Building Operations « California Green Building Blog

Building Operations

Archived Posts from this Category

October 11, 2011

Solar@Work Offers Huge Discounts To Commercial Building Owners And Lease Holders

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building Operations, Energy, Finance, Free, Government, Green Economy, Incentives and Rebates, Make Money, Marketing Ideas, Photovoltaic, Save Money, Solar | Tags: AB 1103, Commercial, Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance, Energy, Finance, Green Building, Green Economy, Green Jobs, Million Solar Roof, Net Metering, Power Purchase Agreement, Solar Roof, Sustainable Development |
Leave a Comment

A new program in San Francisco, Solar@Work, offers discounts, and in some cases free installation, on solar arrays for commercial building owners and lease holders. Almost any size business can qualify for the program that will lower energy costs for participants. For businesses proactively addressing San Francisco’s required energy audits, this program requires a closer look. (For full analysis of San Francisco’s commercial building energy audit program, click here)

Solar@Work groups commercial building owners and/or lease holders together to reduce costs through economies of scale. Participants generate the greatest savings on energy costs through the purchase of a solar array. The cost of purchasing and installing a system can be prohibitive, so Solar@Work creates a discount on installation and financing through volume pricing. A “traditional” solar lease is also available with no up front cost, but the savings on energy bills are markedly less significant.

The Collaborative Solar Procurement model created by the World Resources Institute allows the Solar@Work program to offer four financing options. Owners can purchase systems at a discount, secure a solar lease, secure a capital loan, or finance through other options including power purchase agreements.

The goal is to collect enough businesses in the program to collectively generate 2 megawatts of power or more. Applications are being accepted until October 31, 2011, and an informational conference call is scheduled for October 21, 2011.

The ideal applicants are owner/occupiers or long-term leasers whose available space on a roof or parking area is 5,000 square feet or more.

Solar City is the exclusive vendor for the program created by the World Resources Institute, the City and County of San Francisco’s Department of the Environment (SF Environment), in collaboration with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Optony.

Solar City was selected through a competitive process to provide the installation services for the program. The company anticipates hiring 400 new workers in the second half of 2011 including 100 in the Bay Area, partly due to Solar@Work.

Congratulations to WRI, San Francisco, and the other contributors to this program. Solar@Work promises to be another great example of how sustainable development will lead a growth in the economy through reducing energy costs and increasing employment.

February 17, 2011

Mayor To Sign Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance Tomorrow

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Building Operations, Energy, Government, Just Plain Cool, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Lease, Risk Transfer, Save Money | Tags: AB 1103, Building Code, California, Carbon Footprint, Commercial, Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance, Commissioning, Energy, Green Lease, Post-occupancy performance, Sustainable Development, Task Force On Existing Commercial Buildings |
Leave a Comment

First ever mobile post, so excuse the brevity.
Mayor Lee will sign the proposed ordinance into law tomorrow.

WHERE: Adobe headquarters, 601 Townsend

WHEN: 10 A.M., Friday, February 18, 2011

I wish I could be there, but I’m out of town.
Congrats, San Francisco!

For our comprehensive analysis, please click here

February 8, 2011

Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance Sent To Mayor For Signature

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building Operations, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Lease | Tags: AB 1103, Commercial, Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance, Green Lease, Post-occupancy performance, San Francisco, Task Force On Existing Commercial Buildings |
Leave a Comment

The San Francisco Board Of Supervisors unanimously passed the Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance. The ordinance now goes to Mayor Edwin Lee for signature. Mayor Lee is expected to sign the ordinance, and its provisions will go into effect as law.

This is a major step for San Francisco. Under the ordinance, San Francisco has the opportunity to make drastic cuts to energy use by existing buildings. It is believed that San Francisco is the largest city to require energy audits of commercial buildings.

For our full analysis of the ordinance, click here

February 2, 2011

Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance – First Vote Passed!

