Category Archives: Energy Management

Time to Plan for Your Energy Resiliency

It’s all over the news. Worldwide we have seen many news stories about extreme events: historic fires in California, 127℉ recorded in Death Valley, record heat and fires in Scandanavia, record heat and draughts from Japan to Europe. This impacts our lives. See the terrifying natural conditions in Africa where many farmers can no longer subsist, resulting in the worldwide immigration crisis we see. So these have great impacts on our lives and economics. And we’re not done yet. It’s only summertime and hurricane season is starting – the prime time when the risk of grid-disrupting events where you live and work is greatest. Why this is happening (climate change?) is not important. You are concerned with keeping your facilities operating and being energy resilient.

First, think about how important energy resiliency is for you. What if a major storm were to come through your city and damage the grid so that electricity is no longer delivered? What are the potential practical and financial impacts to your company?

  • You cannot make or deliver product. You cannot do what you do (and charge for it). Yet you still pay staff. Speaking of which: the very safety of your staff!
  • Uncertainty. You don’t know if your power will come back to resume normal services in one hour, a day, a week, or much, much longer (like in Puerto Rico).
  • Lost data. Your business is your data, and losing it because of a power loss can be existential. A number of firms went “under” directly due to Hurricane Sandy.
  • Efforts to get back in operation. Once a system is down – even if only for a few minutes – it may take a long time to get it operating normally again. And the cost. One study estimated that companies generally spend 20-30% of annual revenue to recover from even a brief power loss, in some cases requiring new equipment.

And a storm is not needed to knock out power. Many parts of the country are growing in population and electric demand, and utilities cannot keep up with the additional needed infrastructure to meet this growing demand. Several utilities have openly admitted they may be unable to reliably deliver electricity to people and businesses during peak need.

Energy resiliency means being less or non-dependent on the grid to deliver needed electricity – to develop your own reliable, secure source of electricity. What can your facility do to lower peak need and/or produce power independently? Being energy independent is not cheap, but could be worth it to avoid or lessen the risks above.
An energy resiliency strategy consists of:

  • Understanding your systems, equipment and peak electric needs;
  • Understanding the effects of a power outage and what redundancies exist to minimize its chances of happening;
  • Estimating when/how you are most vulnerable to a potential interruption;
  • Designing of absolute needs should there be a loss of power. Which systems must be maintained and which are less critical?

Options:

  • Sufficient emergency back-up power or combined heat & power (CHP);
  • Monitors to detect when grid power is interrupted – even in neighboring areas – so you are prepared and can automatically have backup systems supply power;
  • Batteries to store excess power in case of an interruption.

Proper strategies and implementation can greatly reduce the chance of your facility being impacted by a power interruption. Such long-term thinking is often a low priority. But in this summer of extremes, it is more important than ever to begin to plan and implement smart strategies to reduce the risk and impacts of electricity outages. Make sure you put money in your budget to begin such planning soon.

CCES can help your firm develop an energy resiliency strategy and plan to assess and lessen the risk of power interruptions and improve your bottom line. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or karell@CCESworld.com.

1st Commercial Ferry Using Fuel Cells Will Launch in 2019

One of the most problematic segments of the economy when it comes to the environment is the shipping industry. Since most ships travel outside of countries’ boundaries, it is hard to enforce environmental rules. In addition, the culture of shipping is overwhelmingly avoiding rules and regulations and having the “freedom” to do what one wants. Countries, NGOs, and other organizations have tried to educate shipping companies about the values and benefits of climate change and environmental responsibility, but nobody wants to spend resources to address problems that their competitors are not addressing.

Thus, it was a bit of a surprise when Water-Go-Round announced the first commercial fuel-cell-operated ferry in the world beginning in 2019. The hydrogen fuel cell-powered ferry will be monitored by Sandia National Laboratories. The project received a $3 million grant from California Air Resources Board (CARB).

According to passengership.info, the aluminium catamaran will have a capacity of 84 passengers. The vessel has a top speed of 22 knots and will be powered by 360 kW-worth of Hydrogenics fuel cells, alongside lithium-ion battery packs. It will carry a 264 kg tank array of 250-bar compressed hydrogen, which should permit up to two full days of operation. Propulsion will come from two 300 kW shaft motors.

