Corsetti, Nicholas and Martin, Emily and Rigel, Adam and Shao, Xiao and Zaheer, Azhar (2012) Analysis and Recommendation of Energy Efficiency Upgrades in New York City’s Upper West Side: A comprehensive guide for residential Upper West Side cooperative buildings. Project Report. Better Buildings New York. (Unpublished)

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

Nearly 9,000 buildings in New York City burn what is known as residual fuel oil (No. 4 or No. 6 heating oil) – an extremely dirty heating source that is harmful to the citizens of New York City. These buildings, which represent only 1% of New York City's total building stock, account for 86% of the city's oil heating soot pollution, while also emitting significant amounts of greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide. Manhattan’s Upper West Side (UWS), while only representing 0.82% of New York City’s land mass and 3% of its population, possesses 11% of the city’s No. 6 oil burning buildings.iiiii Like all of New York City’s neighborhoods, the UWS has its own particular stock of buildings, access to infrastructure, and community makeup. The authors of this report, at the request of our client (Better Buildings New York), have directed our study at the consumption pattern and energy-related actions of residential cooperative (co-op) buildings in the UWS1. This report is set against the backdrop of PlaNYC – the long-term environmental plan for New York City that aims to build a greener city with lower carbon emissions by 2030. We provide an initial list of recommendations and methods for adoption that will provide a solid foundation upon which co-op shareholders, management agencies, and local policymakers can rely when considering energy-related investments in their respective buildings. We believe that these entities should prioritize these investments for three main reasons: to comply with the goals and mandates of PlaNYC, to help generate financial savings for the building and its occupants, and to contribute to the curtailment of pollution in New York City and the effects of global climate change. Examples of potential benefits regarding heating fuel conversion include: - A conversion from No. 6 oil to a dual fuel system (utilizing No. 2 oil and natural gas), can save an average co-op residential UWS building $45,000 a year in heating expenses, recover fuel conversion capital costs ($119,500) in under 3 years, and reduce its annual particulate matter and carbon dioxide emissions by 95% and 23% respectively. - If the specific Upper West Side buildings analyzed in this report (186 buildings) were to redirect 50% of their No. 6 oil consumption to a dual fuel set-up, the aggregate group of buildings could save around $3.6 million annually on fuel costs, a 9% savings from the business as usual case. This shift would be equivalent to taking over 350,000 passenger cars off the road in terms of particulate matter emissions and about 4,800 cars in terms of carbon dioxide emissions. Furthermore, the savings in sulfur dioxide emissions is equivalent to preventing the pollution from coal plants that stems from the annual generation of electricity for 80 American homes.

Item Type:	Monograph (Project Report)
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Energy efficiency, Climate change, Oil consumption
Subjects:	?? case ?? English > Management and Case Studies
Depositing User:	Universitetsadjunkt Susanna Carlsten
Date Deposited:	30 Oct 2013 14:32
Last Modified:	14 Mar 2017 12:16
URI:	http://eprints.sparaochbevara.se/id/eprint/721

Actions (login required)

View Item