Commercial energy efficiency retrofits in the Greater Philadelphia region could spur $618 million in local spending, support 23,500 jobs

http://gpichub.org/hublog/commercial-energy-efficiency-retrofits-in-region-could-spur-618-million-in-local-spending-support-23-500-jobs
A report released on November 6, 2011 estimates that nearly half of the commercial buildings in the Greater Philadelphia region are good candidates for energy efficiency retrofits, and that undertaking these retrofits could spur $618 million in local spending and support 23,500 jobs. Another report details the policies and programs already undertaken in the region to encourage retrofits, and outlines additional proven steps that could help the region take advantage of this economic opportunity.

“These reports provide ample evidence that the Philadelphia region is well-situated to take advantage of the economic opportunities inherent in energy efficiency retrofits. Removing barriers and employing new policy tools to spur retrofits will not only save energy, but also grow jobs and stimulate the regional economy” said Dr. Mark Alan Hughes of the University of Pennsylvania, and leader of the Policy, Markets and Behavior task team for the Greater Philadelphia Innovation Cluster (GPIC) for Energy-Efficient Buildings, which commissioned the reports.

GPIC is a consortium of 24 institutions funded by $129 million in U.S. Department of Energy and other federal funds to create an Energy Innovation Hub at The Navy Yard. GPIC’s goals are to transform the building retrofit industry toward an integrated systems approach, to improve design tools, building systems, public policies, market incentives, and workforce skills needed to achieve a 50 percent reduction of energy use in buildings, and to stimulate private investment and quality job creation in Greater Philadelphia and beyond.

“The Market for Commercial Property Energy Retrofits in the Philadelphia Region”, conducted by Econsult Corporation, identifies 47 percent of the commercial and flex-industrial space between 20,000 and 100,000 square feet in the Philadelphia area for which data is available as potential candidates for energy retrofits. The eligible space includes 4,201 buildings with 154m square feet of space. The report compiled information on commercial building age, type, enclosure, materials, energy load, and owner concentration in the region.

The second report, authored by Cozen O’Connor staff, is entitled “Policy and Process Factors Impacting Commercial Building Energy Efficiency in Pennsylvania and New Jersey.”. The factors examined include laws, regulations, financial incentives, contracts, public bidding requirements and more. The study concluded that while Pennsylvania and New Jersey have enacted many of the available policy levers that could help encourage energy efficiency retrofits, there are still numerous direct and indirect barriers in place.

Additionally, the study found that processes necessary for full valuation of energy efficiency improvements are immature, causing increased transaction costs and making investments less valuable.
...
The typical Philadelphia commercial property spends $2.84/ft per foot per year on energy costs. By contrast, the average U.S. commercial property spends $2.21 per foot per year. Thus, Philadelphia’s energy expenditures are 29% above than the national average, and the fourth highest among 14 large cities studied as shown in the table below.

To narrow the universe to identify the "lowest hanging fruit," the study filtered properties by their end use, construction materials, and shape. The optimal candidate for energy improvements would be an older, low-rise brick building.

Not all buildings consume energy equally. Flex-industrial buildings, including warehouses, account for about 53 percent of the structures studied. But they consume about half the energy per square foot as the average commercial building, such as an office.

The study identified 2,047 buildings as retail, hospitality, or health-care businesses, which consume more energy, according to federal statistics cited by Econsult.

The authors said that lower-rise buildings - with fewer than six floors - are more cost-effective candidates for improvements.  Using data and findings from Emmerich, et al that suggest primary energy savings (HVAC) from reducing air infiltration averages 20-30% is only cost-effective for low-to-mid-rise buildings of five stories or less, the authors determined that buildings five stories or below in height are likely candidates for envelope or enclosure improvements, irrespective of age.

Buildings that depend on electric lighting rather than daylight for interior illumination are good candidates for improvements.  According to the Energy Star building manual (2006), electric lighting accounts for upwards of 35% of electricity use in commercial buildings.  If more than 50% of a building’s floor area is not daylit, then the building must necessarily utilize an above-average amount of synthetic lighting as a necessary substitute, and hence it is likely to cost-effectively benefit from an energy load retrofit.

