 Good evening everyone we're just going to give it a few more minutes for folks to join and we'll probably start in about four or five minutes. Thanks for joining. Thanks everyone so much for joining us tonight we're just going to give it one more minute for people to join but while we're waiting. Feel free to put your name and which borough you're joining us from tonight in the chat so we can get to know each other a little bit tonight. Great. Well I think we can go ahead and get started. Hi everyone. My name is cloudy of you dad Lehman I'm an energy policy advisor at the New York City Mayor's Office of climate and environmental justice. And thanks so much for joining us tonight to talk about the city's energy transition. This is the second of our two technical sessions we had one last night and I see at least one or two familiar names so thanks to those of you who are here to repeat joiners and welcome to all the new people as well. So a quick overview of tonight I'll kick us off with a brief overview of New York City's energy goals and how the power up NYC initiative fits into that and then I'll pass it over to our consultant team at E3 to get into the specifics of the research topics that we're going to focus on today, related to electrifying buildings and transportation. So I am fortunate enough to work in the city of New York where I was born and raised on the next slide you'll see our commitments. The New York New York City is taking the climate crisis seriously and we have a goal to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, which includes 100% clean electricity by 2040. And a goal to ensure that as we transition to clean energy that we do so equitably, and that we're really prioritizing for example clean air and healthier environments for frontline communities, and enabling broader participation in energy planning which is part of the reason that we're here today. So affordability is a key goal when it comes to the clean energy transition. Right now, energy continues to be deeply unaffordable in the city. We have one and a half million residents who are paying too large of a percentage of their income on energy bills having trouble affording paying for energy, known as energy cost burden. There's an opportunity in this transition to change that and make costs more affordable for residents, and really directing the savings of the clean energy transition toward those who need it most. So as we're balancing sustainability and making sure it's equitable making sure it's affordable. We also need to make sure we're maintaining a reliable and resilient energy system, even as we're bringing on more solar and wind onto the grid. So climate impacts are intensifying. So we're really thinking about preparing for these impacts holistically as we decarbonize. Next slide, a little bit about our office. So I mentioned I work for the Office of Climate and Environmental Justice. This brings together the previously separate offices of sustainability and resiliency together to really think holistically about climate mitigation and adaptation through a justice lens. So society has had a long history of pushing disproportionate share of environmental burdens onto communities with a majority of low income residents of communities of color. This is with the least amount of political power and also the least contribution to environmental degradation. So our office is focused on environmental justice and really working to address these inequities by ensuring access and inclusion for people throughout the planning process and really closing the gap on exposure to environmental and health hazards, including in our air quality. Climate justice sort of takes this one step further to recognize that these same historically overburdened communities that are also most vulnerable to a rapidly changing climate. So climate change really tends to exacerbate existing socioeconomic and health inequities. So frontline communities really need to be prioritized in this transition and so we're thinking about how best to do that when it comes to energy. A little bit more about what the energy transition entails on the next slide. You'll see the three pillars that are generally accepted of how we're actually going to make this happen. So the first step is reducing demand, the less energy we use than less new clean energy resources we need to build and pay for. Energy efficiency can really range from something as simple as installing high efficiency light bulbs like are shown here. This is green city force handing these out in the Bronx. Or it could be a more complicated weatherization process like upgrading to more efficient windows improving your insulation, things like that. The second pillar is switching to electricity. So whether that's heating your building with electric heat pumps instead of natural gas boilers or switching to electric buses instead of diesel ones like the one shown here on 42nd street. And then finally, making sure that all that new electricity that we're using to now power all of our buildings and transportation is clean. So New York State mandate 70% clean by 2030 and 100% clean by 2040. So I'll just pause to note how enormous a task this is the energy industry has not really changed significantly since its inception over 100 years ago. And now it needs to be completely transformed really quickly. So things are moving. And there's really exciting ambitious new initiatives and funding available at the federal level at the state level. And it's a really exciting time to be thinking about how do we accelerate this transition and make it unfold in such a way that it's more equitable than the one that we've had to date. So that leads me to power up, which is the city's energy plan. It's an inclusive planning process for the energy transition, and it's really based on two pieces. First engagement and second is research. So first, really understanding and fighting for New Yorkers priorities when it comes to the energy transition is what we're intending to do with this project so we partnered with five exceptional community based organizations throughout the five boroughs shown on the map here, with their feedback and are still receiving their feedback as well as leaned on their expertise and their community trust and on the ground networks that they've already developed within their communities to help engage more New Yorkers in this important conversation. And then the second piece of this process is of course research and modeling. We've already been done a lot of analysis