Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Energy Committee - 08/15/2012South Burlington Energy Committee Meeting Notes Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:00 pm Attendees: Peter Tousley, Keith Epstein, Don Cummings, Sam Swanson, Marcy Murray (scribe), and Laura Waters The committee welcomed new member Peter Tousley, approved the July minutes, and expressed great appreciation for recent Energy Committee participant Anna Sommer who has moved to Arizona. City Staff Updates (via email from Ilona Blanchard) Renewable Energy Partners Contract “City Council approved Encore as a partner, thank you for the committees support. This clears the way for the City to negotiate with Encore. We have received notification that the City has a reserved incentive for 97,500 for a project at Dorset Park (ground mounted).” See “Solar Proposal” below. LED street lamps “The contractor is progressing with the LED relamping project. City has received comments from Queen City Park and will work to incorporate them into the project. Very positive article in the Other Paper when project was initiated – thanks to Don for noting that.” Don will ask Ilona who the contractor is and whether crews are currently out changing lamps. Municipal Building Energy Upgrade Grant Status “Architect is working on the project to rehab City building which is partially funded with energy upgrade grant.” Don will ask Ilona who the architect is, whether s/he is looking at how to improve the thermal efficiency of the building (using Allan Bullis’ energy-audit-related suggestions; assuming yes, we expect to see significant energy and cost savings in future energy/expense data), and whether there should be separate line items for this building in the capital budget or whether the thermal work should be rolled into the rehab budget. Peter and Don will follow up with Allan Bullis for a detailed list of suggestions and Projected ROI by audited building—anyone who’d like to be included in the discussions should contact Don. Based on input from Ilona, it looks like some of this work may be able to be included in the capital plan (projects need to be sent in by September). Ilona has pointed out that in some models, energy improvements have been tied into municipal leases. Post-meeting note: Ilona has confirmed that “the energy efficiency grant will upgrade the HVAC system only.” EPA Energy Use Assessment: Ilona emailed this information to us Solar Proposal (a loan-like lease wherein the city owns the equipment after approximately 10 years): Keith will set up a meeting with Ilona to go through the proposal; Don, Sam, Keith, Laura and Marcy are interested in attending. Given the $97,000 available, there is high interest in making this project work in a way that is best for the city. In addition to the concerns mentioned via email, energy production estimates should be backed up with data, the pricing assumptions for the Renewable Energy Certificates (SREC’s) seem very high and should be backed up with data before the city decides whether to sell them, GMP rate assumptions could perhaps be lowered for the first couple years given GMP’s recent rate-reduction request, and a reduction in the developer fee should be considered given that half the work has already been done by others. Given the proposal’s current assumptions, selling the SREC’s appears to be needed to have the project remain cash-flow-positive (however, the city might accept a breakeven scenario if it could maintain its legal bragging rights to the project’s clean energy by not selling the SREC’s). Depending how the pricing concerns above are addressed, it may not be necessary to sell the SREC’s at all. Some committee members were very uncomfortable with selling the SREC’s. Even though deep penetration throughout the city of energy efficiency improvements would have the greatest economic benefit for the city (Allan Bullis’ payback list from his energy efficiency audit would be a great concrete tool to help demonstrate this), renewable energy projects also make sense despite the city’s economic challenges as long as the related lease payments breakeven or are cash-flow positive. Don will talk with Ilona about inviting Sandy Miller to an SBEC meeting so we can share what we’re doing. Project Updates School solar grant project: Since the school district took over the city’s $8,000 CCRPC solar-education grant, solar panels have been installed on the storage shed at the high school’s turf well ahead of the grant’s installation deadline. They are currently flush with the roof, so are not very visible from the turf. The number of panels was maximized through incentives and “donated” labor by the district’s certified solar installer. Despite repeated efforts for educators to be involved in the planning process, the hardware was ordered without their involvement and the adjustable racks that would have allowed for student experiments (regarding direction and angle) were not included. Changes to curriculum have not yet been made (the district wants to gain experience with the panels first), but teachers have been notified that students will be able to access solar production data through the Enphase website. South Burlington School District (SBSD) employee Steve Webster continues to lead the push to replace the fixed racks with at least some adjustable ones ($2,000 or less would probably be needed). According to SBSD’s Bart Miceli, the array is 5280 watts and will result in a savings of approximately $1,000 a year. Each of the 22 Sharp 240-watt panels has its own Enphase micro-inverter. In the future, there might be room to add a few more panels on the building. On a related note, according to Bart, the district is working on replacing its electric hot water boosters in the high school and middle school with new gas boosters that have a solar component. This is being made possible through the Evergreen Fund (SBEC had encouraged SBSD to take advantage of the latter). ECOS Grant opportunity: Sandy Miller has not recommended pursuing the committee’s weatherization recommendation but prefers to focus on other interests. Residential Weatherization Challenge: Once the September condo project deadline passes, we’ll take stock and decide next steps. At that point, if it looks like we won’t receive grant money, we may target condo associations that showed interest and had audits done during the condo project. We’d try to encourage them to pursue weatherization projects (targeting older neighborhoods one at a time—with neighborhood parties, project viewings, etc.). We wouldn’t go door-to-door, but would hold hands throughout the implementation of projects. Another idea is that above and beyond CVOE funds, High Meadows might help with projects targeting low-income apartment/housing landlords (such projects could help the landlord through building improvements, the tenant through lower utility costs, and the taxpayer through lower Section 8 housing expenses). Then, a future step might be to focus on condos that didn’t participate in the condo project. Condo energy conservation project update: Progress is being made despite the project’s compressed timeframe. Six weeks remain before the consultant’s commitment ends. SUMMARY OF PROGRESS AS OF AUGUST 15, 2012 Condominium Associations Contacted 41 Number of Workshops 5 Number of Associations Attending at Workshops 18 Number of Energy Audits Conducted 13 () Number of Units Audited 114 units in 13 buildings () Number of Energy Audit Prospects 5 buildings (22 units) Number of Signed Weatherization Contracts 0 • The number of units audited increases to 269 when considering the “Stonehedge Standard Audit and Incentive Offer” that applies to all units at Stonehedge • Route 7 Park and Ride / Shelburne Road Corridor Study: The report came out in July with good suggestions. • Residential Building Energy Code compliance: Efficiency Vermont’s strategy session on stimulating greater participation in residential new construction efficiency programs (and contributing to a higher rate of compliance with Vermont’s Energy Code) will be on August 29th • Marcy is planning to attend. South Burlington’s code compliance letter and brochure are good additions but are currently going out too late in the process (AFTER the contractor has been hired and the architectural plans have been budgeted for). Anti-idling ordinance: We’re waiting to hear whether the City Council wants us to pursue this. Residential Solar Challenge (including Suncommon media event): A shortened PR blurb appeared in The Other Paper. Suncommon wants us to lead this, and we are happy to be supportive but want them to lead so we don’t show favoritism to particular businesses. Marcy will ask Steve Webster how his town’s energy committee handled this. (Follow-up note: Steve is on the Underhill Energy Committee which is a town committee. That committee did not endorse Suncommon, but did do the following: successfully encouraged the Selectboard to pass a solar goal, held an energy information night to which many solar installers and community members were invited—7 and 30 attended respectively, wrote a newspaper article about the event, and is now planning to write other related articles.) Next Meeting: Our next meeting has been rescheduled for Wednesday, September 12th, at 7 p.m. at City Hall in the large conference room on the ground floor.