Loading...
Conservation Commission - 09/16/2008 APPROVED MINUTES CONSERVATION COMMISSION TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2008 7:00 PM CITY CENTER Collaboration Room 8080 Mitchell Road COMMISSION MEMBERS: Eapen Chacko (Chair), Ray Daniels, Laura Jester, Sean Katof, Geneva MacMillan, Jan Mosman STAFF: Leslie A. Stovring, Staff Liaison Paul Sticha, Facilities Manager Heidi Wojahn, Recording Secretary STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES: Vallari Ajgaonkar, Alexandra (Alex) Baumhardt, Michael (Paco) Caughill GUEST SPEAKERS: Greg Ackerson, Patrick Barribeau and Nate Nygaard — McKinstry Company Tim Goodman—Tim Goodman & Associates I. CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL Chair Chacko called the meeting to order at 7:10 pm. Katof and MacMillan were absent. Introductions took place a few minutes after the meeting began. II. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Approved as printed, no motion was taken. III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Deferred to the next meeting. IV. SPEAKERS A. McKinstry—20-40-15 Phase II Project Proposal Chair Chacko gave a very brief overview of the 20-40-15 Initiative, part of which calls for the City to improve energy efficiency in its facilities. McKinstry Company, a consulting firm specializing in construction, design, and facility services, has recommended and implemented a number of projects to help the City achieve the goals outlined in the 20-40-15 program (Phase 1). Company representatives were present to update the Commission on the status of Phases 1 and to present a plan for Phase 2. Daniels arrived at 7:15 p.m. McKinstry evaluates and quantifies Facility Improvement Measures (FIMS) for review and approval by staff and the Conservation Commission. The FIMS are then finalized Conservation Commission Minutes September 16, 2008 Page 2 and presented to the City Council. Phase II FIMS have already been presented to and approved by staff. Barribeau gave a quick status update on Phase I. A big portion of this phase included replacement of exterior lighting at the City Hall and Education Center. He encouraged attendees to check out the lights following the meeting. This is the same type of lighting being used on the new 35W bridge. Some of the old-style lighting was left on the pathways around the building for comparison. Another part of Phase I addressed interior lighting. The existing 32-watt lamps were replaced with 28-watt lamps. Most of the changeover is complete, but access in some areas has been limited. It's just a matter of working out a time when that work can be scheduled. Another part is an upgrade of the control system and installation of an emergency generator at Maintenance Building. In the Community Center pool and rink areas, fluorescent lamp fixtures were added which provide better diffused light and eliminate areas of shadow. . There is more flexibility now as to how many lights can be turned on. So, for example, during maintenance of the ice with the Zamboni, a minimal number of fixtures can be turned on. In addition, the old lamps needed time to warm up, whereas this is not the case with the new lamps. For Phase II the initial groundwork of identifying FIMS and gathering price quotes has been completed and is ready to go forward for approval and implementation. Nygaard introduced the recommended improvements for Phase II. One project is to take the same type of LED lighting in the parking lot and use it on the exterior of all City buildings. They're looking at as many different retrofit options as they can. Some can lights, such as in atriums, do not have a good LED retrofit option at this time. There's a lot of metal halide (white light) and high pressure sodium (yellow light) currently being used. A typical metal halide lamp has an approximate lifespan of 20,000 hours; an LED lamp is rated to last up to 5 times longer than that. The next FIM is to install a new desuperheater which is the heat exchanger coming off of a compressor. Capturing that heat and putting it under the slab of ice rink#1 will help prevent frost build-up which has caused the floor to heave in the past, which necessitated costly repairs. The heat will come from the refrigeration system which is used to cool the ice; therefore, no extra equipment, natural gas, or electricity needs to be added. This also allows the compressor to run more efficiently and will help melt ice dumped by the zamboni rather than having to use hot water. Another plan is to install thermal solar collectors at the Community Center to heat the pool. One of the main goals with this project is to help provide a community learning environment. The solar system being considered has an Eagle 2 controller which allows a data logger to be added onto it. Students will be able to track all sorts of live data with this active equipment that can be incorporated into school science curriculum. A link can also be added to the City's website. Conservation Commission Minutes September 16, 2008 Page 3 Ackerson relayed that the City Council was interested in the solar panel concept and wanted to know specifically how we could leverage that into the education of our children. Now that this solution has been developed, one of the next steps is to meet with the superintendent to develop support and to outline specific educational activities that might be pursued. Chair Chacko will work with Ackerson on this. Nygaard continued saying that since residents have watering restrictions, the City should also