done on, you know, understanding what next steps need to be taken both at the city's level and at the state level to meet our goals. So we really wanted to make sure we weren't reinventing the wheel. We wanted to build off of what we do already know and then identify and develop some deep dive research topics that help fill in the gaps where lack of understanding is really stopping us from making actionable decisions. So you'll hear a little bit more about that research to fill in the gaps tonight. And then in terms of where we're headed, we're aiming to publish a report this April 2023 that outlines specific strategies that New York City is going to take in the near term to advance an equitable energy transition. This will be the first energy plan but not the last. So we're required by local law to publish an energy plan every four years, which is good because this is going to take a lot of iteration and what's needed now is probably going to be different than what's needed in eight or 12 years. So it's a it's a long process, but it's a very exciting one so we're glad that you're in it with us. So today we're going to talk about the research questions related to electrification of buildings and transportation and how that impacts the grid. Feel free at any point to add your questions in the chat we want to make sure that this is as interactive as possible and we're happy to answer questions as we go. With that I'm happy to introduce Zach Cittilli who is the lead consultant on this project at the firm energy and environmental economics or E3 and he'll kick off our discussion on the research. Thanks Claudia and good evening, especially for those who are joining us for a second night in a row. Tonight we have three topics last night we had three last night we spoke about energy storage public lands. And tonight we're going to focus on electrification as Claudia mentioned so there'll be three topics and three separate speakers will break in between each topic and allow time for q amp a I'd also encourage folks during the presentation. And I'll comment start putting them in the chat so that we can prepare ourselves for questions at the end and then certainly we'll leave time for anybody who wants to raise hands or ask follow on questions. So the first presentation tonight will be about building electrification. We're going to be focusing in on not only the feasibility and the cost of heat pumps but also zeroing in on affordability challenges that we see in rent stabilized multi family in the second topic we'll be talking about transportation electrification and here again we're focused on one aspect of transportation electrification tonight we'll be focusing on the rapid electrification of our school bus fleet in the city. And then our last topic is really a combination of the two as we electrify both buildings and transportation. We want to assess the reliability and the resiliency of the city's grid. And then we'll move into the future. So without any further hesitation I'm going to introduce a colleague of mine Jared landsman who's going to cover the first topic. This topic will probably be the longest presentation of the night so roughly 15 the 20 minutes with time for q amp a, and then the next two presentations be roughly about 15 minutes each just we have a sense of the flow tonight. Feel free to take us away and all events slides so just queue me up when you need me to. Awesome. Thanks. Yeah, so as I said I'm Jared landsman. So I'm going to talk about two of our research topics today that we've been working on for the last few months, both related to building electrification. So the first one that I'd like to talk about is our research into understanding how to address electrification affordability in New York City. And so we're specifically looking at research questions around what were sort of the common barriers to building electrification in a specific group of the building stock across the city which is rent regulated unsubsidized housing. And this actually accounts for a pretty large portion of the housing across the city. So it has some some interesting barriers that come up that are pretty specific to this portion of the building stock. We understand what factors can help can are currently exacerbating or could actually help alleviate the cost burden that residents will see from electrifying their their homes and specifically within this rent regulated unsubsidized housing stock. And then we're also trying to understand sort of scaling up. So what does it actually take for what kind of investment gap would be required for the city to actually be able to electrify this this portion of the building stock. Already thinking about the fact that there are a number of state and federal programs that can be leveraged to close that gap. And we're trying to figure out what else could the city focus on and what other actions could be taken help close that gap. Once those programs have sort of been used up. So we're looking at addressing these affordability challenges in a few different ways so this is just sort of a very high level understanding of our approach. So the first portion of this research is as I said really trying to understand that citywide investment gap for electrification of this portion of the building stock. And there's a number of different things that have to be considered that sort of go into this equation of calculating that gap. So there's a number of costs from electric associated with electrification. Obviously the upfront costs of equipment. Heat pumps can tend to be more expensive than standard sort of current typical equipment. And then also specific to this portion of the building stock we see that there's often a barrier of additional upfront costs that come from health and safety repairs. So these are not necessarily associated with electrification but can pose a barrier to electrification. And then obviously we know that like due just due to the cost of electricity and gas there can often be an increase in the electric bill from electrification. On the other side we have obviously a number of benefits that can come from this so there's as I said a number of existing federal and state incentives for electrification and weatherization. There's also a number of different tax credits financing options that are available to building owners to pursue this route. And then also with the new implementation of local 97. We see that there's some benefits that can come from lowering any potential penalties that might be incurred from local 