Following its launch, Water-Go-Round will undergo a three-month study period in San Francisco Bay, during which time Sandia National Laboratories will gather and assess performance data. CARB will use this data to assess the suitability of the technology for wider marine use. A hydrogen-battery hybrid system was chosen over a purely electric system because of its perceived greater flexibility, their lack of moving parts, near-silent operation, and scalability, as fuel cells can be combined into larger systems.

CCES has the experts to help your firm assess whether new technologies or applications can save you costs, boost productivity, and put your business in a more competitive position. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Energy Efficiency Saves Money In Unexpected Ways

In real estate circles, energy efficiency often gets short shrift. Conventional thinking gives costs a 100/10/1 relationship. For every $100 a company spends on employees (salaries, health benefits, etc.), it “should” spend $10 on rent and operating expenses, and $1 on utilities (not just energy, but water, too). So, what would motivate a company to be more energy efficient and save only a fraction of the $1, when it can profit more by even a small gain in worker productivity; better return on the $100 spent on workers?

An owner recently published an article that estimated the costs of a building in their city as $300/sf for human resources, $30/sf for rent and O&M, and $3/sf for energy. They were initially pleased when upgrading lights and controls reduced energy costs by about 20%. However, that only saved about $0.60/sf out of $333, nothing to get excited about.

However, it turned out that the new lights were much longer lasting than the old ones, reducing operating costs (time/effort to regularly replace burned out lights) by 10%, savings of $3/sf. The new lights were designed to be of the right color temperature and location to coordinate with specific needs and reduced glare, reducing employee absenteeism and improving productivity. How much can well-designed lights save? It is hard to be accurate. But if new lights reduces absenteeism by only 1%, that’s 20 more hours work annually per employee. What if the lights also improve productivity by 1%? That’s equivalent of each worker being productive 20 more hours per year without having to pay more salary. Fewer coffee and other breaks can easily save this amount. A 1% reduction in absenteeism and 1% gain in productivity is a savings of $6/sf. There’s a good chance that savings would be more than 1% per person. The lighting upgrade, perceived to save the firm only $0.60/sf, has really saved it at least 16 times more.

Therefore, don’t look at an energy upgrade as only saving money on utility bills. Look at it as saving operating costs and making employees healthier and more productive. Leverage the value of energy upgrades to get CFOs and CEOs interested in energy!

CCES has the technical experts to help you get the greatest benefits from an energy upgrade, including O&M savings and productivity improvements, not to mention save much on your energy bills and get incentives to have others pay for them! See how we can make $ for you. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Paving Roads With – Eh, Solar Panels?

French and Chinese companies are experimenting with new technologies that would revolutionize the solar industry, producing solar panels that can be placed on our roads to make electricity. The appeal of “solar roads”, solar panels installed in place of asphalt, is clear. Generating electricity from already developed areas, like highways and streets, rather than from fields could conserve a lot of land.

By producing electricity on roads in and around cities, the electricity can be transmitted relatively shorter distances with less lost in transmission, as opposed to electricity from solar panels in rural fields. And procuring the land is essentially free because roads are needed anyway. Durable solar panels could reduce the cost of road maintenance, too.

Generating electricity on roads themselves could have other advantages, such as melting snow that falls on them or embedding them with lights for better illumination. There has been experimentation of using solar roads to re-charge electric vehicles.

The surface of experimental solar panels is composed of a complex polymer that has slightly more friction than a conventional road surface. Developers are trying to modify manufacturing procedures to ensure a tire’s grip on it is equivalent to asphalt.

A number of challenges exist for this technology before it is widely used. For example, a solar road is currently about 3 to 4 times the cost of a conventional asphalt road, although solar roads produce a sellable commodity, electricity. Based on current costs of electricity, the payback for the increased cost of a solar road is about 15 years. This payback can decrease if the solar panels can be made more efficient in producing electricity, as they lie flat and are occasionally blocked by vehicles.

One critical question left unanswered is how well solar panels can take the pounding of huge numbers of tires daily for many years. Most U.S. roads are made primarily with asphalt, which can buckle or shift under the weight of many cars, potentially damaging the solar chips that produce the electricity. European and Chinese roads have more concrete to absorb the flow, compared to U.S. roads. In addition, solar panels on roads might be stolen, leaving large potholes in the road and reducing productivity.

CCES can use our technical and economic experience to help your company or building assess a wide array of renewable energy options and which make the most sense for your specific building and circumstance. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Recent Decisions On Major Gas Expansion Projects

Decisions made by state utility commissions and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) have much influence on both our energy future and that of responding to climate change. Two contrary decisions in June are described here.

