Submetering and Cogeneration: Face A Common Foe

Herbert. E. Hirschfeld, P.E.Glen Cove, New York, USA

Websites: “Submeteronline.com” and “Cogenerationonline.com”

October, 2004

Submetering and Cogeneration: Submetering and Cogeneration: Face A Common FoeFace A Common Foe

Herbert E. Hirschfeld, P.E.

http://www.spintelligent.com/

Data for Residential Master Metered Buildings:

1. Electrical consumption is 18-26% higher than either Submetered or Directly Metered Residential Buildings – provides an incentive for building to convert

2. 10% of apartments consume 25% of the electricity consumed by all apartments – provides an incentive for some to oppose a building retrofit

To Conserve – to avoid wasteful use of; to save; to preserve; and by doing so reduce the operating

costs in a residential building -

How does the Metering in a residential building impact its ability to implement Cogeneration?

Direct Metered Residential Building

Electric from Utility


Apartment Apartment

Apartment Bldg common area

Utility Electric Meter Utility Electric Meter

Utility Electric Meter Utility Electric MeterCogeneratio

n

Unit

Thermal Energy

Electricity

Master Metered Residential Building


Apartment Apartment


Utility Electric Meter For Entire Building

Cogeneration

Unit

Thermal Energy

Electricity

Submetered Residential Building

Electricity from Utility

Apartment Apartment


Submeter Submeter

Submeter Utility Electric Meter For Entire Building

Cogeneration

Unit

Thermal Energy

Electricity

Why Master Metered and Submetered buildings are better Cogeneration candidates than

Directly Metered buildings

In either a Master Metered or Submetered building both the apartment sector electric load and the common area electric load are available to the cogeneration equipment; whereas in a Directly Metered building the apartment sector electric load is not available to the cogeneration equipment.

Why Master Metered and Submetered buildings are better Cogeneration candidates than

Directly Metered buildings

Having both the apartment and common area sector loads available for the cogeneration equipment enables the production of greater amounts of electricity and associated thermal energy, as well as a larger building demand reduction or load curtailment.

Cogeneration installations sized only for typical residential building common areas are unlikely to be cost effective.

Master Metered residential buildings represent a common marketplace - which develops the basis for Strategic Alliances between the metering and cogeneration equipment industries – Which is the basis for METCOGEN

Regulations imposed by the New York State Public Service Commission (PSC) upon residential buildings implementing submetering may force building owners to choose between the benefits of metering individual apartments versus the benefits of cogeneration in order to reduce building operating costs.

If PSC Regulations discourage building owners from Submetering, the only alternative for metering individual apartments becomes Direct Metering, which usually precludes cogeneration.

Barriers to Submetering Implementation become Barriers to Cogeneration

What are some of these Barriers?

1. The Home Energy Fair Practices Act (HEFPA) as interpreted by the PSC essentially establishes the relationship between the submetered tenant and building owner as if building owner were a utility insofar as billing and verification are concerned.

2. The PSC does not allow the building owner to disconnect electricity for failure of tenant to pay. Utility has that ability to disconnect apartment electricity for failure to pay. The utilization of courts to collect unpaid utility costs is time consuming and not cost effective. Courts generally will not allow for a tenant to be evicted for non-payment of utility as long as tenant continues to pay rent.

3. The polling of non-shareholders creates turmoil between the building owner and the tenants. This PSC requirement is unrealistic because it currently requires an application to submeter electricity when at least one non-shareholder opposes submetering. There is always at least one non-shareholder opposed.

4.The reaction by the PSC to a single complaint is unrealistic and its response can severely jeopardize the submetering process for the building and, at best, cause a substantial delay and impact the implementation cost. In practice, any individual armed with a computer and some determination can manipulate the existing system and delay, if not destroy, the submetering process. Example: Marvin Gardens

Marvin Gardens 500 apartments

100 shareholders 200 fair market rentals 200 rent stabilized unitsPSC Application – 1/7/04Complaint to NYS – 3/23/04PSC Approval – 9/1/04Still to come – DHCR application

– process at least 4 months before rent stabilized units pay for their electricity. Resultant fallout includes lost summer savings, Anita Bridge project and lost contractor.

The building owner is relieved of the disadvantages listed in items (1) – (4) if he directly meters the building, thereby, eliminating the cogeneration option.

5. The PSC requirement for a shareholder vote in a master metered building with 100% shareholders, particularly a Mitchell-Lama building which is under the jurisdiction of HPD, is unrealistic. The Board of Directors should be empowered to make the submetering decision, as they are elected by the shareholders and are responsible (as representing the corporation) to pay the utility costs – they should be able to determine the manner in which the utility costs are paid.

Buildings Implementing Both Electrical Submetering and Cogeneration

Clinton Hill Apartments7-60 KW & 6-30 KW Microturbines

Park Ten (10 West 66th Street)1-70 KW Microturbine

Submetering and Cogeneration: Face A Common Foe

Documents

Transcript of Submetering and Cogeneration: Face A Common Foe