97. And then obviously the elimination or reduction of fuel bills. Taking all these into account we're trying to figure out what is that that gap that that sort of comes from the result of this for all the different customer typologies within the city. And then on the other side we're really focusing on the customers themselves and trying to understand what kind of energy cost burden might come out of the electrification of this low income building stock. And so for this we're really trying to consider different ownership structures that exist across the city within this building stock so obviously there's there's different rate structures there's different availability of bill assistance for different types of customers. And then there's also different just types of utility incentive programs that exist so essentially what this comes out to is the final equation is what what is the energy bill that a customer might see after accounting for any sort of bill assistance and then sort of understanding what portion of a typical customer's income does that energy bill come out to. And that's how we are viewing our energy burden. Next slide. So as I said, we were focusing on the unsubsidized rent stabilized affordable housing stock. And as you can see from this graph on the right this actually does account for a pretty large portion of the renter housing across the city, almost 50%. So we've sort of felt that the market rate housing had been pretty sufficiently studied in a number of different studies over the last few years, and that public housing in the city has sort of its own specific processes. So this portion of the building stock had not really adequately been researched before and we thought it faced some unique challenges that would be interesting to analyze. Yeah, so as I said it's about the second largest housing sector for renters. If you want to go to the next slide. So on the other side of things as I mentioned, we are looking at two different topics for building electrification so the, the other topic is more focused on assessing the feasibility and cost of heat pumps. And this is really focusing on new construction. And this this sort of this research goal came out of the need to understand implications and feasibility of local law 154 compliance. And so to really understand this basically we are modeling different representative New York City building typologies. We're trying to understand how very specific technologies perform with regard to cost and emissions reduction. If they were to switch from typical system to a electrified system. So the specific systems we're looking at are listed below right there. Going to go to the next one. And just to sort of look at all this from a pretty high level, the two different topics we're looking at. The affordability topic really focused on multifamily existing building retrofits. And for this we're looking at the electrification of all different appliances for both space eating water heating and cook tops. And we're doing sort of a full lifecycle cost analysis, in addition to cost burden analysis, and really trying to understand the citywide financing requirements. And local law 154 topic this is really came out of the passing of the law and this is actually required by the local law. We're going to look at all the different building typologies for that one with a focus on new construction, space heating and water heating, and really understanding life cycle costs energy performance and emissions. All right. So just to do a little bit of a deep dive just to give you a sense of some preliminary results we're seeing from our analysis. I'm going to go first into some details on the citywide investment gap and then I'll talk a little bit about the energy burden analysis. Here's sort of just an example here of one specific customer or building typology within this building stock so a pre war building that is less than a fairly small pre war building. That has 10 units and it's about 15,000 square feet that currently has gas and would be switching to an all electric system. So basically first these customers would incur some costs as I mentioned due to sort of unforeseen health safety costs that could come out as as a barrier prior to electrification. And then obviously there's the incremental upfront cost for the electrified equipment itself. You want to go to the next one. And then as I said there's sort of all the changes that come out of the utility bills so we would anticipate there being a pretty high penalty for the incremental electric bill, and then there would be some benefit of the avoided gas bill. So we can see here, all the dollars here presented in $2022 per unit or per apartment. So just for this example building we can see that electrification poses a pretty substantial barrier. This is about $75,000 per unit. Now there are already some ways that we can reduce that cost gap if you want to go to the next slide. So as I said there are a number of existing state and federal programs for electrification to provide incentives tax credits and some upfront loans. And that does pretty substantially reduce that gap. But obviously there's still quite a large number after that. In addition there's an opportunity to sort of pair your electrification with a shell upgrade. So although shell upgrade does have a pretty substantial cost of its own. It allows for a smaller heat pump size which helps reduce some upfront costs can help reduce that electric bill and then, most importantly opens up this pool of efficiency and weatherization incentives that can be pretty substantial. And then finally, go to that next slide. There is also the option to rather than do full electrification look at options for partial electrification so keeping your existing gas furnace to sort of take care of your heating during those coldest hours while using your efficient heat pump for the majority of the year. After incorporating all of this we can see that the cost gap can be shrunk shrunken down pretty substantially but there is still money left over so this means a sort of like a rational customer in this situation or rational building owner might still not choose to pursue the electrified route. So obviously that there is a need here for additional funding to close this gap and enable electrification across building stock. And so yeah so as I said we're, I just sort of walked through is just an example building typology but we are looking at this for all different customer types that exist within this unsubsidized LMI building stock. So