|
Written by Derek MacNeil-Blackmer
|
|
Sunday, 22 February 2009 00:57 |
Since the Central Heating Plant (CHP) was first proposed several years ago, public opinion of it has been high: due to its 30% decrease in green house emissions and fancy modern architecture, students and faculty alike have welcomed it as a new sign of a better UMass. As a feat of engineering it is quite remarkable: 46% more efficient than the old coal plant, positioned to better make use of local water supplies, and covering 45,000 square feet, the CHP is state of the art technologically, and makes use of natural gas to achieve this. However, this feat comes at a cost. Natural gas is far more expensive than coal, averaging $9 (and having reached $14) to deliver one million BTUs. Coal on the other hand costs between $1.50 and $5.80 to deliver the same amount of energy. Even with the added efficiency, natural gas costs 10% more on average. Since the CHP heats up some 1.2 billion pounds of water yearly and costs several million dollars to do so, this could easily result in hundreds of thousands, and possibly millions, of extra dollars a year. This could result in the University having to cut costs elsewhere, or cut back on heating during the winter and air conditioning during the summer. When combined with the CHP's final construction cost of $133 million, the University of Massachusetts (and, therefore, us students) could end up paying a lot more green to be 'green.'
Derek can be reached at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
|
0 