New York City's electricfication program for Heat

Steamhead

Jamie Hall said:

.... it would be very nice, if the people want this sort of thing to happen (and I won't argue that they should) if those same people and their politicians would be willing to pick up the tab...

Don't hold your breath.

PC7060

Very hard to get even small changes accepted in the trades let alone into the building codes in my area. For example insulation panels applied to exterior of home such as zip systems r10.  Just watch 4 level 2x6 framed condos go up with standard 5/8” brown zip panels, no exterior insulation. The framing exceeds 30% of gross area on the lower wall and thermal bridging across the entire structures is well over 20%. The addition of the insulated panels would double the effective R value of the wall.  This issue is even more significant in steel framed walls. 

JUGHNE

Just the change from 2x4 framing to 2x6 was probably like pulling teeth....Then you had to get 2" extended window and door jams, more insulation, more money.
Try to get people to pay more when buying the house...they can't see that they pay for the upgrade once rather than monthly on the utility bill.

Then add another inch to the wall thickness! Many contractors can not adapt to drastic changes.

For years around here they would not install a vapor barrier on ceilings..."the house has to breath"....windows would sweat but they still ran the humidifier all winter.
One solution was to go into the attic and cut slits in the vapor barrier that they did install once, but never again.

There have been upgrade to insulation codes but may be enforced only in the cities or depending upon who is financing the project.

PC7060

Agree @JUGHNE.  My recent addition I had considered 2x4 walls inset 2” from edge of floor deck with 2” foam sheathing to bring out to standard 5.5” thickness. Oh the looks I got when taking to prospective framing crews.  

Got the same looks when trying to get them to use 24” spacing. Ended up using 2x6 with standard 16” spacing.  

Jamie Hall

The problem isn't new construction -- that can be handled with building codes, provided one doesn't mind the problem of higher up front costs (which, of course, leads to higher taxes and some quite understandable resistance from the purchase...). The problem is in the existing built environment. And, as I noted, the idea of essentially constructing a new envelope around an existing structure has some merit -- but at considerable cost -- and is really only reasonable when dealing with essentially standard and relatively recent buildings (can you envision doing that to all the brownstones in New York? Or row houses in Baltimore? Reality is a ****... pardon the French).

@JUGHNE seems to slightly mystified by the difficulty of getting people to pay more up front for a house, when they will pay less down the road. Two problems. First, in most jurisdictions at least some of the savings will disappear in extra property tax, which is assessed on the now increased value of the house. The other, more serious, problem is perhaps not quite as obvious: the increased up front cost means that the buyer must come up with more capital up front. Particularly for middle to lower income folks and folks looking at their first home, this may be a real problem -- in fact, a showstopper -- and this also applies to properties constructed as rentals: the initial capital has to come from somewhere, and rentals particularly (never mind "social" housing constructed by a government entity) have to raise that capital -- and recover it.

Mind you I'm not opposed to doing as much as possible to increase the energy efficiency of the built environment, either new or existing. I'm only appealing for people to recognize that the cost of doing so is likely to be very high, and will have a disproportionate impact on low and middle income people and businesses, and therefore to consider that when the temptation to mandate something strikes.

jumper

Exterior siding insulates well. Eastern side tall brick walls are problematic in Toronto. At least before winters became milder. Steel siding not only kept out driving rain but made rooms on east side MUCH warmer.

Steamhead

Jamie Hall said:

...... Reality is a ****... pardon the French).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlhzX7UKKNU

Couldn't resist

The Steam Whisperer

Jamie, I don't see the cost of most energy efficiency improvements to be very high, in fact many cost nothing at all...i.e taking the same windows put on a standard home and putting them on the south wall instead of west or north, like was done in most older homes( probably the buildings you maintain reflect this). The incremental cost of building a 2x6 frame wall at 24inches on center instead of a 2x4 wall at 16 inches on center is small when looking at overall building costs.
Also, the way to help pay for these upgrades was established in the 1970's....EMV or Energy Mortgage Value. The size of the mortgage made available to a buyer is dependent on all the costs associated with the home, including energy usage... not just the buyer's current costs plus the cost of the conventional mortgage. What you end up with is if the home costs $200.00 a month less to heat, cool, light, etc. than another, that $200.00 a month is now available for the mortgage.
This concept of looking at costs to the buyer at a more real level is probably picking up speed with many mortgage companies after the studies of the 2007 crash. An example of the effect of these
"other costs" related to the home was found in the study of the Chicago area Real Estate market after the 2007 crash. There was a distinct pattern of where the number of foreclosures and overdue payments was the lowest.... along mass transit lines in the city. This was probably in part energy efficiency related... most owners in these areas have at most 1 car and probably upwards 1/3 own no cars. No fuel costs or other car related costs mean more disposable income and savings ( for those that made that a priority) so when one family member lost a job, they could still afford the mortgage.

Steamhead

The other question is, where will all this electricity come from, and how do we get it to the buildings?

In my area, voltage levels drop precipitously on hot days- I've seen them go down to 103. So the grid is marginal at best around here. Add a lot of heat pumps with resistance backup and the grid would probably crash in the winter- see Texas.

Jamie Hall

I quite agree with you, @The Steam Whisperer . For new construction (even for adding an addition onto an existing structure). Indeed, it has been my experience in New England that the additional cost for new construction for a fully passive solar house is negligible, with one caution: it's negligible if one uses craftsmen and women of the same skill for both!. A craftsperson capable of building -- particularly detailing -- such a structure is not going to come as cheaply as a person who has trouble deciding which end of the nail goes into the wood...

(There is something to be said, incidentally, for the concept of factory built buildings -- at least on the component level if not complete structures -- in this regard)

As I say, I suspect that some revision in the building codes to encourage -- if not flat out require -- such construction would be a very good thing!

dopey27177

Converting apartment house units from fossil fuels to electric heat will be a nightmare.
I will site one item I know of in the past (been out of N.Y. 20 years)

20 cents per kilowatt hour. normal retail rate.
New York City Housing Authority with 250 major multiple dwellings with an average of 3 - 300H.P, boilers needed to supply heat and hot water to the residents of those buildings would require 9.8 KW x 900 boiler H.P would need 9880 KW per hour total to supply domestic hot water and heat in the winter.

The amount of electric needed for the H.A. is 2,470,000 KW. There are thousands of multiple dwellings in N.Y.C. Coned could not supply electric to each individual without digging up the streets and changing poles in all five boros just o supply the H.A.

How about changing all trasnsmission lines from Coned plants and Niagra Falls to New York City, then changing all the service lines and meters into every building in New York City.

Add to that car charging stations for every building in New York City.

I can't fathom the expense that will be born on the 8,000,000 residents in New York City.

What are these green people even thinking, put windmills and solar panels on top each building besides installing electric resistance heaters in room in each apartment.

What happens when an electrical failure occurs on the transmission lines in the winter, a whole city goes with out heat.

Can not say anymore because the thought is mind boggling.

Jake