right now, we're sort of aggregating all of these these gaps up to figure out what that city wide financing gap would be. We are also going to sort of evaluate different program participation rates and program funding caps to really understand what the city wide financing gap looks like across the city. And we're going to look at different scenarios of anticipated health and safety issues electrification solutions and shell upgrades. Before I go to the next slide, I see there's a number of questions popping up in the chat. So, I'm just going to start to question what why focus on the increased costs for heat pumps when fossil fuel system simply won't be an option in the long term. I know we see that electrification certainly does look like it is the long term solution but we want to make sure that sort of no one gets left behind in this transition, and we have an equitable energy transition to full electrification. So I think really understanding these gaps in the in the short term, especially in the next 10 to 20 years going to be a critical move to ensure that the long term goals can be met. Another question popped up with these retrofits be added to renters bills, a lot of building upgrades are added to the rent and stay on even after the bill is paid. This is a great question. I'm going to try to address that a little bit in the next section. What are the types of health and safety repairs that you consider near analysis are these things like improved ventilation or lead abatement. Yeah, so I think the main our research has shown that the main health and safety issues that have popped up as a barrier to electrification are things like lead and asbestos abatement. If a retrofit begins and they basically tear down a wall and see that there is lead or asbestos now suddenly that has to be taken care of before any additional work can be addressed. So these are definitely things that they're they're not necessarily part of an electrification project but can pop up unexpectedly. And then finally, the last question in here is what's the cost per term and kwh used in the cost analysis efficient heat pump should be slightly cheaper to operate than a gas steam boiler at current prices. So we are using the the latest. I think that the example I showed before was for a building using conhead gas and electric, I think. We're also, I know that kind of recently been. They've started as a new program for rates for all electric customers. So those rate structures have been incorporated into our analysis so we are looking at all those impacts on the utility costs. Based on our analysis we're seeing that at least for these specific customers the. The gas furnaces were leading to cheaper you were lower utility bills than the heat pump operations that we saw. All right. One more question has popped up managing all the data decisions incentives and contractors to do the necessary upgrades requires pretty high management skills how is a homeowner like me going to manage this practically and financially especially when the rebates lag behind the investment. That's a good question so I will say at least for this portion of the analysis this is really focused on the, this funding gap would be for building owners of low to moderate income housing, who are trying to pursue electrification upgrades for their, their property. I agree that there are definitely still some barriers here to understanding how all the programs and incentives work and how to sort of manage everything. But I will say at least for this portion of the analysis this is not so much focused on single family homeowners. This is really for those larger building owners. For the new construction analysis that we're doing we are looking at the cost effectiveness for single family homes in addition to multi family homes. So that for the pool of funding for those is a little bit narrower and not quite as difficult to navigate. And on the whole single family homes are attending to be much more cost effective for electrification than than the alternative route, basically a like for like replacement. All right, I'm going to continue and then come back to the comments in the chat. You want to go to the next slide. Okay, so the next section I want to talk about is the energy cost burden analysis. So there I think there was already a great, great question in the chat about who actually incurs the cost of electrification in terms of the utility bill. So here looking at this from a few different perspectives, really trying to understand how does electrification impact the tenant bill for different customer segments and how specifically this impacts bill, depending on your starting and entering ending metering configuration and sort of scenario of utility allowance. So what we see here is just an example from that same building typology that we showed earlier. The key thing that we're looking at here that this is a sort of levelized monthly bill per apartment broken out by different end use. And the difference between these bars is really how the building metering is configured and whether the building is pursuing full or partial electrification. So you can basically see if the final metering configuration is putting the pump costs on the tenants, this can lead to a pretty substantial increase in utility bill. So basically if we start with a metering configuration of central hot water and central heating paid for by the landlord, and now suddenly the tenant has to pay for heating that this can cause a pretty big issue. We can also see that partial electrification can help minimize that increase in utility bill, but it does still increase the bill if the heat pump costs are put on the tenant. If you want to go to that next slide, I think that's my last slide. So just to sort of frame that same graph in a different way. Based on the data we were evaluating we saw that the median income for a tenant in this type of building is around $47,000 per year. So just looking at that same data normalized by the income level we can see sort of the percentage of a customer's income that would have to go towards their utility bill. And based on the New York State energy affordability threshold, the energy burden is really intended to be kept below a 6% threshold for all central heating scenarios. So we can see that in a situation where where the heat pump utility bill is put onto the tenant, it ends up exceeding this limit in those specific situations. So that's definitely something we want to investigate how to minimize that in the future with