FERC denied the rehearing of its order authorizing construction and operation of the Mountain Valley Pipeline Project in West Virginia and Virginia and a related project that would connect to Pennsylvania. Among the arguments rejected by the majority of FERC commissioners were that FERC should have evaluated whether energy demands could be met with “non-transportation alternatives” such as energy conservation or renewable energy resources, that FERC failed to adequately analyze climate change impacts of the end use of natural gas transported by the project, and that FERC’s consideration of climate change in the context of evaluating the public interest under Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA) was inadequate. The FERC majority said greenhouse gas emissions from the downstream use of natural gas did not fall within the definition of indirect or cumulative impacts, and also concluded that the Social Cost of Carbon tool could not meaningfully inform decisions on natural gas transportation projects under NGA. FERC said it continued to believe the Social Cost of Carbon tool was “more appropriately used by regulators whose responsibilities are tied more directly to fossil fuel production or consumption.” Two commissioners wrote dissents. In re Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC, No. CP 16-10-001 (FERC June 15, 2018).

On June 26, 2018, the California Public Utilities Commission issued its final decision denying a certificate of public convenience and necessity for a new 47-mile natural gas pipeline to replace an existing pipeline. The proposed decision found that the applicants had failed to demonstrate a need for the project and had not shown “why it is necessary to build a very costly pipeline to substantially increase gas pipeline capacity in an era of declining demand and at a time when the state of California is moving away from fossil fuels.” The decision indicated that based on Commission precedent, the Commission could deny a proposed gas pipeline or transmission project based on insufficient need without completed CEQA analysis. The Commission directed that the preparation of a draft environmental impact report be halted. In re San Diego Gas & Electric Co., No. A1509013 (Cal. PUC June 26, 2018).

CCES is a technical firm and the information provided here should not be used in any way to make any decision on the fuel usage of your facility. Information from legal, business and other professionals should be used in making such final decisions. CCES does have the engineering knowhow to help you assess energy source options and technologies that can save your facility significant energy costs. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Is Your Building “Smart” or “Well-Managed”?

We all see the expression “Smart Building” a lot. What really is the definition of a “smart” building? Is any building using a BMS a “smart” building? Can a well-managed building (with simpler technology or a good manager) still be “smart” or is it its own category?

There are no established answers; definitions are a matter of degrees. A BMS is simply a series of thermostats or meters that allow adjustment of parameters based on pre-programmed inputs. Even if thermostats are primed from the building manager’s mobile device, is that really “smart”? Most BMSs include sequences to respond to needs and energy efficiency (turn off when unneeded), so they are at least a little smart.

Some people define a “smart” system as one integrating data to predict needs and adjust accordingly. Here are two examples. A smart system will recognize that a certain rooftop HVAC unit is not working properly (exit air temperature is too high) and provides the building manager with a list of potential issues that may be causing this; perhaps even self-investigating and resolving the problem itself, saving time and energy.

Second, a specific employee enters the building’s garage and the smart system knows which particular office will be occupied in X minutes by which hallway, so the necessary lights and HVAC loops are activated ahead of time. Both of these examples show the functionality and energy saving capability of a smart system.

New smart building technologies not only improve equipment operation and efficiency, but also address the daily habits and experience of the occupants. Traditional BMS systems were programmed to give optimal results for building management, while today’s smart technologies try to optimize the comfort of each occupant.

The question comes down to whether you need a “smart” building and whether the extra cost is worth it. If all employees arrive and leave at about the same time, then the capability to react to an employee’s unique arrival is not useful. Since there will probably always be a custodian on staff, are the extra “bells and whistles” of self-repair really necessary? Might a good alarm system (found in conventional BMSs) communicating a problem be sufficient? On the other hand, “smart” technology that makes employees more productive is worth quite a bit in terms of what the company pays its professionals and for the quality of the product it produces, and might justify such an investment.

CCES has the experts to help you make your building more energy efficient and your workers more productive, whether it be as a “smart” building or utilizing something simpler. We want to help you improve your business! Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Incentives For Lighting Upgrades Are Flickering

There’s no doubt about it. LED lights are now accepted as a way to reduce electricity for all types of buildings. They use much less electricity than historic bulbs and their prices have come down. Bloomberg estimated that nearly 500 million were installed nationwide in 2016. With this recognition, many utilities and government agencies are wondering whether it is time to gradually end incentive programs for LED lights.