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building Operations, Government, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Lease | Tags: AB 1103, Commercial, Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance, Green Building, Post-occupancy performance, San Francisco |
Leave a Comment

On Tuesday, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance on the first reading. The ordinance will be read one more time at next week’s meeting of the Board of Supervisors, and if it passes again without changes, it will be sent to the Mayor for signature. All indications suggest this ordinance will pass.

For our full analysis and a copy of the proposed ordinance, click here

January 24, 2011

Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Building Operations, Carbon, Energy, Government, Green Economy, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Lease | Tags: AB 1103, California, Carbon Footprint, Commercial, Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance, Energy, Green Lease, Post-occupancy performance, San Francisco, Task Force On Existing Commercial Buildings |
[3] Comments

As mentioned on Friday, the Land Use and Development Committee for the City and County of San Francisco is holding a hearing on Monday, January 24, 2011 to discuss the proposed Existing Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance. I encourage you to attend if possible.

The proposed ordinance would require certain commercial buildings to produce two reports, (1) an energy and performance audit every five years and (2) an Annual Energy Benchmark Summary (AEBS). Save for any confidential information, the audit and the AEBS would be made available to the public. The ordinance makes sense, but may place a cost on building owners that will inevitably be passed on to renters. The upside is that renters usually pay for utilities, so energy savings may offset the cost of the audit…something to think about in a green lease, that’s for sure.

Here’s a short summary:

The proposed ordinance will require two reports. The first report is the AEBS, and that will use the Energy Star Portfolio Manager Energy Performance Rating as a basis. This report will likely not cost too much money as it is based on the Portfolio Manager software that is freely available, and the data is generated from the local utility (in the case of San Francisco, PG&E).

The second report is a building-wide audit (as defined by ASHRAE Procedures for Commercial Building Energy Audits) conducted by a third-party vendor. As such, I am guessing the audit likely carries a higher price tag. Full disclosure, I have never hired someone to do an energy audit for a commercial building, so I am only guessing that the fees are more than nominal.

After the initial three-year staggered start period (which will also be used for the AEBS), the required energy audit would be required once every five years. As proposed, the audit requirement is as follows: Level I audits (as defined by ASHRAE) are essentially “walk-through” audits. These are required for buildings between 10,000 to 49,999 sq ft (smaller buildings). Level II audits (as defined by ASHRAE) are comprehensive surveys and analyses, and they are required for all buildings 50,000 sq ft and above. (larger buildings).

If owners do not comply with the requirements they may face fines. The fines are $100/day (for larger buildings) or $50/day (for smaller buildings) for every day of non-compliance up to 25 days per 12 month period. In other words, the maximum fine per year is $2,500 for a large building and $1,250 for a small building.

In general I like the ordinance but there are some issues that should be addressed… (more…)

January 21, 2011

Mandatory Energy Audits For Existing Buildings – Vote Imminent!

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building and Design, Building Operations, Carbon, Government, Law, Legislation, and Policy | Tags: AB 1103, Commercial, Commercial Buildings Energy Performance Ordinance, Energy, Green Building, Post-occupancy performance |
1 Comment

This post today is short and sweet, because I want to get the notice out. San Francisco is contemplating legislation that will require commercial building energy audits. A hearing in front of the Land Use And Economic Development Committee will be held on Monday, January 24 at 1pm in San Francisco City Hall Room 263. The Board of Supervisors will vote on this soon following a recommendation from the committee. If you’re interested in attending, go for it! We support this legislation, but a full and thorough debate is necessary to create effective legislation.

Click here for the committee agenda: 012411 LU Agenda – FINAL

Click here for the ordinance and supporting documents that are under consideration: 101105

We previously covered post-occupancy performance and the proposed legislation (click here for a few of the posts). Updated analysis will follow this weekend when I have time to write.

