Motion sensors are already in use in many office building bathrooms. They motion on; time off.
Electricians are fairly well paid, but central maintenance electricians would cost the firm no where near $100/hr.
Your talking about replacing T12bulbs(regular typically 40 watt) with T8bulbs(thinner typically 32 watt) T12 and T8s use different transformers(ballasts) if you simply swap one for the other they may or may not work in the short term, but it will eventually blow the transformer. In that time I’m not sure if you actually save any energy
When updating from T12’s to t8’s you have to replace the transformers as well. It is worth while to do this if you have enough fixtures to be cost effective. While T8 bulbs are more efficient and tend to last longer they cost about 4 times as much.
No, you’re thinking of the cheap, conventional rheostat dimmers. They’re just big resistors turning electricity into heat. Triac style dimmer switches don’t do this. Okay, it’s a semiconductor, so there’s a negligable amount of heat loss at 100 W (the SCR’s at work are water cooled, but that’s several thousand amps). Triacs (SCR’s, etc) work by turning on the current at a certain phase angle. When they’re not on, there’s no power consumed and no heat generated. The circuitry that makes them work, though, requires power, which a lot of light switches aren’t wired for (err, hot and common both connected to the device). If you’re working with incandescents, though, you can get power across the filament.
So turn the damned thermostat up! I mean, good lord, don’t you people ever wonder why the women wear a sweater and have a heater? Take your damned jacket off and turn the heat up!
Unless you work in some stupidly designed building, built by Floridians not in Florida, where there’s no heat at all, it just works on body heat and lights and such. There’s another library in town like that, only it’s mostly underground and not made largely out of glass. The air runs year round here. You’re damned right I have a heater.
This would be my current status, that of maintenance electrician for a 1 million sq foot facility of a fortune 500 company, with about 1,000 employees on site.
We have done so many things as far as energy savings here that it boggles the mind. I’d like to entertain the OP but I would like more information as far as specifics of the operations of the company.
I’d like to respond to specific questions since it seems like the general topics have been brought up already.
OP, fire away when ready!
Maybe. Let’s say they make $30 an hour. There’s Social Security on top of that, and then workers’ comp., and then pension fund contributions, unemployment insurance, contributions to the MegaCo-Union joint childcare fund, payroll taxes, health insurance, legal insurance, dental insurance, optical insurance, and other things we just call “fringe.” Hourly wages aren’t of necessity the best indicator of the true cost of an employee.
Then there’s the delayed cost of the work they would be doing if not removing light bulbs.
I think the company I work for pays my contractor about $60/hr to have me here. They’re making small change by having me here but the extra work they get makes up for it.
I know a little about this…
I’m a licensed contractor—licensed in Electrical, Plumbing and HVAC. Generally we consider a factor of 1.4 of wages for FICA, SUI, FUTA etc. So…a $25/hr Electrician is costed as $35/hr for estimate purposes. We do not generally include 401K contributions, vacation days etc as they’r generally costed under SG&A on most P&Ls. Even if they were, there is no way they’s amount to $65 per hour.
Most electrical contractors don’t sell labor at retail for $100/hr. I would imagine that most electrical contractors sell labor between $60-85/hr and make a decent profit along the way. But in most heavily unionized plants labor still doesn’t cost $100/hr.
“Delayed” cost, or opportunity cost isn’t a real cost, especially if the electrician is on staff already. That electrician is a cost center, not a profit center.
In my area a 100 dollars an hour is the going rate to have an electrician come to your home or office to do work. The guy I occasionally apprentice for is one of the cheaper ones and he charges $80-90/hr.
As a well water professional I bill out at $110/hr
You actually make my point. You’re desribing an electrician sold at retail. An on-site, on the payroll maintenance electrician isn’t costing his employer anywhere near $100. In many areas skilled trades get $100, for electricans, HVAC and plumbers,. The local Roto-Rooter Franchisee is charging $135 hour.
Still, the national average is lower, and probably closer to $60-85. I personally know electricians who get $100/hr and we do sometimes. More regularly we get $100 for HVAC work. (controls, refrigeration etc) But I still submit, as I said, “Most electrical contractors don’t sell labor at retail for $100/hr…”
Turn off the printers and throw the damn things out the window.
No one needs to do as much printing as they do.