Masonry buildings are likelier to have more exterior gaps and benefit from improvements rather than steel-and-glass buildings.

The authors narrowed the focus to those buildings owned by the 25 largest commercial landlords for the "purely practical" reason that it will be easier for GPIC to deal with a few owners of multiple properties if its goal is to maximize its impact.

It whittled the prime list down to 232 larger buildings totaling about 50 million square feet, mostly in the commercial corridors of inner-ring suburbs such as Pennsauken, Valley Forge, Plymouth Meeting, Malvern, and Mount Laurel. The buildings were also concentrated in industrial corridors in Thorofare, Bridgeport, Hamilton, Bristol, Northeast Philadelphia near Philadelphia International Airport, and at the Navy Yard.

The reports and supporting materials can be found at https://gpichub.org/activities/policy/gpic-reports.

Greater Philadelphia Innovation Cluster (GPIC) http://gpichub.org 

November 6, 2011

Learning Too Late of the Perils in Gas Well Leases

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/drilling-down-fighting-over-oil-and-gas-well-leases.html
After Scott Ely and his father talked with salesmen from an energy company about signing the lease allowing gas drilling on their land in northeastern Pennsylvania, he said he felt certain it required the company to leave the property as good as new. So Mr. Ely said he was surprised several years later when the drilling company, Cabot Oil and Gas, informed them that rather than draining and hauling away the toxic drilling sludge stored in large waste ponds on the property, it would leave the waste, cover it with dirt and seed the area with grass. He knew that waste pond liners can leak, seeping contaminated waste.

Americans have signed millions of leases allowing companies to drill for oil and natural gas on their land in recent years. But some of these landowners — often in rural areas, and eager for quick payouts — are finding out too late what is, and what is not, in the fine print.

Energy company officials say that standard leases include language that protects landowners. But a review of more than 111,000 leases, addenda and related documents by The New York Times suggests otherwise:
¶ Fewer than half the leases require companies to compensate landowners for water contamination after drilling begins. And only about half the documents have language that lawyers suggest should be included to require payment for damages to livestock or crops.
¶ Most leases grant gas companies broad rights to decide where they can cut down trees, store chemicals, build roads and drill. Companies are also permitted to operate generators and spotlights through the night near homes during drilling.
¶ In the leases, drilling companies rarely describe to landowners the potential environmental and other risks that federal laws require them to disclose in filings to investors.
¶ Most leases are for three or five years, but at least two-thirds of those reviewed by The Times allow extensions without additional approval from landowners. If landowners have second thoughts about drilling on their land or want to negotiate for more money, they may be out of luck.

The leases — obtained through open records requests — are mostly from gas-rich areas in Texas, but also in Maryland, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.

In Pennsylvania, Colorado and West Virginia, some landowners have had to spend hundreds of dollars a month to buy bottled water or maintain large tanks, known as water buffaloes, for drinking water in their front yards....
Thousands of landowners in Virginia, Pennsylvania and Texas have joined class action lawsuits claiming that they were paid less than they expected because gas companies deducted costs like hauling chemicals to the well site or transporting the gas to market.
...
To be sure, many landowners have earned small fortunes from drilling leases. Last year, natural gas companies paid more than $1.6 billion in lease and bonus payments to Pennsylvania landowners, according to a report commissioned by the Marcellus Shale Coalition, an industry trade group. Chesapeake Energy, one of the largest natural gas companies, has paid more than $183.8 million in royalties in Texas this year, according to its Web site. Much of the money has gone to residents in rural areas where jobs are scarce and farmers and ranchers have struggled to stay afloat....
...
At least eight states specifically require companies to compensate landowners for damage to their properties or to negotiate with them about where wells will be drilled, even if the lease does not provide those protections.
...
Some landmen show up in poorer areas shortly before the holidays, offering cash on the spot for signing a lease. They might offer thousands of dollars per acre as a bonus to be paid shortly after the lease is signed. Royalties, which usually run between 12.5 percent and 20 percent of what the companies make for selling the gas, can mean tens of thousands of dollars per year for landowners.
...
In 2005, [Dave] Beinlich and his wife, Karen, signed a lease for $2 an acre per year for five years on 117 acres in Sullivan County in north-central Pennsylvania. They soon realized they had gotten far less money than their neighbors, so they planned on negotiating a new lease when theirs expired in 2010. A day before their lease term ended, no well had been drilled on their land, but the gas company parked a bulldozer nearby and started to survey an access road. A company official informed them that by moving equipment to the site, Chief Oil and Gas was preparing to drill and was therefore allowed to extend the lease indefinitely.