But there are some strong arguments to keep incentives to encourage companies and the public to purchase LEDs. Despite their advantages, they have not totally won over the market. According to the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, LED lamps accounted for 36% of national light bulb sales in the 4th quarter of 2017, while halogen lamps still held 48% of market share. LEDs are displacing CFLs.
Also, the 36% market share is not consistent across the US, but is greatest in states or areas that either have strong financial incentives or high electric rates, from as high as 50% of the market in California to about 12% in Kentucky, according to the USEPA.

Some statistics in New York and Massachusetts, whose utilities have begun to reduce incentives, show that conversions to LEDs have also slowed down. Although switching to LEDs is strongly financially beneficial, consumers and companies have an expectation to get a further financial reward from the utility or government.

The belief is that when the new federal DOE standards come into effect on January 1, 2020 making it illegal to sell most halogen and incandescent light bulbs (less efficient than 45 lumens per watt), LED sales will increase. However, such sales may not soar because retailers will still be allowed to sell its non-complying products in the store past the compliance date and enforcement is unknown. The burden is not on the manufacturer or consumer, but on the retailer to stop selling non-compliant lights. How DOE will enforce these measures in many type of retail stores is unknown.

Utilities are realizing that targeted incentive programs may be best to encourage LED sales in the long term. Some utilities are beginning to focus on underserved markets to promote LED lights, such as rural and low-income urban areas. Programs may also be effective if they target the elderly market who have been slower to adopt to LEDs.

Some consumers have shied away from LEDs thinking they are limited in terms of beauty and utility. Focusing incentives to encourage people to buy decorative and reflector lights can improve this market and convert very energy inefficient lamps of these types to more efficient ones.

Finally, comes the transition to more robust incentives for lighting controls, turning lights – even more efficient ones like LEDs – off altogether when a room is not in use. Utilities are beginning to incentivize effective dimming and occupancy controls that are easy to install and operate.

CCES has the experts to help you upgrade your lights to LEDs to maximize the energy cost savings and to improve your employee’s or customer’s productivity and comfort. We know the existing incentive programs and can maximize these to provide you the best performing project economically with the shortest payback and return on investment. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

The Value Of Modernizing Your Aging Buildings

According to the US Energy Information Administration, only 12% of existing commercial buildings have been built since 2003 and more than half were constructed before 1980. The median age of such buildings is around 32 years. https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/reports/2012/buildstock/

Many cities and states in the US have developed goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, commonly by 80% from a 1990 baseline by 2050. New buildings that are certified as LEED are helpful in meeting these goals. However, the statistics above demonstrate that meeting this goal and also reducing energy usage and demand to more effectively manage the grid cannot be met unless existing buildings modernize. More utilities are developing incentives for existing buildings and municipalities laws or new codes to require existing buildings to be more energy efficient.

Incentives are a positive, but only help the bottom-line a little bit, and sometimes have strings attached. Laws are useful, but often result in building owners addressing the letter of the law and not doing all that can be helpful to be more energy efficient.

Building owners should look at modernizing their existing stock as an investment opportunity with many potential financial benefits for the following reasons:

1. Long-term, reliable energy and other cost savings. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), energy savings of 50% to 75% can be achieved in commercial buildings that implement smart energy efficiency measures. Their biggest problem is aging building envelope, causing boilers and air conditioning units to work harder to develop the heat or cold lost to the aging envelope.

Since heating and cooling constitute the largest portion of energy consumption, most old buildings lose energy due to poor interiors and exteriors. Retrofitting older buildings can help with a significant reduction in energy needed to heat or cool the building.

Of course, upgrading lighting to LEDs is a sure-fire financial winner, with significant, reliable cost savings. When upgrading lighting, don’t forget to include lighting controls to keep lights off when the room is not occupied and daylighting to dim your light fixtures when sunlight is entering a room. Why pay for energy when natural light can help?

In addition, such modernizations and new technologies inevitably lead to cost savings in terms of O&M. Modern buildings with intelligent systems use 20% to 40% less energy and result in 8% to 9% lower operating expenses. https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/BSA/20140108_moa_jones.pdf

2. Meet sustainability goals. Many commercial buildings rent space to private firms that have written sustainability or climate change goals, including reductions in energy usage and/or greenhouse gas emissions. These companies develop multiple strategies to ensure meeting the goals. Working in a building that is energy efficient can keep a tenant happy or attract potential tenants which may have difficult goals to meet. Either way, an energy efficient building can put your building in greater demand (resulting in greater revenue) for your units.

