<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:0cm;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
{mso-style-priority:34;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:0cm;
margin-left:36.0pt;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
p.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, li.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast, div.MsoListParagraphCxSpLast
{mso-style-priority:34;
mso-style-type:export-only;
margin-top:0cm;
margin-right:0cm;
margin-bottom:10.0pt;
margin-left:36.0pt;
line-height:115%;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-CA link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>‘IF’ becomes a big word in your critique – but it is also pretty clear that the report itself is based on the ’IF’ factor but that is also its significance as that is the paradigm for significant change (Kuhn and others). In other words the report identifies what would need to be in place for the IF factor to be a ‘reality’ – it is what I would term a ‘strategic report’ and I think it accomplishes that goal. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>The report thankfully does not diverge into critical theory which however seemingly relevant would make it useless as a document. In making use of the term ‘context of reality’ you are basically saying that this would not fit some orderly progression of society and its economics and culture. Thankfully history does not provide much evidence for that kind of progression or order otherwise our planet would still be the centre of the universe. Our history is one of shifting paradigms and ‘IF’ is the word that begins those shifts as it is predicated in a new reality .<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:#1F497D'>My only other comment is a sideways view on the summary. You identify that the report points to the difficulty of achieving the goal but then relates the data to providing ‘false’ conclusions unless assumingly grounded in reality. I never saw that as the premise of the report (i.e that it would be realistic in those terms). I viewed it as functionally a map that overlays our current map and that it was significant in that it may serve as a map for other communities exploring options (and they all are). Now the fact that it was actually published means that it is significant and probably will have some Copernican type change on how other communities develop their maps for change<o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal'><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> Greenbuilding [mailto:greenbuilding-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Michael Iversen<br><b>Sent:</b> March-20-13 9:54 AM<br><b>To:</b> Green Building<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [Greenbuilding] NYC 90% emissions cut with windows<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>I reviewed the ’90 by 50’ report, and its conclusions are based on invalid assumptions, extrapolations and projections placed outside the context of reality in terms of economic and social behavior. Basically, the report concludes that IF ALL buildings in NYC were retrofitted or designed with rigorous energy measures, and IF ALL buildings were equipped with rooftop photovoltaic systems, and IF ALL source energy was carbon-free electricity, then a 90 percent reduction in building sector-related GHG emissions is possible by 2050.<br><br><b>Report Assumption 1</b>: All building stock is assumed to be retrofitted / designed with existing and near-term efficiency technologies, specifically; air sealing, heat recovery ventilation, and additional insulation, to a point where all heating, cooling, and hot water can be provided by electric heat pumps. Capital outlays are estimated at a discounted net present value $94 billion.<br><br>-</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> </span><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Comment</span></i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>: While energy retrofitting of existing building stock is a valid strategy to reduce GHG, the projection of findings based on perfect model simulations for each building type to the entire building stock is extremely unrealistic, in terms of financial costs and building ownership / management behavior. The $94 billion costs need to be placed in the context of local, state, and federal economic deficits. The report needs to project the extent of retrofitting based on historic data, not unrealistic goals.<br><br><b>Report Assumption 2</b>: All remaining building loads to be carbon-free electricity. After reducing total building energy use by 50 to 60 percent, all remaining building energy in 2050 (50.6 TWh) is to be supplied by carbon-free electricity, in order to meet the 90 percent reduction target.<br><br>Photovoltaic arrays may be added to every single building in NYC (covering up to 60 percent of the available rooftop area), so as to provide 10.7 TWh.<br><br>The report enumerates potential sources of adequate carbon-free electricity, but states that a detailed analysis is beyond the scope of this study. Besides the previously mentioned electricity from photovoltaics (10.7 TWh), the remaining 39.9 TWh are to be provided a) 2,600 4.0MW wind turbines, occupying 35 to 40 square miles, b) an additional 86 million square meters of photovoltaic panels with a footprint of 66 square miles, c) 3 or 4 new 1000 MW nuclear power plants, d) increased hydropower from Quebec, and e) electricity generation from biogas derived from waste and sewage treatment.<br><br>-</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> </span><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Comment:</span></i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> To assume 100% of buildings will be retrofitted with pv arrays covering 60% of roof area is an unsubstantiated overestimate, and does not factor building structural capacity, financial capacity, and social behavior of private building ownership / management.<br><br>-</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'> </span><i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'>Comment:</span></i><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif"'> To simply assume that 39.9 – 50.6 (TWh) of source energy is to carbon free is equivalent to saying it will be provided by magic beans. Any proposed strategy would be valid of all remaining source energy would be carbon free.<br><br><b>Summary</b>: if anything, this report points to how difficult it is to achieve a 90 percent reduction of GHG emissions related to the building sector by 2050. While some of the data findings were of value and interest, any interpretation of findings, unless grounded in the relatity of economic and social behavior, will provide only false conclusions.<br><br>I welcome other viewpoints on this study.<br><br>Michael Iversen<br>Architect, LEED AP, PhD Candidate<br>Department of Urban Planning and Policy <br>University of Illinois at Chicago<br></span><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><pre>______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>Greenbuilding mailing list<o:p></o:p></pre><pre>to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="mailto:Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org">Greenbuilding@bioenergylists.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><pre><o:p> </o:p></pre><pre>to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<o:p></o:p></pre><pre><a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><o:p></o:p></pre><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;line-height:normal'><span style='font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p></div></body></html>