23
X INTELLIGENT APPROACH TO EVALUATING EFFICIENCY PROJECTS The integrated plan for the Empire State Building includes taking the right steps in the right order. First, the team evalu- ated improvements to the building shell, such as window upgrades and the in- stallation of radiant barriers to minimize heat loss from the building. Evaluating efficient equipment was the next step, with the sizing of these systems reduced because of the tighter building enve- lope. Finally, the project will install con- trols and energy management tools to allow for ongoing optimized use of the efficient systems.
X X TRADEOFF BETWEEN FINANCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS As a business, the Empire State Building Company must consider the financial impact of any decision. The project team compared the distinct objectives of re- ducing the building’s carbon footprint and providing a financial return through an iterative review process. First, they identified applicable energy efficiency opportunities. Then they analyzed bun- dles of projects for overall cost, energy savings, and carbon impact. This allowed the building owner to choose a program that provided an acceptable return on investment while also achieving signifi- cant greenhouse gas reductions.
QUANTIFYING THE
X X While availability of capital is a major barrier to energy efficiency investments, the Empire State Building program suc- cessfully incorporated capital from several sources to make the project possible. The efficiency improvements were overlaid on top of major renova- tion plans. Because capital had already been set aside for equipment upgrades, the addition of energy efficient solutions was a small incremental cost. In addi- tion, the building was able to leverage the capital spent on energy efficiency with outside financing through the per- formance contract. This instrument al- lowed the financier to be repaid through energy savings, and placed the risk on the energy services company imple- menting the improvements.
MEETING CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS STATS
Greenhouse gas emissions from commercial buildings (vs. all other greenhouse gas emissions).
NEW YORK CITY EMPIRE STATE BUILDING PROJECT Initial cost: Annual energy cost savings: $4.4m $13.2m
WORLD 5.4%
Old energy usage 21% 12% U.S. CO2 New energy usage Energy Savings 38%
Emmisson Savings:
105,000t
XXINVOLVING THE TENANTS In a typical commercial lease in New York City, tenants are charged a stan- dardized fee for energy in addition to their normal rent. The landlord directs this money toward utility payments for the entire building. An important part of the Empire State Building sustainability plan is to move accountability to the ten- ants themselves by individually metering tenant spaces and treating energy costs as a straight “pass-through.” In addition, a web-based energy management system will allow tenants to easily view and ana- lyze their energy data. This information is expected to lead to greater reductions in energy and carbon emissions. Another important piece of this strategy is effec- tive marketing to tenants, communicat- ing the benefits of energy efficiency.
RESULTS
In all, the Empire State Building’s sus- tainability program will save up to 38 percent of the building’s energy and 105,000 tons of carbon dioxide over the next fifteen years. The initial incremental cost of $13.2m will lead to average an- nual energy savings of $4.4m, giving the investment a simple payback period of three years. From an initial set of over sixty po- tential energy efficiency projects, a bun-
dle of eight measures were included in the final recommendation. This set of measures is customized to the Empire State Building, addresses the “right steps in the right order,” and optimizes the tradeoff between carbon reduction and energy efficiency investment. The experience of the Empire State
Building can be applied to commercial buildings all over the world. The result would be significant reductions in green- house gas emissions for urban areas. At the same time, building owners will dis- cover acceptable financial returns and begin to look increasingly to efficiency as a way to add value to their properties. While cities and communities today
differ in many ways from New York City in 1931, there are important similarities between the construction of the Em- pire State Building and its renovation as a leader in sustainability. In both cases, the iconic building is a symbol of mod- ern technology and cutting-edge inno- vation. In both cases, the building pulled together teams of experts, incorporating the “state of the art” in both technology and management. In both cases, the Em- pire State Building stands as an example of applying careful planning and design to meet the challenges of the day. PE
Sources: World Resources Institute:
http://www.wri.org/chart/ world-greenhouse-gas-emissions-2000,
http://www.wri.org/ chart/us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-fl ow-chart
Local Action Moves the World •
www.icleiusa.org
PLANET EARTH \\ INNOVATION IN NEW YORK CITY
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68