Like the solar/wind boondoggles, I suspect we'll be hearing more of this;
When the city decided to shell out $274,000 for environmentally friendly retrofits to Ted Reeve Community Arena in the Upper Beach, the investment was supposed to pay for itself in cheaper energy bills.Instead, virtually no savings materialized and the arena board struck an agreement to pay back only $51,114 of the upfront costs, according to Michael Haughton, the facility’s long-time manager. “It’s a disaster for the taxpayers of Toronto,” he said, adding that he warned early on that the estimated savings were “incredibly ambitious.”
The problem goes far beyond one rink, according to a scathing new report from Toronto’s Auditor-General that says the city has no way of knowing whether the $21.1-million it spent retrofitting 89 arenas and more than 50 community centres and pools produced any real savings.
From the Globe comments;
From leaky running toilets, to a complete lack of hot water in the showers, that Arena is a joke. Not to mention it takes 20 minutes for the ice to completely re-freeze after a flood.If 'efficient' means nothing works right, then bra-vo.
h/t batb
As an Architect, I've heard of these kinds of jobs that are budgetted to replace equipment and do work based on future savings. In fact banks even go along with them. But what I think they're talking about is the misuse of terminology.
"Self-funding" improvement jobs are ofen initiated by a contractor approaching an owner, and they certainly wouldn't need a subsidy because they are limited to the budget you derive based on the kind of finacing the difference in cost can fund.
Normally it sparts and sometimes ends with redesigning and replacing lighting. You're only effecting one system and getting your savings back from one place: the electrical bill.
Ever try to play hockey when there's water on the ice? The puck glides like it's in cement.
There have been 3 projects like this in my area. One is a school that put in a cascade heat pump draqing off of a well to provide radiant heat to the building. Has been operating a handful of days since installation. Doesn't work.
Another, ice rink taking condenser heat from ice plant to heat pool water. complicated heat pump system with long pipe runs. Hasn't been operating, not reliable. Wont save energy, that I can guarantee.
A school, LEED qualify, ground source heat pump, very expensive building, has the highest sq ft energy costs in the district.
Green = fraud.
About seven years ago I investigated the idea of putting solar panels on my house in order to generate power and save some electricity costs. However, after researching it and doing the math I figured I would break even in the 21st year...which was the expected operational life of the panels..I would then have to replace it all again. Don't we pay exorbitant taxes to these municipalities that employ engineering departments with huge staffs to figure out something I figured out by myself using the internet, a pencil, a pad and a calculator?
Hardly the first time. Here on the left coast we have been paying for things like this forever.
http://www.piquenewsmagazine.com/whistler/library-grant-at-risk-as-building-fails-to-meet-energy-targets/Content?oid=2298282
I once used a low flow toilet in a vegetarian resteraunt.
It didn't go well, and my toilet brush solution didn't work well either.
Sometimes you just shut the door and leave.
Michael Haughton, it seems, out of a list of managers of 89 arenas, is the only fellow who could provide data analysis on cost savings. This of course means that Mr. Haughton is the only manager, out of 89 arenas who is worth his salt. Better yet, he is the only guy who actually knows what he is doing. Amazing.
This is the real story. The success of the "arms length" approach to managing the arenas. Obviously being as far away from big government management has once again proven itself to be far more efficient and cost effective. The Ted Reeve facility is the only one mentioned in the report because it is the only one generating any financial data. This means that it is the only one run with any sense of fiscal responsibility to the tax payer. Restructuring the management of the other 249 facilities should have been identified as a highest priority need.
Kudos to Mr. Haughton for following up on the results of his crappy expensive retrofit and being able to articulate green energy as lower quality for more money. More kudos for not paying for it! Michael Haughton is an unsung hero IMHO.
The insanity of "green" politicians is difficult to understand:
Bjorn Lomborg claims that Germany has spent $130 billion in solar power subsidies to generate $12 billion worth of electricity and that the effort will set back global warming by 23 hours at the end of the century. I have not checked his math, but haven't seen it challenged either.
There was an amazing development in the U.K. last week. Four years AFTER passing the legally binding Climate Change Act the U.K. Parliament is finally looking into some pretty fundamental issues:
In the words of Tim Yeo MP, Chair of the Committee, "Government policy on wind power should be based on sound economics and engineering, not political pressure from a small vocal minority – whether that be green campaigners or anti-wind protestors. In this session we want to cut through all the hot air talked about wind power and examine whether the economics really add up. Wind farms are over forty times less polluting than gas burning power stations - per unit of energy produced - but there are concerns about the costs to consumers. We will be asking if the Chancellor is right to consider cutting onshore wind power subsidies? And how much these subsidies really add to our electricity bills? Does it really make financial sense to generate low-carbon electricity from wind? Or are there cheaper ways to cut carbon emissions from our power stations?"
