jr
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) www.NBER.org
NBER Working Paper No. 17632; Issued in December 2011

Study Clarifies the Energy Savings in Retrofitted Buildings

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/realestate/commercial/study-clarifies-the-energy-savings-in-retrofitted-buildings.html
While the practice of retrofitting buildings with energy-conserving technology like efficient boilers, high-quality windows and compact fluorescent light bulbs has been around for years, data on whether these changes result in any real savings has been virtually nonexistent. Now, a new study shows that these relatively straightforward fixes can significantly reduce spending on fuel and electricity. Deutsche Bank Americas Foundation, a philanthropic arm of the German bank, and Living Cities, a nonprofit partnership of 22 foundations and financial institutions, commissioned the report, which will be released later this month. It examined nearly 19,000 affordable housing units in New York City that had undergone energy efficiency retrofits and found that these changes resulted in a 19 percent savings on fuel bills and a 10 percent savings on electricity across the portfolio. This translates into $240 in fuel savings and $70 in electrical savings per apartment every year.
...
At Terrific Tenements, for example, an 88-unit, two-building affordable housing complex on West 48th Street in Manhattan, the installation of new boilers and heating controls reduced fuel costs by 50 percent. At one of the buildings, at 425 West 48th Street, there was a fuel saving of $551 a year per apartment, while at the sister building at 527 West 47th Street, the saving was $355 annually for each unit.
...
The retrofits at the Terrific Tenements “was not achieved with any particularly exotic technologies” like solar panels or a green roof, [Marc Zuluaga of Steven Winter Associates] said. Rather, this is the simple story “of how an owner took the worst-performing building type in the city and turned it into one of the best-performing buildings in the entire city.”
...
Another project examined in the study is Riverview II in Yonkers, also owned by the Related Companies. The 343 apartments at Riverview, at 47 Riverdale Avenue, were heated with electricity, and the landlord was responsible for paying all of the tenants’ electrical bills. The Related Companies started an electrical savings program, including better windows, lighting upgrades and Energy Star refrigerators, that helped reduce overall electricity usage by more than 25 percent.

In addition, each apartment was responsible for paying its own electric bills, giving tenants an incentive to conserve electricity. As a result, the changes translated into $808 in annual savings for each apartment.

The study’s authors hope the results will go beyond persuading landlords to institute environmentally beneficial retrofits. They hope that lenders will use this data and consider underwriting larger loans to landlords based on the projected savings that come from retrofitting buildings.

Currently, lenders do not consider future savings from retrofits when they are underwriting a loan because there is little data indicating what those savings would be, experts said.

In addition to a lack of data, there is also some doubt whether energy audits, like those conducted by the Related Companies, are accurate. This is in part because some auditors are motivated to overstate the potential savings since favorable results help to justify the audits, and also because there is not sufficient follow-up to determine whether the energy audits were accurate.

To help resolve this, the study also created a tool for lenders to confirm the accuracy of energy audits. Using the data gathered, they divided New York City multifamily housing stock into categories based on a building’s age, heating system, electrical infrastructure and other factors.

Lenders can then apply the data gathered in the study to the building types to determine the potential savings and check the veracity of the energy audits. It also allows lenders to identify those buildings that would have the greatest increase in efficiency, and therefore the largest drop in costs, from an energy efficient retrofit.
...
To make them more comfortable using projected savings from retrofits, a public-private partnership started this year, the New York City Energy Efficiency Corporation, is planning to dedicate a portion of $37.5 million in federal stimulus money to provide collateral guarantee these deals. If a lender agrees to underwrite a loan and incorporate potential energy savings from a retrofit, the partnership will repay that loan should the projected savings fall short.

These efforts come at a time when New York City has been pushing environmental initiatives. The City Council has instituted laws requiring that buildings of more than the 50,000-square-feet benchmark compile and share information regarding their energy efficiency, and that every 10 years these buildings perform an energy audit. ...

by Julie Satow
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/09/realestate/commercial/study-clarifies-the-energy-savings-in-retrofitted-buildings.html
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com
November 8, 2011

New Tactics and Billions to Manage City Sewage

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/20/nyregion/new-york-city-set-to-commit-2-4-billion-on-storm-water-control-tactics.html
The Bloomberg administration is set to commit $2.4 billion in public and private investment to applying new environmental technology to an old problem: the flow of untreated sewage and storm water into New York City’s waterways.

