Link back to Harbor Development Committee page
Meeting was started at 1905 by the Chair, Pam Harty.
Members present were Jeff Born, Pam Harty, Otto Harling, Vic Popp and John Tzimorangas
Minutes of the previous were approved by voice vote.
The meeting proceeded according to Pam’s agenda.
1. Review recent action from and give energy conservation recommendations for School Dept. (David Killory to hopefully attend)
David Killory from the school department discussed the School Department’s deliberations and efforts to reduce energy consumption. The focus has been on non-school days and seasons when boilers can be turned of. They are working on limiting air exchanges in the buildings to what is needed. Electricity for lighting can be reduced further by installing automatic turn-off devices. Need funds to obtain these. John Tzimorangas indicated that he would approach the board of the HMLP for funds needed to obtain and install the automatic turn-off devices. John also stated that the pay back time for these devices is short, about six months. DK promised to provide John with data on the number of turn-off devices which are needed, how many and where.
DK also indicated that the school department is looking into reducing the number of stops on the school bus routes and into reduced idling of buses. It was mentioned that there is a Mass. Law on the books against excess idling of vehicles.
John introduced the subject of co-generation for the school department. He indicated that this area has a major potential for energy use savings and suggested a pay-back period of 3.5 years. The up-front capital investment is significant, ~$1M. David replied that the school department was reluctant to ask for this in the last warrant where there was such a large request for new construction. Otto asked if bonds could be floated for a co-generation system. DK replied that it had to be looked into in order to determine if Hingham had the authority to float bonds for that purpose.
DK also mentioned that the design of the new school building is being handled by an architect with a track record in green buildings.
2. Assign Policy Doc segments (please review the town Newton’s, at least)
Vic suggested and John agreed that it would be good to have base line information and to confirm what the sub-sections should be. Pam will confirm what the “buckets of information” will be.
3. Timeline
Sept-Oct: ICLEI completes inventory and issues report
Sept-Oct: Review other policy plans and review ICLEI inventory
10/6/08: Discuss reduction target
Oct-Nov: Draft plan
11/3/08: Review draft
Town needs new budget items between Nov and Dec.
An action item for Town Meeting must be prepared early, probably by mid-February.
For example a 500 kW co-gen system for the School Dept., as recommended by John, would cost an estimated $850,000, savings estimated at $253,000/yr. More information is in the School Dept. report.
Jeff emphasized lack of time for the EAC to complete the suggested time-line item and therefore the need to revise the time-line.
John promised to email Otto and Vic a copy of the reports and analysis relating to the proposed 500 kW co-gen plant, which is based upon a gas fueled microturbine.
4. Assign liaisons to each town dept.
School Dept.- Otto and Vic
Police and Fire- John
DPW- Pam
Harbor Master- Otto
Building Dept.- Jeff
Country Club- Brian
Water Company- Russ
Vic volunteered to draft a one- page letter which introduces the EAC to the various town departments.
5. Timing/topic for next Hingham Journal article
No decisions were reached on this agenda item.
6. Discuss (no more than 5 minutes for each topic. please) immediate specific measures, assign tasks/ownership for follow-up to each.
Waste- Re-establish contact with Town Long Range Waste Planning Committee to support education efforts, research efficiency of trash pick-up. Vic volunteered for this.
Bike lanes/path/racks- establish subcommittee (Tom Sexton has agreed to take this). Pam’s husband may handle this.
Community garden(s)- Mary Heissner maybe up for this
Anti-idling campaign-Plymouth R. principal has gotten behind this. Is it School Dept. wide? How about town-wide? There is a Mass, statute against unnecessary idling. John will discuss this with the Police Dept.
Pellet-stoves? Susan Haley, who was in the audience, suggested that pellet stoves be considered and she gave some pellet fuel industry literature to Otto, whose preliminary assessment is as follows. On the plus side pellet fuel is a domestic resource and it is a renewable fuel assuming proper management of the forestry resource. Based on the industry literature and a check of pellet fuel price at Lowes, the cost per unit of energy content for pellet fuel is not significantly different from that for petroleum or natural gas. Price per useful unit of heat delivered, depends upon the efficiency of the heating system, and was not factored into this preliminary assessment but probably favors the fossil fuel systems. Use of a renewable bio-fuel such as waste wood, from which pellets are made, should be carbon neutral. For fossil fuels this is certainly not the case. Emissions of toxic chemicals during the combustion process and the cost to mitigate these emissions was not assessed.
Engine oil recovery from town owned vlehicles, re-refined oil, where is it going, is it a viable source of $ and conservation? Pam will find out what the town is doing with its used oil and the oil delivered to the town dump.
Suggestions from “Muni Elected Officials-Caucus on Climate Change”. Jeff attended that meeting and he provided his notes for the committee. He remarked that some of the goals have been hard to attain but that should not detract from the progress achieved.
Others? Otto provided a handout announcing a seminar at MIT by Thomas R. Casten, entitled, “Profitably Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions”. Otto attended that seminar on Sept 9th and here are a few interesting pieces of information provided by Casten.
Energy efficiency is the “elephant in the room” was Casten’s main thesis. Efficient use of energy can provide huge savings in primary energy and proportional reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Much of the energy used in the US can be utilized much more efficiently without violating any laws of physics and without requiring the development of new technologies.
Electric energy efficiency is ~30% in the USA and has not changed for decades. This is primarily the result of governmental regulations which provide no incentive for the generating companies to improve efficiency.
42% of US carbon dioxide emissions are from electricity production, unchanged in
50 years.
Local generation of electricity with use of waste heat is the most economical approach to generation and the cheapest way to reduce the carbon footprint.
Other countries are doing better eg. the Danes generate more than half of their electricity locally and with 40% less carbon dioxide per unit of electric power than the USA. They have been able to double the efficiency of their electric power generation. The wind resource is very good in Denmark. Spain is also able to use wind energy effectively. According to a recent article which I have read Spain is able to produce 30% of its electricity from wind (MIT Technology Review).