Why weren't these issues addressed earlier?
Ontario's Green Energy Act and Miller's folly in the subject article are no different!
i live across the street from a calgary public school. solar Panels installed on the roof in the last month.ur tax dollars at work.
When one looks at the subsidy cost for wind and solar power(or bio fuel), the payback will be.. ....never and the damage done to the economy substantial. Someone in Germany looked at the numbers and they are going back to coal. Now that the Fukushima panic is declining I would bet that Nuclear will re-emerge as the only logical option.
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/01/04/the-real-costs-of-alternative-energy/
"Toronto's $36 million Energy Retrofit Program, created under former mayor David Miller in 2004, .."
Therein lies the problem, jumping in to a large scale project with, I suspect, no sound engineering studies or pilot project to confirm feasibility. Green politics at its worst.
Well. You must admit that these "green,sustainable" pixie dust and unicorn farts schemes are actually VERY efficient: at robbing tax-payers and lining the pockets of eco-cultists,greenies,green contractors,politicos at all levels,and of course,the prophets Gorebull,Sucksuzki,etc. C'mon pipples,get your priorities straight(for the kiddies)!!!
In addition to all of the concerns indicated above, I thought it odd that the City of Toronto, which is only a municipality and a creation of the Province of Ontario, has an "Auditor General".
Canada has an "Auditor General", which is a term that I thought paralleled "Governor General" in the sense that the latter, both historically and constitutionally, carries connotations of the country as a whole. Ontario used to have a Provincial Auditor, but I understand it also now has an "Auditor General".
What kind of self-important Laytonic overreach does this diseased nomenclature represent? It feels weird to have to point out that Toronto isn't a country by any standard, regardless of the delusions of the locals. Just for fun, I went onto the Toronto "National" website to see where the Auditor-General fit into the scheme of things and found that he/she was one of four or six "officers of City Council" (my expression) and that the Administrative Structure contained no fewer than 49 senior personnel at the Director level or above.
It strikes me that a piddly $2.1 million wasted on energy retrofits for arenas is the least of the problem here.
Rule of thumb for green policies: they are always based on BS and emotions. They are more about ideology than actual science and engineering. The costs grren energy are exorbitant with no return on investment. But when you are a lying, cheating leftist you don't think about the costs. In fact, you don't think at all! The left will just raise taxes and bleed industry and the working people dry to fund their windmills and solar panel schemes. The ends justify the means even if they starve us all to death in the process. To them the planet must be saved at all costs even if they kill themselves, and us, in the process.
I told you guys a few years ago about the "waterless urinals" that were put in the new "green" building at Innovation Place in Saskatoon.
Absolutely the most disgusting thing I had to deal with on a daily basis. Very analogous with the Left IMO.
A suspicious person would maybe look into what companies got these contracts, and maybe see if they gave any (totally, awesomely legal no doubt) contributions to any municipal politicians.
Know what I mean?
Posted by: Indiana Homez at June 26, 2012 5:18 PM
We also have waterless urinals in our new Lac La Biche "BOLD CENTER".
Just hold your breath when you use them.
This is nothing more than old-fashioned government incompetence, waste, graft and corruption. They do the same with non-green tech, but go ahead and blame the technology if it makes you feel better.
Working with low-energy residential designs for more than 30 years, we've proved that if it's done correctly the savings can be substantial compared with conventional house construction techniques. Super-insulation, airtight construction, heat recovery ventilation, passive solar, it's all been proven to be effective. We were building better houses for the North long before if was a fad to be 'green'.
LEED is mostly a scam
favill: "Don't we pay exorbitant taxes to these municipalities that employ engineering departments with huge staffs to figure out something I figured out by myself using the internet, a pencil, a pad and a calculator?'
Yup. And that's the whole point: a whole lotta people making a whole lotta money but who says any of it's going to be well-spent? "It's taxpayers' money, so big deal. They pay, I get rich, great setup."
This is Moron Miller's legacy. What a shyster. Now, he's employed by the UN to advise third-world countries how to run a city. The Peter Principle at work.