demonstrate being a good steward of water by installing water-saving devices wherever indicated. McKinstry is working with Scott Neal and Paul Sticha on developing a FIM to increase water-usage efficiency. Power factor correction has to do with demand at the maintenance facility and the amount of power coming in. Penalties are charged for low power factors. Installing a capacitor bank will correct that problem, thereby eliminating penalties. Mosman asked for an explanation of power factor. Barribeau explained that the impression exists that a power company has to provide more power than what is actually needed. For example, to Xcel Energy, if 20 watts of power is needed to do something, they have to put out 25 watts in order to make it happen. The difference is referred to as "dirty power". Xcel starts charging penalties when the power factor is 0.9; the maintenance shop has been in the 0.7-0.8 range. The capacitor evens that out and makes 20 watts look like 20 watts. Discussion ensued on the idea of installing an emergency generator at the Community Center to provide emergency lighting during a power outage to allow for a safe exit from the building as part of Phase 2. It will also keep equipment such as ice compressors and boilers running, so the expense of regaining lost ice doesn't become an issue. Retro-commissioning was listed as a FIM for Phase 2 also. This is similar to a tune-up for a car and consists of auditing all digital control systems to make sure they're calibrated and that all sequences are working properly. Ackerson said that normally they see a 5-20% reduction in energy consumption as a result of retro-commissioning efforts. They expect Eden Prairie to be on the low end of that because the City's facilities are already running fairly efficiently. The good new is that because this is a project that Xcel takes great interest in, they are willing to pay 75% of the cost (this is an additional 25% on top of their normal offering of 50%). Mosman inquired if there are similar opportunities like this made available to small businesses and residents. Ackerson replied that he is not aware of anything currently open to residents, but Xcel does offer a variety of rebates in different programs to its customers. Ackerson presented a draft of the Rough Order of Magnitude FIM Matrix. One of the keys to keeping the City's budget neutral is requiring a 15-year payback on average. The current draft shows a budgetary range of 13-18 year--after numbers are tweaked and finalized, this should end up in the 14-15 year range. The payback isn't great in terms of the desuperheater either, but there is a utility savings there. Sticha explained that the rink floor had to be rebuilt about 4 years ago to the tune of $500K. So in addition to energy savings, there is a measurable benefit in risk avoidance. Sticha described the complexity of rebuilding the rink floor. Frost had driven into the ground 10 feet; the solution was to drill 10 foot holes into the soil and drop hot Conservation Commission Minutes September 16, 2008 Page 4 water coils into the holes. It took $26,000 and 30 days just to remove the frost from the ground. His point was that there's a lot more to this than just energy savings. It's a project that must be done, because it will be a lot more costly if it is not. Discussion included moving this portion of Phase 2 to the general facilities budget. This would decrease the payback time period to about 11 years. McKinstry was unable to quantify energy savings for the 400kw emergency generator because they cannot predict number and length of outages, etc. They are in talks with an Xcel rep regarding heat rates to try to determine some utility savings. Sticha added that for some reason they have lost power at the Community Center every two months, on average. Outages have lasted anywhere from minutes to days. Not only are they losing ice when this happens, but they are losing revenue from people coming in for swim meets and hockey games. Daniels inquired about what makes the generator run, as he is always looking for ways to incorporate hydrogen. The generator runs on diesel. Hydrogen would be too expensive at this time, but McKinstry is working with the U of M - Morris on this and are a couple of years out on bringing it to fruition. Carbon reduction has been calculated for Phase I and will be for Phase II when it is finalized. This will be added to the chart presented to the City Council. Ackerson then solicited feedback. Jester recommended a column be added to the matrix listing ancillary benefits suggesting that it might be more helpful to someone looking at the matrix to have those explanations in front of them. Ackerson said he will work with staff to develop a summary of that information for inclusion in the Council packets. Nygaard added that the presentation to Council will include a preface to the data that will address the history behind some of these things and the intrinsic value of why they should be done other than just for financial reasons. MOTION: Jester moved, seconded by Mosman, to approve the Phase II initiatives as recommended. Motion carried 4-0. B. Tim Goodman & Associates—Recyclini! 