City officials announced ... that the State Department of Environmental Conservation had tentatively assented to a proposal by the city to introduce infrastructure to retain storm water before it reaches the sewer system and overloads it.  The approach reflects a shift from traditional sewage-control methods like underground storage tanks and tunnel systems to techniques like green roofs with plantings, porous pavement for parking lots and depressions for collecting water in parks.
...
The federal Environmental Protection Agency promotes these newer forms of infrastructure as a cost-effective and environmentally preferable alternative to conventional overflow management.

Sewer overflows are the biggest water-quality problem in the metropolitan region, preventing many waterways from meeting federal standards for fishing, swimming and healthy habitats for wildlife. Each year, up to 30 billion gallons of overflow enters New York Harbor, Jamaica Bay, Newtown Creek and other waterways.

The city plans to spend $1.5 billion of its own money in the next 20 years on the infrastructure project. An additional $900 million in private investment is to be secured by imposing requirements for residential and commercial development, like limits on the amount of runoff allowed from a new project. (The city will still spend $1.6 billion more over the same period on traditional sewage-control projects.)
...
City officials said features like plantings would help reduce the sewage overflows by 40 percent by 2030 and cut the city’s sewer management costs by $2.4 billion over 20 years, helping to keep water bills down for utility customers

by Mireya Navarro
FOR FULL STORY GO TO: 
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/20/nyregion/new-york-city-set-to-commit-2-4-billion-on-storm-water-control-tactics.html
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com

October 19, 2011

Rooftop farms sprouting in Brooklyn -Urban pioneers cater to restaurants and markets

http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110828/REAL_ESTATE/308289984
inShare10

Atop an industrial building in Greenpoint, Brooklyn, the crew at Gotham Greens can harvest the equivalent of six acres of salad greens and herbs without getting their hands dirty. Bibb lettuce, basil and other leafy plants spout from a stream of recirculated, nutrient-rich water in the company's 15,000-square-foot hydroponic greenhouse.

The process actually uses 20 times less water than a soil-based farm, according to Viraj Puri, Gotham Greens co-founder and CEO. “It's a very efficient, productive way to grow,” he said.

...

Gotham Greens, with 25 employees, had its first harvest in June. Two soil-based operations—Eagle Street Rooftop Farm, in Greenpoint, and Brooklyn Grange, in Long Island City, Queens—have started up within the past two years, selling their crops to restaurants and markets throughout the city.

...

But it remains to be seen whether these rooftop farms can compete in a system dominated by national growers.

... The cost of a hydroponic rooftop is about $2 million to $2.5 million, says Paul Lightfoot, CEO of Manhattan-based BrightFarms, a firm that finances hydroponic outfits.

... Mr. Puri would not disclose startup costs for the 0.3-acre farm....

The urban farm's strategy is to focus on growing items that are highly perishable and expensive to ship. “Food goes bad while people own it,”....

Eagle Street co-founder and head farmer Annie Novak says keeping labor costs low is essential to its success. The 6,000-square-foot farm relies on volunteers, apprentices and a partner organization, Growing Chefs, to assist its four paid employees.

The farm focuses on leafy greens and herbs, which provide the best return, says Ms. Novak. “An herb is perfect, because it has a high price and requires zero labor,” she said.

Eagle Street breaks even on crops, with annual revenues of about $1.25 to $1.50 a square foot. The business makes an additional $2,000 from sales of T-shirts and nonperishables such as honey, Ms. Novak said. Building owner Broadway Stages paid for the $60,000 roof, which was designed and installed by New York-based Goode Green. The cost—amounting to about $10 a square foot—was significantly lower than that of many similar projects.

Because Gotham Greens can achieve a denser yield and harvest year-round, Mr. Puri forecasts first-year revenues to be higher “by a factor of hundreds” than those of the average soil-based rooftop farm.

Demand for Gotham Greens items already outstrips supply. Mr. Puri is in talks to open another Brooklyn facility next year and expects to establish several more.

...

