Executive Speeches

Remarks of Eugene W. Zeltmann, president & chief executive officer of the New York Power Authority, at a U.S. Green Building Council Meeting, Battery Park City, New York, New York

April 10, 2003

With Governor Pataki being honored here today, I should begin by noting that—under the Governor’s leadership—the New York Power Authority has more than doubled its annual investment in energy efficiency and clean-energy technologies at public schools and universities, government buildings and other public facilities across the state.

We expect to commit about $100 million to such projects this year—and to continue into the future as a national leader in this respect.

Our normal approach is to finance and supervise all aspects of the work—and to recover our costs by sharing in the savings on energy bills. 

Thus far, we’ve completed projects at close to 2,000 facilities statewide. The overall benefits include reductions of more than 175,000 kilowatts in peak demand for electricity, more than $80 million a year in energy costs and close to 580,000 tons in annual emissions of greenhouse gases. 

Although we’re very proud of these numbers—and intend to keep adding to them—I’d like to focus today on a single initiative that’s very close to home for the Power Authority—and close to our hearts too.  I also think it’s in line with the objectives of the United States Green Building Council—which we very much share and support.

The project involved a wide range of energy-efficiency improvements at our 17-story Rappleyea office building in downtown White Plains—the workplace for about 575 Authority staff members and some 300 employees of our tenants. 

As the nation’s largest state-owned electric utility, we own and operate power plants and transmission lines in many parts of New York.  But the bulk of our headquarters staff is located in the 450,000-square-foot, 22-year-old White Plains building—which we bought in 1991. 

For all we’ve accomplished at other people’s facilities, we view the work in our own building as something special.  That’s particularly true since the Governor has clearly stated that government must lead by example in saving energy and protecting the environment.

We’d replaced more than 4,500 lighting fixtures in our areas of the building with efficient T8 lamps and new electronic ballasts in the mid-to-late 1990s.  In addition, we’d installed variable frequency drives on our main heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment. 

But the impetus for a still more ambitious initiative—which we completed last year—came from Governor Pataki’s “Green and Clean” Executive Order 111 of 2001.  That order—as some of you know—called for a 35 percent cut in energy use at state buildings by 2010, relative to 1990 levels.

Thanks to the recent project, and our initial work in the ’90s, we’ve cut annual energy use in our building not by 35 percent—but by more than 50 percent. That’s a saving of more than 5 million kilowatt hours annually.  And—because the improvements were in place by the summer of 2002—we’ve met and exceeded the goal eight years ahead of the Governor’s deadline.

We’ve also cut peak monthly demand for electricity by about 35 percent—or 700 kilowatts.  We’re saving more than $400,000 a year on our energy bills.  And we’re reducing annual greenhouse-gas emissions by some 4,100 tons.

Our total expenditure—going back to the beginning—was about $3.4 million.  The average payback period for the various initiatives will be less than 7 ½ years.  Given the benefits I’ve just mentioned, we view this as a very sound investment.

Now, let me summarize the recent work—which we carried out within a period of about seven months.

Without question, the most challenging part of this effort—and the one that’s had the greatest impact—was our installation of a new chilled water cooling plant to air-condition the building.  The previous system had been in service since the facility opened back in 1981 and had reached the end of its expected lifespan.

The cooling plant is located one flight up from the building’s top full floor—in an area we call the penthouse.

The replacement project entailed bringing in two new 460-ton chillers and two new 500-ton cooling towers by helicopter and taking out—also by helicopter—the old equipment.  This was done by breaking the chillers and cooling towers down into smaller elements. 

Although the old chillers were the same size as the new ones, they were only about half as efficient since the new units are equipped with variable speed drives and other energy-saving features. 

Also, the previous chillers used a refrigerant that can no longer be produced in the United States because of its role in depleting the ozone layer.  The refrigerant in the new system is environmentally acceptable on all counts—which is just where the Power Authority wants to be.

One difficulty in replacing the cooling plant besides the sheer size of its components—was the very tight deadline we had to meet.  We began the work in late November of 2001 and finished it on time by the following April.  Otherwise, the building would have been without air conditioning as the warm weather set in and we might have had some testy tenants—and employees. 

The chiller replacement cost about $2.1 million—more than half our total energy-efficiency investment in the building.  But it’s also accounted for a large chunk of the benefits—including savings of more than $215,000 in yearly electricity costs.  On that basis, we’re looking at a payback period of just over 10 years.  

It’s important to recognize, though, that because the cooling plant was at the end of its useful life, we would have had to replace it under any circumstances.  So the more meaningful payback figure is the two years that reflects the incremental cost difference between the extremely efficient system that we installed and the most basic, run-of-the-mill plant we could have obtained.  Again, money well spent. 

The penthouse is also home to another of our new energy-efficiency features—a computerized energy management system.  The contrast in size with the cooling plant couldn’t be greater—the visible part of the energy management system consists essentially of one relatively modest-looking computer keyboard and screen.

But through more than 200 connection points, the system permits real-time monitoring and control of our heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment.  This enables us to reduce energy use while maintaining comfortable conditions throughout the building.

As one of our engineers said to me, the computerized system has in one swoop brought us from the stone age to the most modern energy management technology. 

I should mention, too, that we further improved the HVAC system’s performance by installing premium-efficiency motors on all pumps and fans and replacing the system’s valves and controls. 

Elsewhere, we’ve added energy-saving reflective film to each of the building’s more than 2,000 windows and to the windows and doors in the lobby.  The film’s main benefit is to reduce the summer heat coming in—and thus the need for air conditioning.  But it also helps to retain heat in the winter. 

The window film work, by the way, proved again that this business never stops surprising you.  We’d been moving along routinely enough when we started getting complaints that NEXTEL cell phones—the kind that can double as walkie-talkies—weren’t working in the building.  It turned out that the film was blocking the radio frequencies from coming through the windows.  We solved the problem by installing an antenna inside the building.

As I said before, we’d put in energy-efficient lighting in the Power Authority areas of the building during the project’s first phase.  This time around, we replaced the lamps and ballasts in tenant spaces—a total of more than 1,300 fixtures. 

Coincidentally, we also installed more than 1,300 occupancy sensors throughout the building.  And we replaced the previous compact fluorescent exit signs with more than 250 light-emitting-diode signs.  The LEDs use far less electricity—and we expect them to be maintenance-free for about 25 years.

Efficient lighting was also the focal point of our work in the building’s 283,000-square-foot parking garage.  We installed a sophisticated “daylight harvesting” system that automatically turns off garage lighting in certain areas when abundant sunlight kicks in.  And we put in a control system that cuts energy use  by all of the garage’s lighting fixtures by up to 28 percent—with no noticeable loss of light.  

Those are the highlights of our energy-efficiency project in White Plains.  But we’ve also made our building a showcase for new energy sources by installing a 30-kilowatt microturbine in the penthouse and a 5.5-kilowatt solar photovoltaic project on the roof.  Both supply electricity to the building.

What we’ve done in White Plains is in keeping with the Power Authority’s energy-efficiency and clean-energy projects throughout the state.  It’s also enabled us to vividly demonstrate that government can, in fact, lead by example. 

I hope those of you with responsibility for building management and energy use will see it as an example worth following.  We’ll be happy to work with you to share the benefits of what—for the Power Authority—has been an extremely instructive and rewarding experience.

Thanks very much.

TOP