Lawyers say that drilling leases are not like other contracts. “You’re not buying a refrigerator or signing a car note,” said David McMahon, a lease lawyer in Charleston, W.Va., and co-founder of the West Virginia Surface Owners’ Rights Organization, adding that once a well is drilled, it can produce gas for decades, locking landowners into the lease terms. “With a gas lease, you’re permitting industrial activity in your backyard, and you’re starting a relationship that will affect the quality of living for you and your grandchildren for decades,” he said. Mr. McMahon and other lease lawyers say that unlike many contracts, oil and gas leases are covered by few consumer protection laws, in part because drilling has been most common in states with less regulation.
...
“When it comes to negotiation skills and understanding of lease terms, there is a gaping inequality between the average landman and the average citizen sitting across the table,” said Chris Csikszentmihalyi, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who created a Web site last year called the Landman Report Card that allows landowners to review landmen’s professionalism and tactics.

Some lawyers also say that there are major differences between what drilling companies tell landowners and what they must disclose to investors.
...
“It’s been one expense after another since our water went bad, and the company only has to cover part of it,” said Ronald Carter, 72, of Montrose, Pa. Mr. Carter and his wife, Jean, said they signed a lease in 2006 for a one-time fee of $25 per acre on their 75 acres and annual royalty payments of 12.5 percent. The Carters live on $3,500 a month, including the $1,500 per month they average in gas royalties. But they had to spend $7,000 to install a water purifier when their drinking supply became contaminated in 2009 after drilling near their property. The Carters joined a lawsuit with about a dozen neighbors ...
...
by Ian Urbina and Jo Craven McGinty
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/02/us/drilling-down-fighting-over-oil-and-gas-well-leases.html
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com
December 1, 2011

Valuing pollination services to agriculture

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091100334X
Abstract: Crop pollination by animal pollinators is an important ecosystem service for which there is no generally accepted valuation method. Here, we show that two existing valuation methods, previously thought to be unrelated, are each a special case of a more general equation. We then present a new method, termed attributable net income, for valuing insect pollination of crops. The attributable net income method improves upon previous methods in three ways: (1) it subtracts the cost of inputs to crop production from the value of pollination, thereby not attributing the value of these inputs to pollinators; (2) it values only the pollination that would be utilized by the crop plant for fruit production, thereby not valuing pollen deposited in excess of the plants’ requirements; and (3) it can attribute value separately to different pollinator taxa, for example to native vs. managed pollinators. We demonstrate all three methods using a data set on watermelon pollination by native bees and honey bees in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, USA. We discuss the reasons why different methods produce disparate values, and why the attributable net income method most accurately reflects the actual ecosystem service that is being valued, marketable fruit production.

