The Future of Con Ed's IRT Powerhouse

Anyone who goes to the area around 60th St. and West End Ave. in Manhattan immediately notices what's right in front of them: a big parking lot, a big pile of dirt, and a hole that lets you see the underground train tracks. This is the site owned by Extell and its backers (the Carlyle Group and now a mortgage from a group in Oman). The site is the last undeveloped part of the Riverside South development, and has been dubbed Riverside Center by Extell & Co. It is the site they plan to overbuild by a huge amount, blasting by prior agreements with the community, agreements they knowingly assumed when buying the property.

The next thing you are likely to notice is the amazing IRT Powerhouse building bordering the south edge of the property.

This historic building has been the focus of major preservation efforts. There is a group devoted to its preservation, the Hudson River Powerhouse Group, whose web site has a wealth of information, plus some new videos that are informative and entertaining. The Riverside South Planning Corporation has also devoted a lot of effort to the preservation of the building and in particular the way it could be integrated into a more community-friendly version of the plans for Riverside Center. The Coalition for a Livable Upper West Side has incorporated the building into their alternative proposals for the site.

Marta Hallowell has been paying attention to the building on her blog in the Huffington Post. Most recently, she has written about Mayor Bloomberg seeing the possibilities for the Powerhouse and joining the effort to preserve the building while making it into a cultural center and highly efficient energy plant to supply the area with steam and electricity.

Comments

[p]

A message for Marta:

Burning natural gas and co-generation are two different issues. Some or all of Con Edison's existing boilers already burn natural gas (as well as oil). Con Edison could burn more natural gas in those boilers regardless of whether it switches to co-generation.

The steam system (as opposed to the electric system) does not waste half the energy burned. Steam boilers are probably at least 70% energy efficient. On the other hand, co-generation can only be more energy efficient than normal electric generation if the waste steam is put to use. Because the steam system has much a higher peaking characteristic than the electric system (i.e. a lower base load relative to the peak), it cannot use the the waste steam from a new co-generation plant much of the time. The unused steam will be wasted just as at a normal electric generation plan. Thus the increase in energy efficiency from installing co-generation at a Con Edison steam plant will be somewhat ephemeral.

[p]

A message for Marta (updated):

Burning natural gas and co-generation are two different issues. Some or all of Con Edison's existing boilers already burn natural gas (as well as oil). Con Edison could burn more natural gas in those boilers regardless of whether it switches to co-generation.

The steam system (as opposed to the electric system) does not waste half the energy burned. Steam boilers are probably at least 70% energy efficient. On the other hand, co-generation (up to 90% energy efficient) can only be more energy efficient than normal electric generation (30-50% energy efficient) if the waste steam is put to use. Because the steam system has much a higher peaking characteristic than the electric system (i.e. a lower base load relative to the peak), it cannot use the the waste steam from a new co-generation plant much of the time. The unused steam will be wasted just as at a normal electric generation plan. Thus the increase in energy efficiency from installing co-generation at a Con Edison steam plant will be somewhat ephemeral.