According to The Eagle Street Rooftop Farm Fact Sheet at http://rooftopfarms.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/EagleStreetRooftopFarmFactSheet2010.pdf :

• The green roof base system is comprised of 2” of built-up components: polyethelene, drainange mat, and retention and separation fabrics.

• With the approval of the building's engineer, 200,000 pounds of growing medium were lifted onto the roof by crane, in "super-sacks", over the course of a single day. The growing medium, laid directly onto the green roof base, is a mixture of compost, rock particulates and shale and is manufactured in Pennsylvania. It is a green roof component that at the same time retains water, allows for air circulation and is lightweight.

• The green roof can hold over 1.5” of rain, providing a significant reduction in storm water runoff. The captured water, in turn, can help to cool the warehouse below yielding a reduction in cooling costs.

• Installation cost was approximately $10 per square foot. This is significantly lower than most green roof installations due in part to two main factors: the three story building and open expanse of roof were very accessible and, two, that recycled materials such as used rafters were utilized for edging.

• Upon completion of Goode Green's base system installation, the growing medium was moved into by place by a team of farming volunteers over the course of three days. It was arranged into 16 north-south beds measuring thirty inches to four feet in width and divided down the middle by a single long aisle. The beds have a soil depth of 4-7”. The aisles were filled with mulched bark.

• Since overhead watering on a rooftop often evaporates or blows away, irrigation was inititally provided via black plastic drip lines, using city tap water. In 2010, the drip irrigation system was de-installed, as the root systems of the crops rotated and intercropped through the farm during the growing season were incondusive with drip watering (e.g. carrots, microgreens, radishes). Currently, the Farm relies on hand watering (via hose) for seedlings and transplants, and rainwater for established plants (kale, chard, tomatoes).

• In its first season, the Eagle Street Rooftop Farm grew over thirty types of produce, from watermelon to cabbage. Having seen what fared poorly in a greenroof growing environment, in 2010 Annie tightened the crop list to a wider range of varities within a smaller number of crops.

• In 2010, the Farm grows a narrower crop list, with a wide diversity of heirloom and rooftop-acclimated varities of produce within each crop type. In chosing her crops, Annie designed a special rooftop salad mix of seed stock designed to do well on rooftop conditions, yet provide the same colors and spice of traditional popular salad mixes. Currenly, the Farm grows cucumbers, hot peppers, tomatoes, eggplants, spinach, radishes, kale, swiss chard, carrots, peas, beans, salad greens (lettuces, mustards, arugula) herbs (sage, tarragon, oregano, parsley, chives, cilantro, dill), and flowers (cosmos, zinnias, calendula, tobacco, daisys, hops). Additionally, the Farm grows a small amount of corn and squash (winter and summer).

by Sara Eckel
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20110828/REAL_ESTATE/308289984

Crains New York Business www.CrainsNY.com

August 28, 2011

With Post-Its and Checklists, Schools Cut Their Energy Bills

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/education/15energy.html

Simple yellow Post-it notes with the message “When not in use, turn off the juice,” pointedly left on classroom computers, printers and air-conditioners, have helped the Mount Sinai School District on Long Island save $350,000 annually on utility bills.

Energy consumption in New York City’s 1,245 school buildings is down roughly 11 percent since 2008, as motion detectors have been installed on classroom lights and unused refrigerators and freezers have been unplugged for the summer.

In Yonkers, energy savings have financed $18 million in new boilers, windows and other capital improvements that the Westchester County district could not otherwise afford.

Schools, once known as energy wasters, are embracing conservation in increasing numbers. A desire to practice the environmentally friendly principles discussed in classrooms has been heightened by soaring energy costs and tighter budgets. With the help of a growing industry of energy consultants, school officials are evaluating every detail of their daily operations, like the temperature of the swimming pool and the amount of electricity the cafeteria ovens use, and are replacing energy-guzzling equipment with more efficient models.

Supporters say that even small adjustments can pay off almost immediately. “If we tested schools in efficient use of energy, many of them wouldn’t get a passing grade,” said C. David Myers, president of building efficiency for Johnson Controls, which has joined with 60 of the 125 school districts on Long Island to reduce energy use by 20 to 40 percent annually.