August 16, 2010

New Legislation Proposed to Reduce Energy Use in San Francisco’s Existing Commercial Buildings

Posted by Sarah Grilli under Building and Design, Building Operations, Energy, Government, Law, Legislation, and Policy, USGBC / LEED | Tags: AB 1103, Building Code, Commercial, Commissioning, Energy, Energy Audit, Green Building, Post-occupancy performance, San Francisco, Task Force On Existing Commercial Buildings |
1 Comment

As always, it’s great to have Sarah Grilli contribute. Here is her latest post:

Last week San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom proposed new legislation with co-sponsor City Supervisor Bevan Dufty focused on reducing the energy use of existing commercial buildings over 5,000 square feet. This new law is expected to be passed next month by San Francisco supervisors. San Francisco is currently subject to a strict green building code which was described in detail on a prior blog post. If this new measure passes, it will assist in making San Francisco’s green building legislation one of the most comprehensive of any city nationwide.

In May, we mentioned that the Mayor was planning this legislation, and, as predicted by pundits, it does go far beyond the statewide energy reporting required by AB 1103. The program proposed by Mayor Newsom implements many of the recommendations suggested by the Task Force on Existing Commercial Buildings. (For our discussion of AB 1103 and our series on the Report from the Mayor’s Task Force On Existing Commercial Buildings, click here). The legislation is modeled on similar programs in California and Boulder, Colorado, and requires the use of free software from the US EPA.

The cornerstone of the legislation is that it requires building owners to conduct a comprehensive energy audit every five years and an updated audit every year. This emphasis on energy efficiency will provide an additional layer of measurement and verification that is often missed in building codes and third party rating system such as the USGBC’s LEED. However, the newest version, LEED 3.0, does require measurement and verification through a post occupancy audit process. See our prior blog post on this issue here.

The city’s efforts in this regard will provide an important catchall for non-LEED buildings, and even more importantly will focus on existing buildings, not new construction. In theory, once the building owners and managers receive an audit report they will embrace the resulting proposed energy-saving renovations. Most, if not all, of the available energy-saving renovations are subsidized by Federal and State programs, thus assisting implementation. Stay tuned to the California Green Building Blog for a comprehensive review of the ordinance if this legislation passes.

UPDATE: This legislation is on the way to passage. Click here for coverage

June 2, 2010

Mayor’s Task Force Report On Existing Commercial Buildings – Part 3

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building Operations, Energy, Finance, Finance / Mortgages, Government, Green Economy, Incentives and Rebates, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Solar, Sustainable Community, Wind | Tags: AB 1103, AB 811, BerkeleyFirst, California, Carbon Footprint, Commercial, Distributed Power, Energy, Finance, Green Jobs, GreenFinanceSF, net energy metering, Renewable Funding LLC, San Francisco, Sustainable Development, Task Force On Existing Commercial Buildings |
Leave a Comment

Parts One and Two of our analysis of the Final Report and Recommendations from the Mayor’s Task Force on Existing Commercial Buildings discussed mandatory energy audits, the risks associated with allowing unilateral submetering, and the welcome drive to increase transparency in energy use reporting under an expanded implementation of AB 1103. In Part Three of this post, we look at the task force’s proposal to “attract game-changing capital.”

First, it should be noted that the task force’s interest in attracting game-changing capital comes from not only prudence, but also awareness of the acute financial restraints facing our society. The task force offers low-cost solutions such as the Green Tenant Toolkit, and looks to engage the private sector in these and other initiatives.

There are two possibly expensive financial initiatives proposed by the task force that we will address at length. The first is a Financial Optimization Tool (FOT) – a fantastic idea. The proposed FOT is software that organizes and amalgamates all incentives and rebates available to building developers, managers, and tenants. Currently, the best place to find such information is through the Database of State Incentives and Renewable Energy (www.dsireusa.org) (a website that is the anchor on our Tax Incentives and Rebates page). The problem with DSIRE, and other resources such as the Flex Your Power website or the US Department of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Newsletter, is the fluctuating information is difficult to organize.

DSIRE addresses this problem by simply listing every incentive available, and weekly (if not daily) updating that list. This approach is thorough, however it creates a mountain of information to sift. The FOT is a great alternative because it allows owners to use all incentives to design an energy efficiency program specifically tailored to their financial circumstances and their building’s design and condition.