Aside from the fact that they’re $100 or less, it still begs the question what the hell kind of savings are you going to get by removing a few fluorescent bulbs having paid hundreds of dollars to do so?
Electricians “sold at retail” don’t have the same benefits and costs as an industrial electrician, and especially if they’re UAW. All of our skilled trades (three years ago) in US plants were budgeted for $100 per hour as cost. Non-skilled workers were presumably less, but I didn’t manage them. If UAW skilled trades could run out and get the same pay and benefits and not have to work in a plant, we’d have a hard time retaining good skilled trades.
Reread my post. My only point was that the true “cost” of those electricians was no where near $100/hr. The poster noticed electricians changing light bulbs, and doing some calculations noted that it couldn’t be cost effective—in large part because they were costing the company $100/hr. It could still be true that it is not worth the cost (although I doubt the rationale) but in any event, those electricians were not outside contractors but on site mainenance electricians. They are a semi fixed cost. They haven’t been brought in from outside. They’re going to be paid because they’re on the payroll anyway. Is pulling bulbs the best use of their time? I don’t know.
In any event, it is a worthy excercise to determine whether this is an effective use of their time. But it is still true that in an office building those onsite maintenance electricians weren’t costing the owners $100/hr. Period.
The poster referenced “central maintenance electricians” in an office building. Earlier you spoke of outside contractors getting $100 at retail, which is not the same as “cost.” I submit that a UAW electrician isn’t costing GM $100/hr either, but that’s not relevant.
Some contractors are getting $100/hr at retail. But no contractor would last long charging $100/hr if his true cost was $100/hr. He’d either need to charge $140/hr (which the market wouldn’t allow) or reduce his costs.
Your question, “it still begs the question what the hell kind of savings are you going to get by removing a few fluorescent bulbs having paid hundreds of dollars to do so?” is valid, and it is necessary to evaluate the return on any investment. (in this case the lower utility cost return vs the electricians labor cost investment)
But if those electricians are on the payroll anyway, and if those activities are part og an ongoing process of identifying opportunities to reduce energy*, than removing those bulbs might have been an effective use of their time.
(*any single event—those elecrericians might be installing motion sensors in the bathrooms tomorrow----may not be “cost effective”. But if the electricians and HVAC people must be on site anyway, and if these type of activities are done during what might otherwise be downtime, (and in GM plants downtime usually means reading the newspaper) than I think it might be a very good idea.)
Thanks for all your responses. Keep em coming (though I think we’ve exhausted electrician’s pay scales in the context)
jjimm: The website looks very useful. I’m checking to see if anyone’s been through it in detail already. If not, I will
On lighting we’re doing most of the stuff mentioned already, though we don’t leave people in the dark on the toilet. Removing light bulbs might be possible in some areas.
Tastes of Chocolate: We definitely need to think about making sure people turn off computers. We also need to think about how we can reduce waste from other electrical equipment (printers, network, chargers, TVs, phones).
Does anyone know any ideas which work well for getting people to remember to turn off personal appliances?
Does anyone know techniques for reducing wastage from IT infrastructure?
crazyjoe: The roof isn’t suitable for grass and, I think trying to improve our insulation will be an uphill battle with the landlords. However, the office is a quite large 7 story building. Our surface area is fairly small for the volume and the height allows us to make some use of rising heat.
I’ll ask about the air conditioning and avoiding simple losses, such as windows being left open.
zelie zelerton: We are very much trying to think out of the box. The aim is to reduce our overall carbon footprint - I just happen to be helping the team working to reduce energy usage within the office at this stage.
I’d prefer to keep the thread focused on this area for now, but I’ll answer the points you’ve raised already - I may start another thread if people want to talk beyond direct energy usage:
We’re in central London - I can’t think of anyone in the office who comes to work by car. Travel outside London is another very big question that we’ve got a team on.
I think other teams will be looking at suppliers. We use a Fairtrade coffee supplier - I’m not going to pitch Fairtrade against low carbon in this thread.
We need to improve recycling - we do get our waste separated but could do more at source. Any ideas for how to get people interested?
I’ll ask about maintenance, but my impression is that we’re pretty good at it.
We are certainly looking at energy sourcing - another smaller office buys renewable energy already and we’d like to get that going for the main one. Most of the stuff I’m hearing on microgeneration is fairly negative nowadays. As I understand it, investing in larger projects is more effective. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
Uncommon Sense: I’ve given a few specific questions above. But what I’m hoping for is practical and creative ideas that I haven’t thought of already. Examples of how you’ve managed to get people involved in similar schemes would be ideal.