... More than two dozen states ... have used millions in federal stimulus money since 2009 to pay for energy programs and upgrades in school buildings, said Judy Marks, director of the National Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities in Washington. These efforts include replacing light fixtures, adding solar panels and building geothermal heating and cooling systems.

Some states have also started programs to finance school conservation efforts and to create local contracting jobs....  Oregon passed legislation in June to provide school districts with low-interest loans and grants for school efficiency improvements; Washington State started a similar grant-based program in 2009.

In some instances, districts like Mount Sinai have appointed an official energy manager — in its case, Chris Heil, ... to police hallways and classrooms to root out energy waste. Armed with yellow notes, he inspects 100 classrooms a day and “tickets” violators. Teachers have been known to run back to their classrooms when they see him coming. When one instructor refused to shut down his classroom computers at night, Mr. Heil sent him an e-mail calculating how much money was being wasted, and promised to share the next message with the superintendent.... Mr. Heil sometimes shows up at schools at 4 a.m. to make sure the custodial staff remembered to turn off the lights. He has rummaged through storage closets to locate switches to shut down rooftop exhaust fans that ran nonstop. Such vigilance has reduced the district’s utility costs by 30 percent since 2007, Mr. Heil said.

As part of the Bloomberg administration’s campaign to reduce the municipal government’s energy consumption and carbon emissions by 30 percent by 2017, the city awarded $100,000 in May to schools that voluntarily decreased their energy use in a monthlong competition. Martin Luther King Jr. Educational Campus in Manhattan won top honors with a 35 percent reduction. And this fall, rooftop solar panels are being installed on three school buildings.... Dennis M. Walcott, the city’s schools chancellor ... regularly checks on schools that he sees lighted up at night.

Many districts across the country have financed conservation efforts through so-called energy performance contracts with companies that advise them on how to be more energy-efficient and guarantee them specific savings, either in dollars or kilowatts. If the district’s actual savings fall short, the company writes a check to make up the difference.

With contracts involving equipment investments — which can be $50,000 to tens of millions of dollars ... districts typically use existing utility budgets or borrow money through third-party lenders, and then pay it back out of their immediate energy savings so that no budget increase is needed.

In Yonkers, the improvements included replacing Lincoln High School’s 60-year-old boilers, which guzzled 137,500 gallons of heating oil a year.... The new boilers burn only 80,000 gallons.

Three consultants — Johnson Controls, Trane and Energy Education — have reported that their school business has grown by at least a third since 2006. The companies send in engineers and specialists to conduct extensive audits of each district — Energy Education uses a checklist of 1,200 items — and then custom-design conservation programs. “Anything that consumes energy, natural gas or water is going to get evaluated,” said Larry Wash, Trane’s president of global services.

In New Jersey, the schools in Holmdel Township have lowered their electric and gas bills by about half since 2009, to $1 million annually..... That breaks down to 3.5 million fewer kilowatts of power and 240,000 fewer therms of heat a year.

William Balicki, Holmdel’s energy manager, said he kept a tight check on thermostats, and installed automatic timers on outdoor lights in bus yards and parking lots that once stayed on long after the drivers left.
Mr. Balicki also considered placing motion sensors on classroom lights, but instead settled for $75 worth of stickers to post above light switches as a reminder to flip them off.

...
by Winnie Hu
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/education/15energy.html
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com
August 15, 2011

New York City Parks and Their Impact on Residential Property Values

http://www.nycedc.com/NewsPublications/Newsletters/EconomicSnapshot/Documents/EconomicSnapshotAugust2011.pdf
The City of New York Department of Parks & Recreation (“Parks Department”) oversees about 29,000 acres of land, slightly less than a fifth of all City land. Parks constitute the majority of such space: 16,600 acres, or 11 percent of total City land. The remaining space under the Parks Department’s management includes golf courses, stadiums, tennis courts, etc.  According to a report by The Trust for Public Land (“Trust”), in 2009, New York City had the highest percentage of park land among 14 other cities identified with similarly high population density, surpassing areas such as Washington. D.C, San Francisco and Boston.