To address the need for constant updates, the task force suggests a public-private partnership (P3). The inclusion of a private partner could be effective. But, as with so many other opportunities that are offered to private industry, this represents an early sale of future assets. Further, including private industry may undermine the intent of the FOT

P3s have an essential place in our society, however, for this situation P3s are not an effective solution. To have the greatest impact, all parties should have access to the FOT. Use could eventually be required as a standard of care for the building management industry or as part of energy audits. But, if a P3 private company is involved there needs to be a profit angle. Due to its niche market, the FOT will not produce sufficient advertising revenue. And without advertising, the only profit angle is through subscriptions.

A subscription-based FOT will fail because it will deter a majority of potential users including other municipalities. Further, if the FOT is privatized, anti-trust issues arise if use of the FOT is required

The best approach to implement the FOT is a “top down” approach that I will discuss in Part Four of our analysis. The federal government, working with state and local agencies, must come up with this tool, so that it is accessible to all interested parties. Perhaps federal leadership is too much for a locally convened task force to suggest, and perhaps this tool needs to start at the state level with contributions from our state universities. What the FOT does not need is a private partner seeking profit.

There are areas where a P3 will work, and one surprising area the Task Force misses is an opportunity to suggest a partnership in finance. The report suggests following the BerkeleyFirst distributed power program that utilizes AB 811. As we previously discussed on the CGBB, the BerkeleyFirst program is not only innovative in attaching the debt obligations of a solar installation to property taxes, it is also innovative in allowing a private company to underwrite the financing for the installations. This powerful P3 model epitomizes P3 success. The private partner provides funding, and earns a fair return on investment. The municipality reaps the reward of infrastructure development at a fraction of the cost. Perhaps the task force was wary of opening the proverbial floodgates to private enterprise, or perhaps the task force did not want to single out Renewable Funding LLC, the underwriter in the BerkeleyFirst program.

Nonetheless, San Francisco launched GreenFinanceSF, and the city called on Renewable Funding LLC to finance the project. BerkeleyFirst deserves a great amount of credit as the first program of this type in California, but GreenFinanceSF looks to be a broader initiative that has a longer list of eligible projects. Unlike BerkeleyFirst which funds solar residential solar installations, GreenFinanceSF finances a long list of energy and water retrofit projects. The California Green Building Blog will offer further analysis of the GreenFinanceSF program in the future.

The next and final installation of our analysis of the task force report will discuss a topic near and dear to my heart – the suggestion by the task force that government “lead by example.” I am a firm believer in this approach. This is not about government intervention, this is about leadership. No matter where your political loyalties fall, you’ll want to read next week…

May 25, 2010

Mayor’s Task Force Report On Existing Commercial Buildings – Part 2

Posted by Steve Sacks under Building Operations, Energy, Government, Green Economy, Incentives and Rebates, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Lease, Research, Sustainable Community | Tags: AB 1103, California, Carbon Footprint, CEESP, Commercial, Commissioning, Energy, Green Building, Green Economy, Post-occupancy performance, San Francisco, Submetering, Sustainable Development, Task Force On Existing Commercial Buildings |
Leave a Comment

In Part One of our analysis of the report from the Mayor’s Task Force on Existing Commercial Buildings, we discussed the task force’s four themed approach to improving the energy efficiency of existing commercial buildings: 1) “maximize transparency,” 2) partner with the private sector, 3) attract game-changing capital, and 4) lead by example. We now turn to theme two, “partner with the private sector.”

As discussed in Part One of this post, the transparency mandates suggested by the task force, and/or mandated under AB 1103 will force private industry to report energy use. These reporting requirements will generate market forces that push buildings to higher energy efficiency. But, will developers, owners, and tenants really compete in a race to the top of efficiency based on AB 1103 alone? The answer is “probably not,” or maybe I should say, “probably not quickly enough.”

Sure, required energy reporting will occur, but the desired reduction in energy use will not manifest rapidly. Without government mandate and assistance for developers, owners, and tenants, the measures suggested by the task force, including mandatory energy audits, will create resentment and real hardship for businesses. Also, the local taxpayers might not be happy with the incentives and rebates suggested to assist in deferring the cost (though some of the underwriting will come from state and federal grants).