1. Single-Sort vs. Traditional Sortin! Chair Chacko introduced Tim Goodman, a consultant to several cities, school districts, and other companies and organizations evaluating recycling methods and benefits. Goodman said single-stream (one-sort) vs. dual-stream (two-sort) recycling is a very hot topic nationwide. There has been a lot of discussion on the collection side, but not much on the processing and marketing impacts of recycling methods. Goodman explained the definition of Recycling per Minnesota rules as well as other recycling terminology. He then reviewed the pros and cons of single-stream collection. Typically single-stream incurs less cost on the collection side than dual-stream due, in part, to reduced staff and the truck staying on the route longer. For example, in dual-stream collection, inevitably one compartment of the truck will Conservation Commission Minutes September 16, 2008 Page 5 fill up faster than the other so the truck has to leave the route to dump that load at the Materials Recovery Facility (MRF). Some of the disadvantages include higher contamination rates and collection of an increased quantity of non- recyclable materials. Next he reviewed residual rates as reported by local MRFs. Some of these numbers have changed since the presentation was prepared, for example Eureka Recycling's rate is actually closer to 2% because they were not accounting for a recently-installed optical glass sorter. Stovring also stated that Allied Waste has a new facility that is reporting residual rates of 3.8% due to the increased efficiency of the newer equipment. Goodman agreed that their numbers are encouraging. Waste Management is currently using mixed broken glass for aggregate in their landfills as a beneficial reuse. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) defines this as recycling, although Goodman does not agree (quoting the Minnesota rules) because the material is not being reused as another glass container. By excluding the use of mixed broken glass for aggregate as a recycled material, Waste Management's residual rate would be closer to 22%. Goodman stated that there has been a significant decrease in the availability of clean, color-separated glass since the introduction of single-stream recycling. Single stream recycling has been perceived as more convenient for residents since everything can be thrown into one bin without sorting. Collection rates have increased as a result. However, the residual rates do tend to be higher with single-stream sorting. A couple years ago, 6 out of 7 companies he interviewed had seen more contamination and a decline in quality of the recyclable materials, such as broken glass mixed in with paper. However, other problems include increased use of items such as glued Post-it Notes and envelopes and the glue does impact their lines. There is also an increase of non-recyclable materials being placed in the single-stream bins (such as Pyrex, margarine tubs or pizza boxes). Next he cited a presentation by Abitibi-Bowater, a large paper conglomerate, given to the Association of Municipal Recycling Coordinators (AMRC) in Canada. Basically, the Thorold Paper Mill has seen an increase in the percentage of non-fibrous materials (such as broken glass, crushed cans, plastics, etc.) in the paper, which in turn creates increased costs for production and higher rejection rates for materials going into recycled papers. Despite complaints from various markets concerning single-stream recycling, 75% of paper mills in Goodman's study admitted that they have received both good loads and bad loads from collectors, whether from single-stream or dual- stream. Not all dual-stream loads are clean or well-sorted and some single- stream loads provide good sources of paper. However, they maintained that single-stream still creates more problems over-all. Conservation Commission Minutes September 16, 2008 Page 6 Goodman also discussed the definition of recycling. Measuring recycling by what's being collected is not a true reflection of what's actually being recycled. Collecting materials at curbside, in and of itself, is not recycling. Recycling involves collection, sorting at an MRF, and sale of the metal, paper, glass and plastic materials to companies that can recycle them into high value uses, such as food and beverage containers and office papers. In summary, when it comes to determining which is the better system (single or dual-stream), the answer is really contingent on a variety of factors depending on the individual community. Stovring agreed that glass recycling has been a source of frustration and as a result some of the glass recyclers are going out of business because of their inability to get consistent volumes of good material. Goodman replied that Anchor Glass is one of those companies that has gone through multiple bouts of bankruptcy; and, although they're solvent right now, they are having a hard time meeting their glass needs locally and are having to get it from out-state sources, which raises their costs. Jester recalled returning glass bottles as a child to the store for a refund. Goodman said 8 or 9 states currently have bottle laws in place, and they do have higher glass recycling rates. Stovring said glass is making a bit of a comeback because people like the taste better,but aluminum would also have to be included in a deposit program otherwise people would consider returning glass bottles inconvenient. Goodman explains that the beverage industry is very politically connected and strong, and both they and the grocery industry have lobbied against deposit laws and taking back bottles and cans in their stores. It's also a concern for communities with curbside programs because once a deposit program is in place; they will start to see a decrease in container collection thus losing some of their income. The issue seems to be debated in Minnesota every couple of