3. Reliability in a world of growing energy use. More companies do more and more things to stay competitive, including, but not limited to bigger and greater data centers. It has been estimated that energy demand will rise 50% between now and 2050. Is your building able to reliably supply energy to tenants. Remember, risk may include serious incidents affecting business viability occur, which, of course, could lead to litigation. Therefore, not wasting energy and bringing in sufficient amounts for all situations is critical, and may require some modernization of the building and its wiring.

This includes automated controls, sensors, monitoring of energy use and feedback, “smart” technologies, and backup power. Being in control of energy usage and distribution puts you in a more powerful position. Are such new technologies expensive? No, they are not as automation has brought down prices. Not having modern features can be more costly to your business as a building owner.

4. Better performing business, greater demand for your space. A modern, green retrofit building with efficient energy systems has been shown to lead to improved worker performance and reduced sick time compared to companies in existing buildings that have not retrofitted appropriately.

A recent Harvard study found that worker cognitive functions improved with better indoor environmental quality and ventilation, including a 50% increase in focus, doubling in crisis response, and a tripling in information usage and strategic thinking scores. A follow-up study found positive impacts on sleep and wellness. https://green.harvard.edu/tools-resources/research-highlight/impact-green-buildings-cognitive-function

5. Rising revenue for a modern building. Continuing on these themes, providing potential tenants with the most modern technologies, reliable energy service, and beneficial working conditions will result in greater market demand. Buildings certified as energy efficient (LEED, Energy Star) are in greater demand and can charge greater rents than stodgy, inefficient buildings with not a lot of specialization to offer the tenant.

Modernizing older buildings with improved energy efficient systems appears to be expensive and a “hassle”. However, the technologies are established, have little chance of failing, and results in many positive items that will raise both the value of your property and the demand to rent space from it, raising revenue and lowering cost significantly. This can only be done, however, if retrofits are implemented intelligently, led by experienced architects and engineers.

CCES has the technical expertise to help you plan and implement smart upgrades to your existing building to gain the benefits listed here. Our experts can help you lower energy usage and costs reliably and to maximize the benefits and, with the help of incentives, minimize the payback and hasten growth. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Should I Be More Energy Efficient or Should I Go For Renewable Energy?

Building owners and managers are seeing more and more evidence of the growing costs of energy and realize these costs must be managed and lowered. But how does one most effectively do this? Does one evaluate the current systems that use energy (HVAC for comfort, lights for lighting, plug load) and make smart upgrades to improve its efficiency (do the same or more using less electricity or gas/oil)? Or does one invest and implement renewable energy to bypass the local utility and take advantage of the free resource generating energy (solar, wind, geothermal)?

Certainly being more energy efficient is a good thing financially for your building. It is in your interest to operate your equipment – for which you paid a lot of money – properly and efficiently; you want to get your money’s worth. If a system (an area of lights, a rooftop unit, a boiler, some PCs) is wasting energy day after day, it is in your interest to replace or upgrade it with equipment that works as well, but uses less energy. On the other hand, renewable energy is all the “rage”, with prices declining. There is certainly security; we know, if designed right, solar, wind, etc. work reliably. Being less dependent on your local utility is a good thing. Which one should a smart building owner/manager lean toward?

Well, it is best to optimize both strategies, but in a particular order. It is tempting to install solar panels or a wind turbine right away. It’s a great “show” piece for stakeholders, incentives are available in many places, and prices are coming down. But it is best to emphasize energy efficiency first. Have a thorough energy audit performed by an experienced, certified (P.E., CEM, or CEA) professional. That auditor will undoubtedly identify multiple smart strategies to save energy, with numbers demonstrating that each potential strategy will pay back the initial costs for the strategy in a reasonable amount of time, taking into account local incentives. Do not take the numbers literally. For example, if a payback of a certain strategy is listed as 3.2 years, it may end up being a little shorter or longer because factors involved in the audit and calculations are changeable. However, in a well-performed audit, the real payback is usually close to the predicted. Seriously consider and implement one or more listed strategies in the audit report that your company is comfortable addressing. Measure and note the decline in electricity or gas/oil usage. Remember that most energy efficiency projects have other benefits that renewable energy does not confer, such as improved productivity and reduced O&M costs and efforts. So you are getting these confirmed financial advantages relatively early.