Over a thousand acres of park land was added to the City from 2003 to 2011 according to property data from the NYC Department of Finance (DOF). About two thirds (794 acres) of the increase was due to one park reclassification and the re-opening of the McCarren Park in 2005, which was a pool park originally closed in 1984 and located in Williamsburg, Brooklyn
.
With approximately 25 million visitors, Central Park is the most visited city park in the U.S., according to the Trust. 7 NYC parks ranked in the country’s top 50 visited parks, including Prospect Park, Battery Park and Bryant Park.

Parks are amenities whose value is difficult to assess due to many intangible factors. However, in so far as they affect the quality of life, land values should vary based on the proximity to parks.

The New York City Economic Development Corporation NYCEDC analyzed property data around three of the City’s parks: Central Park (Manhattan), Prospect Park (Brooklyn) and the recently opened Highline Park (Manhattan). The analysis finds that land values of residential properties increase the closer they are to a park. Additionally, the increase in land values over time specifically for lower priced properties is also correlated with the proximity to the park.  This analysis is based on market value of land per square foot as estimated by NYC DOF. Data are from the Real Property Assessment Database between Fiscal Year 2002/2003 and
Fiscal Year 2010/2011.

On the east side of Central park, median values for properties between a 5 and 10 minute walk were 11 percent lower than those within 5 minutes from the park assuming a casual walking pace of 2-3 miles per hour. A similar trend was observed on the west and south sides of Central Park, Prospect Park, and the Highline. 

From 2003 to 2011, property values closest to the parks escalated over time at a faster rate in lower priced areas (relative to their neighborhoods bordering the park), such as Flatbush, Central Park West and Hudson Yards. Before the construction of the Highline Park in 2003, surrounding residential properties were valued 8 percent below the overall median for Manhattan, but had appreciated beyond borough-wide values by 2011. The trends among neighborhoods with relatively higher land values were not as conclusive

New York City Department  of Economic Development www.NYCEDC.org
Economic Snapshot August, 2011

Cities See the Other Side of the Tracks

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/03/realestate/commercial/cities-see-another-side-to-old-tracks.html

The High Line park, built on an elevated railway trestle in Manhattan, has become both a symbol and a catalyst for an explosion of growth in the meatpacking district and the Chelsea neighborhood. 

 

Now cities around the country, including Chicago, Philadelphia and St. Louis, are working up plans to renovate their aging railroad trestles, tracks and railways for parkland. Cities with little public space are realizing they badly need more parks, and the High Line has taught that renovating an old railway can be the spark that helps improve a neighborhood and attract development.

The High Line’s first and second sections cost $153 million, but have generated an estimated $2 billion in new developments. In the five years since construction started on the High Line, 29 new projects have been built or are under way in the neighborhood, according to the New York City Department of City Planning. More than 2,500 new residential units, 1,000 hotel rooms and over 500,000 square feet of office and art gallery space have gone up.
...

The area around the park, sprinkled with small offices under 200,000 square feet, has become a draw for start-ups and creative companies.

 

Though plans in many cities have a long way to go before becoming reality, a point in favor of reuse is that it can be cheaper to renovate old rail structures than to tear them down. The Reading Viaduct, an old elevated railway line in Philadelphia, would cost $50 million to demolish versus $36 million to retrofit, according to the Center City District, a business improvement group. 

In Chicago, where a 2.65-mile elevated rail line slices through four residential areas, tearing down the line would be prohibitively costly. With 37 bridges and large earthen embankments, the Bloomingdale Trail, as it is now called, snakes east to west across Chicago and is simply too big to go.
...

As with other, similar rail lines around the country, passenger and freight trains have not operated on the Chicago line in at least 10 years. The only traffic most of these lines see is an occasional runner or bike rider, even though trespassing is usually forbidden.

...

The Bloomingdale Trail is moving forward after Rahm Emanuel, who made completing the trail one of his campaign promises, was elected mayor in February. Over the next year, design concepts and engineering work will get under way. The Bloomingdale Trail will allow bikes and dogs, interconnect with new and existing ground-level parks and cost $40 million to $75 million.
In St. Louis, plans are in the works to renovate a 2.1-mile elevated rail trestle and turn it into a park as part of a larger waterfront revitalization project. The Iron Horse Trestle, estimated to cost $50 million, does not have a timeline. Organizers hope to have the first one-mile phase completed in five years.
...