years. Daniels stated that it seems there is a need for more sorting efficiency on the processing line. Goodman explained that some of the glass is broken in collection, some in dumping, and some in the feeding stage. The optical sorter can select out glass by color and works best when glass is 5/8" or larger. A lot of the glass shards are too small, so much of it is lost. Another downside is optical sorters are very expensive. Daniels asked what plastics are considered as recyclable. Goodman said that as far as plastics are concerned, mainly numbers 1 and 2 are considered acceptable. Other plastics are technically recyclable,but the numbers can't be mixed together due to different characteristics plus there's not much of a market for them here. Stovring said that Allied Waste is looking into accepting margarine tubs. 2. RecycleBank Stovring distributed a couple of articles on RecycleBank which is an incentive program that rewards residents with vouchers good at local businesses and Conservation Commission Minutes September 16, 2008 Page 7 national chain stores based on how much they recycle (determined by weight). Stovring announced that Allied Waste has signed an exclusive contract with RecycleBank to expand this program nationwide. Allied Waste has started installing infrared chips on their recycling bins this week. The weight of the recyclable materials will be averaged by route rather than by individual household. The RecycleBank program reports that a typical family can earn $20-30 per month in points. The concern is that users will start to throw rocks or trash in the bins just to pad the weight. That is a risk, but they have found that very few will do this as it is seen as dishonest by their neighbors. Chair Chacko thanked Goodman for his presentation and requested that copies of his materials be included in the Friday envelope for Council. V. REPORTS FROM STAFF A. Winter Newsletter Stovring said that MacMillan is still on vacation with her family and is unable to write an article on "Paper vs. Plastic —Why Not Cloth?" and asked for an alternate volunteer. Daniels stated he will take on this task and inquired about the deadline and word count. The paper is due in one week and it can be similar in length to Chair Chacko's article. Stovring would like to add something storm water-related to the newsletter, as well. VI. REPORTS FROM CHAIR A. Commission Charter Review (October) 1. Review of Backsround Documents Chair Chacko reminded the commission that the charter review is scheduled for next month's meeting. Each member should have the following handouts: a copy of the existing charter, the 2008 Work Plan, and the U.S Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. Chair Chacko will send Stovring another copy of the Best Practices Report for distribution. Stovring stated she had not received it the first time around likely due to the fact that she's been having some problems with her email. The Best Practices Report is a means of comparing what other cities are doing. 2. Goals for Review Process Chair Chacko said that the reason for the review is that some of the elements were too broadly formulated or else they belonged more properly to other commissions such as Parks. He directed the Commission members to gather their specific thoughts together on what a revised charter should look like. Stovring stated that Public Works Director, Gene Dietz, will lead a discussion of this item; therefore, everyone should come prepared to discuss this topic. Stovring added that Dietz also wants to address the idea of energy/ conservation rebates and how to get funding for that. There will be a city survey containing a Conservation Commission Minutes September 16, 2008 Page 8 question related to this along the lines of"If the City develops a program to assist or rebate energy conservation measures (including change a light, programmable thermostats, and energy audits), would you be willing to add a $1.00 to your utility bill to regenerate funding?" VII. OLD BUSINESS A. Sunbonnet Days—Recycling Results Daniels, Jester, and Mosman reported that they had inclement weather and a poor turnout for Sunbonnet Days. There were some problems with recycling--the bins were difficult to monitor, and due to their depth, it was difficult to retrieve materials from the recycling containers that did not belong. They needed to be tipped over and dumped out to accomplish this. In the future we may want to use containers with a small round opening on top so it's more obvious to users that they are intended just for recycling. Stovring stated that the bins had been supplied at no cost and apologized for not communicating more clearly that there wasn't cause for concern if some paper plates and a little bit of food waste got inadvertently mixed in with the recyclables. VIII.NEW BUSINESS Daniels reported that Xcel Energy is developing its first wind farm in Minnesota. Grand Meadow Wind Farm's location is south of Rochester. IX. INFORMATIONAL MATERIALS/HANDOUTS/COMMUNICATIONS Stovring referred to the Geothermal Heating and Cooling Systems handout which is a DNR publication covering the environmental impacts and the pros and cons of different types of geothermal systems. She thought it would be a timely piece of information to share since this has been a recent hot topic. X. UPCOMING EVENTS XI. NEXT MEETING A. OCTOBER 14,2008 XII. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Mosman moved, seconded by Jester, to adjourn. Motion carried 4-0. Chair Chacko adjourned the meeting at 9:24 pm.