by Jack Evans, AIA-Headquarters Facilities Manager
In furtherance of our commitment to the promotion of sustainability and green building initiatives, I'm pleased to report that the AIA national component has amended our contract with Pepco Energy Services so that we will be purchasing electricity that is entirely wind-generated.
A key benefit, of course, is that electricity produced from renewable resources reduces the amount of carbon dioxide, a key greenhouse gas, as well as sulfur dioxide emitted into the atmosphere in the production of electricity from burning fossil fuels. Wind energy is particularly effective in reducing greenhouse gases, because there are no air emissions associated with operating wind generators.
The AIA has taken on the 2030 Challenge to reduce carbon emissions from new buildings and major renovations to 0 percent by 2030. Because buildings account for an estimated 48 percent of the total carbon emissions in this country, the 2030 Challenge will have significant impact on reducing the greenhouse gases that are contributing to global warming. The AIA is committed to lead by example.
We are in good company with this decision. Other notable organizations that have purchased green energy from Pepco Energy Services include the National Geographic Society, Lerner Enterprises, the Willard and Fairmont hotels, and numerous government agencies, including the U.S. Departments of Agriculture, Labor, Transportation, Energy, Interior, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
Pepco Energy Services is helping us all meet the challenge by offering electricity produced by wind farms all across the country. The AIA buys credits equivalent to a share of that production, for which we are paying about .425 cents per kWh over what it would cost to buy electricity from fossil-fuel-burning generators. It’s well worth it because, as we learned from Ben Franklin, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
What do you think?
Comments (9)
This is really great! Clean energy is perhaps the largest element of a sustainable strategy.
Posted by Jeremy | April 13, 2007 12:49 PM
Posted on April 13, 2007 12:49
Can't wait till everyone 'buys' energy credits. AIA should spend their money on more 'sustainable' strategies.
Posted by Michael Shilale | April 13, 2007 1:31 PM
Posted on April 13, 2007 13:31
I think it is a good start, but as a companion piece,there also should be a commitment and a plan that will instill a sense urgency and contribution to the energy reduction by the building occupants, regardless of the source of purchased power. It is an attitude thing that everyone must be a part of.
Posted by Gaines Hall | April 13, 2007 4:47 PM
Posted on April 13, 2007 16:47
Unless the facility is actually physically removed from the city power grid and connected directly to an electrical generating windmill, "purchasing Wind Power" is just a "fell good" scam. Kind of like Al Gore buying carbon credits! What a joke.
Posted by Michael | April 13, 2007 5:07 PM
Posted on April 13, 2007 17:07
Way to go, Mr Evens! The purchase of renewable energy credits is a start, but we must continue to upfit the building to be as energy efficient as practicle.
Posted by George Buck | April 13, 2007 6:27 PM
Posted on April 13, 2007 18:27
Way to go AIA. That's the way to put our money where our mouth is. As a graduate of The Climate Project (Al Gore's training of 1000 people) I am proud to be able to announce this in my presentations!
Posted by Todd C. Howard, AIA | April 14, 2007 7:32 PM
Posted on April 14, 2007 19:32
I called up a company that was promoting the purchase of energy credits (Whole Foods). I called their corporate office and after a few re-routings was told by someone there that the money is given to a company in Texas that is doing wind-power research. There is actually no impact on grid energy consumption in purchasing these credits. However it does generate money for a company in Texas. They did not give me the address of this company.
Posted by JA Herbert | May 3, 2007 4:02 PM
Posted on May 3, 2007 16:02
What is the source for the statement that "buildings account for an estimated 48 percent of the total carbon emissions in this country?"
How does the AIA validate that it is "purchasing electricity that is entirely wind-generated?"
What does the dimensionless number .425 mean?
Can the AIA produce the economic analysis to demonstrate that "an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure?"
How specifically will "the 2030 Challenge will have significant impact on reducing the greenhouse gases that are contributing to global warming?"
How do you respond to Mr. Herbert's comments of 5/3/07?
Posted by Michael S. Adams, AIA | May 11, 2007 1:45 PM
Posted on May 11, 2007 13:45
You are right, Mr. Adams, that the .425 is dimensionless. I have made the correction (as I did the silly mistake in the Google Earth blog entry between San Francisco and San Diego - my thanks to all for unsloppying my writing).
Ed Mazria has this to say about the 48 percent estimate:
"For those who want to know how the Building Sector's 48% of total US energy consumption is estimated:
To create a U.S. Building Sector percentage for the year 2000, the Residential buildings (operations) sector (20.4 QBtu), Commercial buildings (operations) sector (17.2 QBtu), Industrial sector - buildings operations (2.0 QBtu) and the Industrial sector - annual building construction and materials embodied energy estimate (8.57 QBtu) were combined. Total annual 2000 Building Sector consumption was 48.17 QBtu. Total annual 2000 U.S. Energy consumption was 99.38 QBtu.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration (consumption numbers vary slightly depending on which EIA table you use, so the numbers are approximate, which is why I rounded down)."
As to the comment that the money goes to people doing research into wind power, that is pretty much what Jack Evans figured on when entering this contract with the electrical utility. Certainly you can't differentiate which electron came from wind-generation and which came from a coal-powered station when you're getting it off of the grid. The support for wind-generated power, though, was the whole point. My hat is off to JA Herbert for actually making a call to check that out.
Posted by Doug Gordon | May 12, 2007 2:39 PM
Posted on May 12, 2007 14:39