The task force suggests two low-cost “tools” to rapidly generate efficiency results and ease the private burden of implementing energy efficiency. The first suggestion is a “no-brainer,” but the second might not be as simple.

The first tool is the “Green Tenant Toolkit” (“GTT”). Rather than simply mandating energy efficiency, the GTT proposes a “toolkit” with suggestions for developers, owners, and tenants regarding “best practice recommendations, a model green lease, [and] a standardized checklist to identify green features of spaces for lease.” Also, as a part of the “partner with the private sector” theme, the task force suggests a public/private (dare I say) task force to come up with the language and suggestions for the GTT. The proposed GTT is a quick and easy resource, and one that will ease the burden of implementing energy efficiency measures.

The second tool suggested by the task force is “unilateral submetering.” This strategy proposes allowing tenants or landlords to implement submetering at the requester’s expense. This is risky, and not completely thought out. First, this option likely already exists for a majority of tenants and landlords, and second the suggestion ignores the issues that arise from such a policy.

For example, unlike other tenant-level capital improvements, submetering affects the operating costs of other tenants. Generally, a building’s utility costs are averaged, and then allocated to tenants based on square feet. If a large tenant has a significant amount of space that is below the average energy use in a building, and that space is removed from the building energy calculation, the average cost will rise for other tenants. Conversely, a landlord, at the bequest of other tenants, may submeter a power-sucking data center. This action will lower rent for a majority of other tenants, but send operating costs for the data center through the proverbial roof. It’s not quite that simple, but the example above is closer to the reality than the task force lets on.

To achieve the equity the task force seeks, unilateral submetering will need further analysis, or testing before city-wide implementation. Perhaps if a tenant submeters, a landlord could be forced for one year to keep the submetered tenant in as part of the calculation for the building’s energy use averages until other tenants can take action to either lower energy costs or also submeter? Or perhaps the city will limit the amount a landlord can raise an energy charge thus encouraging energy efficiency? Perhaps other tenants will just have to “get with the program,” submeter, and increase their efficiency to realize ROI. There are no easy solutions to this question, but submetering is an effective tool to reducing energy use, and is required for any effective energy efficiency policy.

The task force’s next suggestions – including the suggestion of a government fund to cover expenses for implementation of energy efficient technologies – will be covered in part three of our analysis. Stay tuned…

May 10, 2010

Friendly Reminder, Webinar Series Starts Wednesday, May 12

Posted by Steve Sacks under BIA / Building Industry Association, Build It Green / Green Point Rated, Building and Design, Building Operations, California Green Builder / Building Industry Institute, Editor's Note, Government, Green Economy, Law, Legislation, and Policy, Speaking Engagement, Sustainable Community, USGBC / LEED | Tags: Federal, California, Commercial, Residential, Energy, Green Building, Sustainable Development, Green Economy, Webinar |
Leave a Comment

Hi All,

A friendly reminder that I am presenting in one of three great webinars presented by the State Bar of California. The webinars will be on May 12, 19, and 26. If you can’t make these dates, you can register by the date of the event, and listen any time in the three months afterward.

The first webinar is “Sustainable Development: Moving Beyond Green Building Toward Sustainable Building and Sustainable Master Planning” I will discuss alternatives to LEED and the many factors interested parties should consider when designing and developing sustainable buildings and neighborhoods. Jeff Conner (Conner & Associates), Matt Burris (CTG), and Patricia Chen (Miles Chen Law Group, P.C.) will join me in a roundtable discussion that will discuss LEED as well as other ways to develop a sustainable project (i.e. ICC, GreenPoint Rated, or independent assessment). Each approach requires unique planning and permitting. More information can be found by clicking here.

Our webinar is the first of a series. There are two more webinars that are really worth checking out. The first is , “Sustainable Development: Charting a Course to a Sustainable Future Through CEQA Compliance and Effective Climate Action Planning – Demystifying AB 32 and SB 375″ and the second is “Sustainable Development: The California General Plan Law and General Plan Updates: The Future of Sustainable Development”

We hope to catch you online at these events!

California Green Building Blog