Thanks to my friend Luigi, I was given an opportunity to talk about solar to over 100 intelligent, engaged and fun members of CORENET’s Northern California chapter on 19AUG2010.
I moderated a panel on Getting the Carbon Out, and had the chance to frame solar and other renewables as the third step in a coordinated carbon reduction campaign. Gratitude to event organizer Melody Spradlin for putting this together, and kudos to fellow presenters Stephanie Glazer and Tim Chadwick for a really informative session.
Over the course of an hour and fifteen minutes, we walked our CORENET friends through the steps of understanding and curating your corporate real estate portfolio in a future where leadership is increasingly defined by how you manage the carbon intensity of your operations.
Click here for a copy of Stephanie’s carbon accounting presentation [1MB pdf]. Click here for a copy of Tim’s Improving carbon [and energy] efficiency presentation [2 MB pdf]. And click the slide below for a pdf of my relevant slides on implementing renewables[200k pdf]:
A very relevant question was “How would you understand what to do with an older 100,000SF building you just bought?” My approach is headcount focused, since most companies look at revenue per employee, RSF per employee, and have readily available utility bills. Here is my take:
- Understand energy use per employee—California average is 7.5MWH/person, I have one client whose use is currently 43.75 MWH/employee [pharma]--so this number needs to be put in context with your industry peers.
- Have an energy audit done of the building—PG&E can do this for you. They identify lighting upgrades, VFD swap-outs, and EMCS options that can help frame the easy wins on focusing carbon intensity.
- Look at renewables, primarily solar, in locations where shade becomes an asset—parking, rooftops, western glazing.
One particular point that resonated well was the fact that fuel cells, if natural gas is your feedstock, are dirtier [800# CO2/MWH] than PG&E’s current mix of generation [635# CO2/MWH]. Won’t be long before permitting a fuel cell will trigger CEQA compliance issues, requiring environmental impact analysis and mitigation measures. I am a big fan of fuel cells run off of landfill gas, digester gas, or captured methane from CAFO--but natural gas is too useful a feedstock for fuel cell applications.
The other point that hit home was, thanks to AB 2473, permitting of all types of solar systems in California “shall not be willfully avoided or delayed”.
And did I mention that installed PV costs a third less on a capacity basis, lasts three times as long [10 yrs v 30 yrs], produces zero C02 emissions, and costs a helluva lot less to operate than a fuel cell?