Highlights
► Multiple methods are currently used to value pollination services, with divergent results.
► We show that these methods are special cases of the same general equation.
► We introduce a new valuation method, which improves on previous methods.
► All methods are demonstrated using the same data set on pollination services to watermelon.
► The reasons why the different methods produce divergent results are discussed.
...
A replacement value for native bee pollination is what it would cost farmers to rent enough honey bees to replace the pollination currently provided by native bees. We calculated this value by multiplying the area in watermelon production (746 ha)2 by the industry-wide recommended honey bee stocking rate (4.5 hives ha-1; Delaplane and Mayer, 2000) by the annual rental cost of a honey bee hive in the study area ($60-$75 hive-1)7 by the fraction of farms at which native bees alone are fully pollinating the crop (91%). We used the same method to estimate the replacement value of honey bee pollination, substituting the fraction of farms fully pollinated by honey bees (78%) for the fraction fully pollinated by native bees (91%).
...
The value of native bee pollination based on the replacement value of renting enough honey bee hives to replace native bees is $0.21 million year-1 (range, $0.20 - $0.21 million year-1) and the replacement value of honey bee pollination is $0.18 million year-1 (range, $0.17 - $0.18 million year-1).
 ...
The production value method provides a higher estimate. The estimated annual production value of watermelon in New Jersey and Pennsylvania combined (P⋅Y), before subtracting the costs of inputs to production, is $7.64 million year-1. Multiplying this production value by the 62%±5% (SE) of all pollen deposition done by native bees provides an annual value of $4.74±0.38 (SE) million for the pollination service provided by native bees. For honey bees, the corresponding value is $2.90±0.38 (SE) million year-1.... After subtracting the costs of variable inputs to production, the estimated annual net income value (Eq. (4)) of watermelon in New Jersey and Pennsylvania combined is $3.63 million year-1, leading to estimates of $2.25 0.18 (SE) million for the pollination services provided by native bees and $1.38 0.18 (SE) million year-1 for honey bees
...
The annual attributable net income value of native bee pollination, when native bees are considered primary pollinators (Eq. (5)), is $3.40±0.16 (SE) million year-1. The value of honey bee pollination, when honey bee pollination is valued residually (Eq. (6)), is $0.24± 0.16 (SE) million year-1 (Fig. B.2). When honey bee pollination is valued as primary (Eq. (5)), its value is $3.07±0.25 (SE) million year-1. When native bee pollination is valued residually (Eq. (6)), its value is $0.56±0.25 (SE) million year-1
...
The cost of renting a single honey bee colony for almond pollination increased from $35 in the early 1990s to $150 in 2007.
...
A free version of the paper  is currently available at http://winfreelab.rutgers.edu/documents/WinfreeGross2011_EcologicalEconomics.pdf.

by Rachael Winfree 1, Brian J. Gross 2 and Claire Kremen 3
1. Department of Entomology, 93 Lipman Dr., Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08901, USA; Tel.: + 1 848 732 8315.
2. Food and Resource Economics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada, BC V6T1Z4
3. Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA Ecological Economics via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 71; 15 November 2011; Pages 80-88
Keywords: Apis mellifera; biodiversity-ecosystem function; ecosystem services; native bee; pollinator; valuation; ecosystem service valuation; wild bee

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

Prices Fall for Some Gas-Rich Shale Land

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/business/10views.html
The gas-rich land of the Marcellus shale has offered some of the hottest wildcat real estate in recent years. But if Exxon Mobil’s recent $1.7 billion acquisition is any indication, the days of eye-watering prices are over. The oil titan is paying barely half the price such acres were fetching last year, as the frenzy has shifted to Texas. Cheaper real estate may even make gas assets look appealing again.

Exxon is paying about $5,000 an acre by buying Phillips Resources and TWP, two private drillers in the Marcellus, which spans Pennsylvania, New York and West Virginia. This may not seem like such a steal when compared with 2006 prices of around $100 an acre. Even so, it does suggest that energy land values are coming off the boil.

The property boom reached its peak when Chesapeake Energy doled out $17,000 an acre in early 2010, according to research from IHS. Mitsui and India’s Reliance Industries both paid $14,000 an acre in the spring of 2010. As recently as December, Exco Resources was willing to pay $9,000.

There are good reasons the froth has come out of Marcellus. Gas prices have been in the doldrums and are running about a third their 2008 peak. Meanwhile, state regulators are taking a tougher line on hydraulic fracturing, supported by a skeptical public. This has sent energy firms flocking to the oilier Eagle Ford Shale, which is now experiencing a property boom of its own. Marathon Oil paid $20,000 an acre for oil-rich land in Texas earlier this month.