In October, Mike and Matt Pestronk pounced on a 10-story office tower next to the Philadelphia viaduct when it fell into foreclosure and bought it for $5 million. ... The developers plan to renovate the vacant office tower for $25 million and turn it into apartments.... The brothers are trying to improve the area and have done some “guerrilla improvements” to the viaduct, such as weeding and putting down plywood to cover holes, and installing artwork and live video projections on two sides of their building.  Plans for the viaduct are slowly moving ahead after nearly 10 years of grass-roots work.... As a first step, a small section of the trestle owned by a regional transportation authority would be redeveloped for $5.5 million.

...

Atlanta also hired Mr. Corner to help redevelop a 22-mile rail corridor encircling the city. In the next 25 years, Atlanta plans to add 1,300 acres of parks and green spaces, public transit and trails along the necklace, increasing Atlanta green space by nearly 40 percent. The project’s cost is put at $2.8 billion.
...
by Kristina Shevory
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/03/realestate/commercial/cities-see-another-side-to-old-tracks.html
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com
August 2, 2011

Going Green in New York: One Co-op’s Story

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/realestate/10000-buildings-get-the-word-on-dirty-fuel.html

[In the past three years the Brevoort], a 1955 co-op tower in Greenwich Village] ...  has spent nearly $6 million. The projects ranged from the prosaic, like new windows and light bulbs, to the ambitious, like green roofs, converting from heating oil to natural gas, and installing a $3.2 million cogeneration plant capable of powering the 20-story building in a citywide blackout.

The extent of the work and the amount spent in such a short time are unusual. But board members say the building is now a model of energy efficiency and proudly note that other co-op boards have come to see what it has done.
...
In April, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg announced new heating oil regulations for thousands of buildings across the city. Now those buildings — most of them apartment houses — are reviewing their heating systems.The new rules require that by 2015, about 10,000 buildings switch from No. 6 heating oil, the cheapest but also the dirtiest fuel available, to No. 4 heating oil. Some buildings need to make the change as early as next July. But since buildings will be required to use either No. 2 oil or natural gas by 2030, many building owners are contemplating making the larger change now to avoid two separate conversions. Natural gas currently costs about 30 percent less than fuel oil.

City officials say that the soot pollution created by the 10,000 buildings that use No. 6 oil exceeds the amount created by all the cars and trucks in the city. At a seminar given by the Real Estate Board of New York earlier this month, a representative from the mayor’s office said that while converting to natural gas can be expensive, switching from No. 6 to No. 4 oil could cost a building as little as $7,000. But contractors and consultants in the audience challenged that figure, saying it represented a best-case scenario — a building whose equipment needed only minimal upgrading.

David Kuperberg, the chief executive of Cooper Square Realty, which manages about 450 buildings in New York City, described the extent of the work and the amount invested at the Brevoort as “the exception by a long shot.”

He said his company had urged the owners of its buildings to make similar changes, “but there is a great deal of skepticism and people just don’t believe the savings are there.” Most co-op and condo boards, he said, would rather make incremental changes and take on one project at a time.

About 100 of Cooper Square’s 450 buildings use No. 6 oil. “We’re in front of all our boards now,” offering advice and information on what needs to be done, Mr. Kuperberg said. Wherever possible, Cooper Square encourages gas conversion. But “the initial cost scares off a lot of buildings,” even though “we could prove the economics.” He pointed out that the savings from gas conversion could pay for the upfront costs in a few years.

The changes at the Brevoort did not come without pain.

Vigorous efforts were made to unseat board members in the last two elections, with some unhappy residents likening members to harsh and unyielding prison wardens.

But opposition candidates came shy of the votes they needed in both elections, and Ms. Nardone was re-elected this spring to her sixth term.

The switch from No. 6 oil to natural gas cost the Brevoort $225,000. It involved replacing the burner on the boiler, removing two 20,000-gallon oil tanks, and installing equipment to draw gas from the available Consolidated Edison pipeline. The board expects to save as much as $70,000 a year in fuel costs....