Ah, yes… that’s a very good point that I didn’t mention directly. Clearly they’d be on the payroll anyway. This gets us into deeper management concerns outside the scope of the OP, though (as you alluded to, why are they on the payroll if there’s so much downtime and so on).
Here we’ve banned most appliances, heaters, ovens, microwaves, small fridges, etc. The only ones that are allowed are the ones supplied by the company in certain areas of the facility.
Also, we’ve consolidiated the IT infrastructure into one single area of the building. That cuts back on UPS units needed, AC for the servers, IT personel legwork is reduced, and then closets and rooms that once held crucial network equipment were locked up (or used for storage) and the lights turned off.
Well, we’ve installed timers on just about anything electric. Water heaters, compressors, cirulating pumps, etc. All of the lighting in the building is being converted from the T-12 lamps to the T-8 or T-5 lamps so save energy there. We’ve also automated (with motion and daylight sensors coupled with timers) just about all the lighting on the complex. That includes outside lighting, signs, parking lighting, etc. Heating and cooling should be set back during off hours too.
Take weekends and holidays into the equation too.
Some of the largest energy hogs will be in the ‘out of sight’ areas such as utility rooms and basements. You may just want to do a complete site survey and walk-through to determine how to even begin an energy audit. At least you’ll know what components you are dealing with.
Sounds like you work in an office environment? You may already be at a 90% energy savings level once you start to look at everything. IOW, going the extra mile to save that last 10% may not be cost effective for the company.
I think the biggest things you will be able to cut back on will be the lighting and computer useage. Updating the lighting has an immediate affect on your power bill and prabably about a 5-7 year pay back depending on how fancy you go and if the local Utility has any kickbacks to offer under an energy saving program < that’s another area to explore.
Is there a way IT can set the PCs up so that they power down after an hour of innactivity? Ours here are locked so I can’t change the power settings, IOW the monitor and the harddrives turn off after a set time and the user can’t change that. Look into that.
Water heaters don’t need to be on at night or on the weekends, neither do the circulating pumps. Even if you have a skeleton crew there at night or on the weekend they don’t need hot water.
Also, exhaust fans throughout the building may be running non-stop. Get these on motion sensors (with the lighting) and timers also < big waste there that no-one ever notices.
We also do manufacturing here so that adds about a ton of other things that can be adjusted, timed, and modified to save energy.
You’ll just have to do a little digging to uncover the possible energy savings.
Some newer buildings are installing a system that includes individual HVAC. This basically means installing along with the electrical conduits to each desk, 2 flexible tubes for heated & cooled air. These are connected to individual controls (often just manually operated louvers), generally 1 at foot level under the desk, and one at desktop or head level.
This allows each person to set the heat/cooling/ventilation level just the way they want it at their own desk, and to adjust it any time they wish. This individual control usually eliminates people bringing in their own personal heaters & fans, thus cutting energy use. And it keeps employees happy, too.
But this is probably not feasible except when the whole office is being re-done, with the whole wiring & hvac system revamped. But it seems a worthwhile investment at such times.
For individual PC’s, the most effective way I’ve seen is to provide something useful to the employee if they do this.
For example, one place I worked had a end-of-day shutdown procedure, which employees were encouraged to start running when they were ready to go home. It ran unattended, so you just went home and let it do the following:[ul]
[li]made a backup copy of all their data to a network drive [/li][li]checked for & applied any patches/updates for their installed software[/li][li]did a virus/adware scan of their computer[/li][li]did a disk cleanup, erasing temp files, caches, etc.[/li][li]ran a reorg of their hard disk (if needed)[/li][li]probably more tech stuff we didn’t know about.[/li][li]Finally, it powered down the computer for the night.[/li][/ul] The first item was the big incentive for employees, since there was an easy way to recover a file from these backups when needed. The other stuff was helpful too, but mostly for the computer techs.
Because of the backup incentive, most employees started this shutdown procedure every night before they went home. So most machines were powered off at night. Without any management orders or threats at all – just making it more convenient for employees to do it that way was enough.
Agreed. Many companies keep more people than they really need and satisfy themselves that people look busy—when it is nothing more than busy work.