But with less hype built into land values, the Marcellus is looking like a good bet again. The glut of gas that depressed prices is finally clearing. And because of its proximity to the New York market, gas from the Marcellus sells for a premium. Shell’s announcement that it is mulling a new petrochemical plant in the region suggests more demand may be on its way.
...
By Christopher Swann and Reynolds Holding
The New York Times www.NYTimes.com
June 9, 2011
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/business/10views.html

Startup Rentricity recovers energy from water systems-Rentricity's Flow-to-Wire system mimicks pressure reduction valves | SmartPlanet

http://tiny.cc/cr8px
According to David Worthington writing in the October 13, 2010 Smart Planet Daily at www.SmartPlanet.com:
The ancient Greeks harnessed the power of water to grind wheat. Over a millennium later, a start-up is evangelizing its system to generate electricity from hydrokinetic energy recovered from U.S. water utilities.

Rentricity, a Manhattan based company ... has developed a system called Flow-to-Wire.... Flow-to-Wire recovers energy by mimicking the pressure reduction valves (PRVs) that are used to relieve excess pressure in water supply systems. Excess energy is recovered rather than being dissipated as heat. PRVs keep pipelines within pre-defined pressure ranges, and are frequently deployed at locations where water is traveling downhill and pressure rises.

Rentricity deployed a Flow-to-Wire system in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania in October 2010. The system captures energy from the pipes that run water between the Beaver Run Reservoir and a nearby water treatment plant; the recovered energy is re-purposed to help power the utility’s pumps.

The Westmoreland installation costs US$323,000, and will generate 30 kilowatts of electricity, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reports, [and] ... will save the Municipal Authority of Westmoreland County $40,000 per year in energy costs.

Rentricity has identified 6,500 PRV sites in the US that have the potential to generate 520 mWs of clean energy from $1.5 billion of installed capital cost, according to the company. Other hydrokinetic energy projects have sought to generate power from tidal forces.

by David Worthington, Contributing Editor for SmartPlanet
Smart Planet www.SmartPlanet.com
October 13, 2010
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://tiny.cc/cr8px
Also see www.Rentricity.com and http://www.pr.com/press-release/263351 and http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/westmoreland/s_702414.html

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) Fines Chesapeake Energy More Than $1 Million - Penalties Address Violations in Bradford, Was

http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/newsroom/14287?id=17405&typeid=1
The Pennsyvania Department of Environmental Protection on May 17, 2011 fined Chesapeake Energy $1,088,000 for violations related to natural gas drilling activities.

Under a Consent Order and Agreement, or COA, Chesapeake will pay DEP $900,000 for contaminating private water supplies in Bradford County, of which $200,000 must be dedicated to DEP’s well-plugging fund. Under a second COA, Chesapeake will pay $188,000 for a Feb. 23 tank fire at its drilling site in Avella, Washington County.

“It is important to me and to this administration that natural gas drillers are stewards of the environment, take very seriously their responsibilities to comply with our regulations, and that their actions do not risk public health and safety or the environment,” DEP Secretary Mike Krancer said. “The water well contamination fine is the largest single penalty DEP has ever assessed against an oil and gas operator, and the Avella tank fire penalty is the highest we could assess under the Oil and Gas Act. Our message to drillers and to the public is clear.”

At various times throughout 2010, DEP investigated private water well complaints from residents of Bradford County’s Tuscarora, Terry, Monroe, Towanda and Wilmot townships near Chesapeake’s shale drilling operations. DEP determined that because of improper well casing and cementing in shallow zones, natural gas from non-shale shallow gas formations had experienced localized migration into groundwater and contaminated 16 families’ drinking water supplies.

As part of the Bradford County COA, Chesapeake agrees to take multiple measures to prevent future shallow formation gas migration, including creating a plan to be approved by DEP that outlines corrective actions for the wells in question; remediating the contaminated water supplies; installing necessary equipment; and reporting water supply complaints to DEP. The well plugging fund supports DEP’s Oil and Gas program operations and can be used to mitigate historic and recent gas migration problems in cases where the source of the gas cannot be identified.