Property managers and environmental experts say that gaining access to gas pipelines maintained by a utility like Con Ed or National Grid could be a huge hurdle for some buildings. As Isabelle Silverman, a lawyer with the Environmental Defense Fund, put it, “The infrastructure to bring gas lines to the buildings definitely has to be built out, and we don’t know how long that would take.”

City officials say that is why the imminent rule change is for No. 4 oil and the natural gas requirement does not kick in for 20 years.

Most buildings are already hooked up for cooking gas. But long stretches of pavement may need to be ripped up to connect a building to the pipelines for heating gas, which are larger in diameter. “When you can get it and how much it will cost depends on where your building is relative to the gas line,” Ms. Silverman said.

Of the roughly 100 residential buildings managed by Rose Associates, 6 are in the process of converting to natural gas.  J. Brian Peters, a senior managing director at Rose, said that “the due diligence on this really pans out, and there is a track record that shows the savings and benefits are real.”  Getting permits and physically converting the equipment takes four to six months, he said, but how quickly Con Ed can hook up a building is less certain.

For the 15-story co-op at 910 Park Avenue, converting the burner to accept either No. 2 fuel or gas took less than six months and cost $73,000. The work was done in October, but the building burned No. 2 oil all winter, while it waited six months for Con Ed to connect its gas line.

Jerry Cohen, a board member, ... ran a spreadsheet and it showed that in three years, the savings would give us payback on the cost of the conversion.” The board approved the plan unanimously.  Con Ed waived the $23,000 cost of connecting Mr. Cohen’s building to a pipeline that runs along Park Avenue because the building committed to using Con Ed’s gas exclusively....  He said that a friend at a building on Madison Avenue had recently learned that connecting to a pipeline would cost $1 million.

Joseph McGowan, the manager for gas sales at Con Ed, said that Con Ed would install up to 100 feet of
pipe free to a building with five or more apartments, and could waive the fee for more, depending on the utility’s anticipated revenues from the building.

Hypothetically, he said, the cost to connect a building at, say, Fifth Avenue and 42nd Street, to the appropriate pipeline along First Avenue could be as high as $3 million. “Just think about having to trench along 42nd Street for that many blocks,” he said.

But if Con Ed found that seven additional large buildings along that route also wanted to convert to gas, “the revenue from all those buildings could take care of the cost.”

It has taken the co-op board at 12 East 97th Street about a year to weigh the benefits and figure out the cost of gas conversion. John Slattery, the vice president of the board, said the building was now close to signing contracts and expected a bill of $100,000 to $200,000. “All of this goes agonizingly slow,” he said, “because like most boards, we only meet once a month.”

Mr. Slattery says the building is trying to decide whether to go with a gas-only contract or to spring for the option of using both oil and gas. “It seems like most major property holders are doing dual fuel,” he said. “Maybe they’re just belts-and-suspenders people, but in today’s world, who knows what’s going to happen with the price of gas or oil?”

Myriad calculations and unknowns complicate the decision making. “The real problem is there are a lot of variables out there,” said Paul Gottsegen, the president of Halstead Management, which manages about 200 apartment buildings. “At this point, people are scrambling for the best ideas and the cheapest and greenest options.

To encourage gas conversion, utility companies are creating incentive programs and the state this year provided $6.5 million in grants to about 240 buildings. Francis J. Murray Jr., the president of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority, said applications poured in and the money was spoken for shortly after the fund was announced in April.
“The demand clearly exceeded what was available,” Mr. Murray said. The agency is seeking other funding sources and hopes to offer more grants next year.

The state agency also provides grants for cogeneration plants, which burn gas to produce both heat and electricity, and this year distributed $20 million to 19 projects across the state, including three residential buildings managed by Rose Associates. Mr. Peters of Rose said that for certain buildings, it made sense to put in cogeneration at the same time as a gas conversion.

“It depends on the scale and the unique character of the property,” Mr. Peters said, adding that one of Rose’s rental properties, London Terrace Gardens, installed cogeneration about six years ago and saves about 15 percent on electricity annually.