Now that energy usage has been reduced and efficiency improved, you can consider alternative sources of energy. Solar panels and wind turbines are improving in effectiveness and reducing in price in time, so a slight delay in their procurement is probably in your favor. But more important, with energy usage minimized, now you can design the proper sized and placed system, reducing the upfront costs. If you bring down your electricity usage, say 20% because of improved efficiency (better lights, plug load, improved weatherization, upgraded HVAC), that could reduce the number of solar panels or wind turbines needed to reach your goals, reducing the capital costs you would need to get from Financial or any type of loan you may take out. And this will reduce the labor needed to install the equipment and leave you room on your roof or property for other things.

Sources estimate that currently energy efficiency typically costs one-third to half the full cost of rooftop solar. Therefore, it makes sense to prioritize efficiency before sizing a rooftop system, reducing the number of panels needed. For example, if a 40 kW commercial solar system can be reduced to 30 KW because of reduced need for power (improved efficiency), then the upfront cost for the panels can be reduced by $15,000 or more, a financial incentive to optimize energy efficiency first. It would not be good to install a large system and then after implementing energy efficiency projects find out that such a large system was not needed after all for the long-term future. Obviously, the exact numbers may vary based on efficiency and renewable energy incentives available.

CCES has the experts to perform a thorough and useful energy audit of any building type, providing normally multiple smart strategies to reduce energy usage effectively and at a reasonable payback. We can project manage the strategies you select to ensure that you get the maximum benefits (on top of utility cost savings) of the selected upgrade. And then we can help you decide on which renewable energy source is right for your building and work with established vendors to ensure that a good system is installed, providing you with maximum benefits and is smooth to operate. Contact us today at karell@CCESworld.com or at 914-584-6820.

Congress Votes for Clean Energy with Omnibus Bill

On March 23, 2018, President Trump signed the much ballyhooed 2018 Omnibus Spending Bill contained spending and resources for many industries and groups, including for energy efficiency. The Consolidated Appropriations Act (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4417591-FY-2018-Omnibus.html) passed by Congress disregarded major cuts in spending proposed by the administration and instead raised funding in many areas that Congress favored, including federal programs that help consumers and businesses save energy. President Trump reluctantly signed the bill, enabling several programs to be re-established.

Overall, the bill increases funding for energy efficiency programs at the USDOE and maintains funding levels for such programs at the USEPA. The bill maintains current funding levels for ENERGY STAR® and other programs that give consumers and businesses information to select energy-efficient products. The USEPA’s laboratory, where vehicle certification testing and research occurs, was not cut.

There had been concern that funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy would be cut. Instead, the USDOE’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy will see an overall increase in funding of 11%. The Building Technologies and Vehicle Technologies Offices will each receive an increase of 10% more funding. The Bill also includes a 10% increase for the Weatherization Assistance Program. It should be noted that the USDOE’s Equipment and Building Standards Program was cut by 7%.

It is ironic that Republicans in Congress strongly supported such programs that are also supported by environmentalists and by those wishing to fight Climate Change. However, Republicans supported these programs because they represent “clean energy” and cost savings, something they recognize the US needs to stay in the lead at globally. Several Republicans whose states stand to gain from these technologies, such as Ohio, which has several wind turbine manufacturing plants, supported these measures.

In addition to the funding, the Bill also addressed financial incentives for energy projects. For example, the combined heat and power (CHP) market will get a boost from the extension of the federal tax credit for such projects. The tax credit can benefit the owner or an operator of its CHP system or a 3rd party owner selling power to the utility through a power purchase agreement. It is anticipated that more investors will take an interest in microgrids and CHP, including utilities, to spread the risk of power delivery. This would be an interesting development as utilities for quite some time fought hard to discourage microgrids as unfair competition against their large grid service.

Finally, the Bill reinstates the IRS tax deduction for energy efficient upgrades of buildings called EPACT (Section 179D), going back to January 1, 2017 and is valid through December 31, 2018. EPACT provides a potential tax deduction up to $1.80 per square foot for certain energy upgrades.

CCES has the experts and experience to assist you in performing energy efficiency evaluations and implementing the projects with the maximum financial benefits for the building owner and manager, including getting the greatest incentives from appropriate agencies and tax deductions. Contact us at karell@CCESworld.com or 914-584-6720.