NYC Tackles Climate
Change with Local Law 97: A Balancing Act for Building Owners
New York City aims for carbon neutrality by 2050, and
Local Law 97 (LL97) is a crucial piece of the plan. This law mandates emissions
reductions for large buildings, aiming for a 40% decrease by 2030 and net-zero
by 2050. However, building owners face a complex balancing act: complying with
the law while considering the cost of retrofits and the limitations of the
existing grid.
Who's Affected?
Most buildings over 25,000 square feet must
comply, including older structures with unique challenges.
The Timeline:
2024: Emissions limits take effect.
2025: Buildings must report their 2024 emissions and face fines for
exceeding limits.
2030: Stricter emissions limits kick in.
Challenges and
Opportunities:
Retrofitting older buildings:
Bringing older structures up to code can be expensive and require significant investment.
Grid limitations:
New York's aging grid may not yet fully support the increased demand from widespread electrification.
Benchmarking and planning:
Carefully assess a building's energy use and
develop a cost-effective compliance plan.
Energy efficiency upgrades:
Consider measures like LED lighting and
weatherization to reduce emissions.
Explore renewable energy:
Investigate options like solar panels or on-site
power generation but consider grid capacity limitations. How will the skyline
change?
Nuclear power, which New York state has
three remaining nuclear power plants: James A. Fitzpatrick, Ginna, and Nine
Mile Point, Unit 2 The Indian Point nuclear plant
closed in 2021. In 2022, nuclear power accounted for 21% of New York's
utility-scale net generation, down from 34% in 2019. Public
sentiment towards nuclear power is not positive, though it is a clean source.
Advocacy and collaboration: Engage with policymakers and utilities to
advocate for grid upgrades and explore financial assistance programs.
Green buildings are not the same as LEED certified. This law measures emissions. Examine the sources of power to fix the problem. New York City relies upon twenty-four in the city power plants that run on natural gas and fuel oil.
The plants were built decades ago and 70% are over 50 years old. In addition to releasing GHGs that contribute to climate change, these plants release air pollutants that cause air quality and health issues in NYC communities.
The power sent to the plants comes from: fossil fuels, coal,
hydro from Canada, nuclear, and small amounts of solar and wind.
Climate Mobilization Act is the theory behind
this Local Law 97 (LL97). Buildings in
NYC over 25000 square feet are subject to the law. Covered buildings are subject to a yearly
monetary penalty. Restrictions and penalties increase into the future.
May 1st, 2025, covered buildings must submit a report showing their GHG emissions for the prior calendar year (2024). This reporting is required annually, and it must be prepared by a registered professional. Buildings that don't submit an annual report before May 1st or release over-limit Greenhouse Gases will be fined. This accounting and reporting require experts and employees to provide the facts in spread sheets. What department in the city is the expert to verify or inspect the statistics?
A huge industry of experts, engineers and contractors have popped up, there’s college classes in compliance to meet carbon emissions. The problem is the cost.
Lawmakers suggest owners comply by starting these steps:
Add solar panels as an energy source.
Solar panels on rooftops in Northeast Cities that don’t have sunlight 360 days a year isn’t a great solution. Also, solar has a shelf life, the glass wears down and fails will require maintenance, cleaning, and replacement. Huge glass panels on top of historic buildings reminds of the movies with King Kong bouncing on top. Wind turbines also are not efficient and require maintenance. Wind and solar parts fill up landfills and are never recycled.
Retrofitting HVAC systems
Cost prohibitive unless the existing system is old/failing then bringing it up to code and to meet this standard makes total sense. Often this will mean a year of construction and disruption to tenants and income for ownership.
Switching building systems from gas to electric.
An old building that has a coal fired boiler to direct-fired gas heaters or boilers is going to cost millions of dollars to just change it out. These boilers use either natural gas or landfill gas. Boilers work by heating water in a vessel using gas, oil, or coal. The heated water is then sent through a system of radiators to provide indoor heating.
Changing lighting fixtures to LED lighting.
This sounds simple but the cost of one bulb is around six dollars
vs incandescent at two. Phasing in new seems reasonable and prudent. Those
still useful bulbs are not recyclable, can they be given to some source?
Installing energy-efficient windows.
The GM building with its historic International
Style of millions of windows and white Georgia marble is not going to be cheap
to replace the windows. Since it’s an older construction we assume there is
lead, asbestos, and materials that will increase the cost of replacement.
C-PACE loans –
Many commercial loan covenants restrict
second, third financing behind the first trust deed. A loan decreases the
profitability and value of the building.
Tax credits-
Huge companies that own 153000 square foot buildings like most corporations in America don’t pay federal income taxes, they have accountants and attorneys who make the bottom line zero. This may work for individual landlords.
Do the right thing-
Building owners would love to put a plaque out front and have media press about being caring but they measure the cost.
Change is hard. Rents for commercial and office in NYC are NOT on an upward curve. The cost must be passed on to tenants.
Building new such as the Taipei 101 or the Shanghai Tower include planning for low emissions and greener use but retrofitting real estate is costly.
What solutions do you know?
New York City landlords are not alone, it's rolling into a world wide pickle.
.png)