At the Brevoort, while most residents approved of gas conversion, many felt the cogeneration system was unnecessary, even though the building received a $500,000 state grant for the work.... Debt went from about $3.5 million to $11 million,” he said. “Maybe we should have gone slower.”  The building this year issued a $2 million assessment, which works out to about $10,000 for the owner of a two-bedroom apartment.

by Vivian Toy
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/realestate/10000-buildings-get-the-word-on-dirty-fuel.html
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com
July 22, 2011

Citizens Budget Commission of New York Study Analyzes the Efficiency of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority

http://ec2-50-17-180-122.compute-1.amazonaws.com/sites/default/files/press_release_04062011.pdf
Finds New York’s Subways Among The Most Efficient In The Nation; Buses Operations and Commuter Railroads Are Relatively Inefficient

On April 6, 2011 The Citizens Budget Commission (CBC) of New York released a report on the efficiency of the services of New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA): its subways, bus operations, and commuter railroads. The report is part of an ongoing effort by the CBC to support and encourage cost controls at the MTA. The study uses unit-cost comparisons to benchmark the efficiency of the MTA compared to other large mass transit systems in the United States.

Key findings of the report – titled “Benchmarking Efficiency for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Services” – include the following:
* New York’s subways are among the most efficient in the nation. Among the ten largest subway systems in the United States, the MTA has the lowest cost per passenger trip; it has the second-lowest cost per passenger mile (behind Atlanta) and second-lowest cost per hour of service (behind Chicago), and it is third (behind Philadelphia and Chicago) in cost per active vehicle. New York is fifth in cost per mile of service. In non-vehicle operations (stations and other facilities), the MTA scores only in the middle of the group – a notable opportunity for further improvement.
* The MTA’s bus operations are relatively inefficient. Among the ten largest urban bus systems in the nation, the New York City Transit bus operations rank last in three of five cost indicators: cost per mile of service; cost per hour of service, and cost per active vehicle. The MTA Bus Company ranks seventh or below in all five indicators; the other two being cost per passenger trip and cost per passenger mile.
* The two MTA commuter railroads, the Long Island Rail Road and Metro-North, also are relatively inefficient. Among the ten largest commuter railroads in the nation, the Long Island Rail Road was at or near the bottom on three of five indicators (last on cost per passenger mile; ninth on cost per active vehicle; eighth on cost per mile of service) and below the median on the other two (seventh on cost per passenger trip and sixth on cost per hour of service). Metro-North was in the bottom half of the group on all five indicators (eighth on cost per active vehicle; seventh on cost per hour of service, and sixth on the other three indicators: cost per mile of service; cost per passenger trip, and cost per passenger mile).

“This benchmarking analysis highlights both the national leadership of the MTA and specific opportunities for improvement,” said CBC President Carol Kellermann. “It’s a very valuable tool for understanding the efficiencies and inefficiencies of the system and how the taxpayers’ money can be better spent.” “This benchmarking study also provides a basis for judging the MTA’s performance going forward,” said CBC Executive Vice President and Research Director Charles Brecher. “We can now gauge improvement – or decline – against these key unit-cost comparisons.”

The table below shows that for "Heavy Rail Service" in 2009 operating expenses per mile of service in New York City were $9.40 per mile of service (ranked 2nd lowest and below the median of $10.30), $171.48 per hour of service (2nd), $1.40 per passenger trip (1st) and $0.33 per passenger mile (2nd).



For Bus Service in 2009 operating expenses per mile of service in New York City were $22.29 per mile of service (ranked 10th lowest and above the median of $12.79), $172.48 per hour of service (10th), $2.72 per passenger trip (3rd) and $1.25 per passenger mile (8th).

For Commuter Rail Service operating expenses per mile of service in New York City were $16.98 per mile of service (ranked 8th lowest and above the median of $14.34), $496.19 per hour of service (6th), $11.35 per passenger trip (7th) and $0.57 per passenger mile (10th).

The full report is available at http://ec2-50-17-180-122.compute-1.amazonaws.com/sites/default/files/report_mta_04062011.pdf

The Citizens Budget Commission of New York www.CBCNY.org founded in 1932, is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civic organization devoted to influencing constructive change in the finances and services of New York City and New York State governments.
2 Penn Plaza * 5th Floor * New York, NY 10121; 212-279-2605, ext. 322 212-279-2605, ext. 315
April 6, 2011