The Avella action was taken because on Feb. 23, while testing and collecting fluid from wells on a drill site in Avella, Washington County, three condensate separator tanks caught fire, injuring three subcontractors working on-site. DEP conducted an investigation and determined the cause was improper handling and management of condensate, a wet gas only found in certain geologic areas. Under the COA, Chesapeake must submit for approval to the department a Condensate Management Plan for each well site that may produce condensate.

“Natural gas drilling presents a valuable opportunity for Pennsylvania and the nation,” Krancer said. “But, with this opportunity comes responsibilities that we in Pennsylvania expect and insist are met; we have an obligation to enforce our regulations and protect our environment.”

For more information, visit www.depweb.state.pa.us.

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) www.depweb.state.pa.us
Press Release Dated May 17, 2011

Cities Use Brownfields to Go Solar « The Dirt

http://dirt.asla.org/2011/04/13/cities-use-brownfields-to-go-solar/

New York City, Chicago, and Philadelphia increasingly view their contaminated inner-city brownfield sites as natural locations for large-scale solar installations. At the national Brownfields conference, each city explained how solar farms can be set up in the unlikeliest places, saving the money involved in cleaning up some of the worst sites.

Chicago Launches Largest Urban Solar Installation in U.S.

In Chicago, Dave Graham, ... said the City Solar project [was brought to the City by] representatives from Exelon and SunPower, [who] ... wanted to create a massive solar farm on a derelict brownfield site.... It’s the largest urban solar plant in the U.S. Its 32,000 photovoltaic (PV) panels provide 10 MW of energy, enough for 1,500 local homes. In addition, GPS tracking systems help tilt the panels, ensuring the most efficient use of solar energy.

Heavily contaminated sites can cost up to $150,000 per acre to clean up. The West Pullman site for City Solar, which “has a variety of issues,” would have cost $20 million alone to clean up, “something no one in the city wanted to invest in.” As a result, Exelon simply put solar panels on top of the site, leaving the worst soils untouched underground. In some cases, where PV structures need to be installed, the team did actually discover underground storage tanks, which they then removed.

Throughout the process, the local community was consulted. Some residents had concerns about living so close to the new power facilities. Graham said one plus is that the facility is totally quiet.

In the construction process, some 200 jobs were created, “all local labor.” ...

Philadelphia Takes Advantage of Solar America Grants

Philadelphia won a Solar America Cities grant, which they will use to help create renewable power purchasing agreements. Kristin Sullivan, Philadelphia Mayor’s Office for Sustainability, said a number of city-owned sites are already being prepped for solar. In an example of multi-use infrastructure, Philadelphia Water Department’s treatment facilities will also host panels, generating 250 KW of power.

In addition, the city will soon be issuing a request for proposals for a new three MW facility....

New York City Incentivizes Reuse of Brownfields

New York City launched SPEED, a searchable database of brownfield properties, a “real estate search engine”, that has gotten great traffic from the local developer community. Dan Walsh, Mayor’s Office of Operations, New York City government, said SPEED includes historical maps so developers can “toggle through time” and explore some 3,150 vacant commercial and industrial brownfield sites spread throughout the city. The idea is to use some of these sites for solar power plants.

To make it even easier for developers, the city launched a $9 million brownfield reinvestment fund. Each developer of a brownfield site gets $60-140,000 “fast” if they commit to cleaning-up a brownfield or redeveloping for energy uses. The grants can be used to cover expenses involved in design, investigation, clean-up, or insurance, says Walsh.

For brownfield sites that will be used by the public, the city has also launched a Green Property Certification program, which can be shown on site as proof that the area is fit for its intended use. “This is a voluntary, not regulatory program.”

Interestingly, none of these urban policymakers discussed how to turn parts of these new solar facilities into public spaces. Solar facilities need not be cut-off from neighboring communities. If designed well, they can also offer green space or even wildlife habitat. As an example, see Walter Hood’s model solar campus project at the University of Buffalo, which will be both public art installation and 1.1 MW solar power facility.

by asladirt
The Dirt - Connecting the Built & Natural Environments
http://dirt.asla.org
April 13, 2011