additional programs and additional methods of bill assistance. I see a number of different questions have popped up in the chat. I'm going to go back there. I see that New York City Accelerator provides resources training and one-on-one expert guidance to help building owners and industry professionals. Okay, that's not a question, but that's a great comment. What about multifamily residential that isn't market rate? So this analysis is really focused on that category of multifamily residential that is not market rate. Are your energy costs numbers publicly available? Comparing condensing gas furnaces or boilers isn't relevant with the steam system. Yeah, so we are looking at, I believe, all of our cost data will be public in the final report. And what you said, yeah, so the example I mentioned was for a customer with a gas system, but we are also looking at customers with steam systems. Financing available for them as far as especially with interest rates going up. So we have done pretty extensive research on all of the available financing options specifically for this category of low to moderate income building owners. So that will all be, I believe, released in our final report as well. So do these cost breakdowns include ConEd's gas connection fee? That's a good question. I don't think these costs are including any ConEd gas connection fee, but I will definitely double check that and I will look into that. And all right, the other questions were just clarifications. So yeah, maybe I'll pause there and see if anyone has any questions they want to ask out loud. Okay, Jared, I just want to make sure this entire call is going to be on non-market rate buildings only. That's correct. Yeah, so right now the analysis we have these sort of preliminary results for is all of the non-market rate buildings, specifically the retrofits of the affordable housing building stock. As I mentioned, also doing the analysis of new construction, looking at those different technologies as part of the local law 154 compliance. And that analysis is still, we're still working on that. So I don't have any results to share for that yet, but we are also evaluating that. But not retrofits for market rate, correct? That's correct. Yeah, we're not looking into that as part of the scope of this work. Thank you. Could I just toss out a question that hopefully is relevant enough to what you're discussing, Jared. I understand that Connet is contemplating imposing a rate hike on all of us customers to cover. Replacement of many, many sections of piping, you know, citywide, bringing, well, in effect, fracked gas to all of our buildings. And there's been protests against, I don't mean I've been part of a petition drive to say, no, we shouldn't have to pay rate hike for a fuel that goes against, totally against the principles of the CLCPA, the Climate Leadership Community Protection Act. But is it, I'm just, I'm just wondering about your perspective or anyone's perspective with some sense of whether these pipe replacements are in any way necessary. If we have aging pipes under our streets, then that's a potential methane leak or even, you know, a potential fire, I mean, it's it's really, I'm not sure exactly how to how to think about, you know, these this this pipeline, you know, replacement project citywide it looks disastrous because on the one hand it perpetuates fracked gas infrastructure right which is the last thing we need we just don't have time. However, until you know heat pumps and electrification come online we we really have no choice but to to burn gas this. Does that make sense my question kind of. So I will say I don't, I haven't done too much evaluation of those pipe replacement costs. So I will say that that that is not currently really within the scope of what I've we've been looking at within this research topic. I'm not sure if that's addressed at all and in the grid readiness topic but it is definitely something we yeah we could think more about. Okay, thank you. Yeah, all I would add Jared is that the spirit of much of the work in this report is how to kind of break a log jam and accelerate progress towards things like building and transportation electrification so absolutely hear the sentiment. We figure out ways to make this move faster and the focus on this specific sliver of quite large sliver of the building stock is that there's unique challenges here as far as ultimately how these costs could flow through to renters. And because of limitations and, and how those costs could be how they could flow through we we see this potentially being a challenge to get these buildings updated and upgraded. That was our primary reason I'm focusing on this market rate less so because there are very clear ways in way in which those costs could be passed on to renters whereas here they could and we're concerned that this building stock won't get upgraded. I think we're pretty close on time Jared thanks for keeping us right on schedule. Certainly, there'll be other breaks throughout but I think we should move on to the next topic. Okay, so with, with that said thank you Jared and we're now going to hand it over to another colleague Christy heavey. So switch gears and talk about electric school buses. Great. Thanks Zach. We can jump into the next slide perfect. All right, so like Zach mentioned, and we are looking at the electrification transition for school buses in New York City. We provide a bit of context for this work. New York City and also New York State as a whole require that school buses be all electric by 2035. And this is a really important strategy to reduce the harmful health impacts from diesel emissions as well as the climate impacts. New York City also has a goal that new school bus purchases be electric starting by 2027. So that's another goal that we're considering as part of this work. To scale of this, there's about 10,000 school buses in New York City so we have a lot of work to do to transition that fleet to fully electric by 2035 and electric school buses are pretty expensive they are about three to four times the cost of a new diesel bus. So with this work we wanted to better understand the costs and also the benefits of this transition and also understand opportunities where we can potentially mitigate some of that cost by better managing the school buses once they are electrified. So there are three main goals here. The first is to evaluate the lifetime costs and benefits of school bus electrification as they compare to conventional diesel vehicles. Second, we'd like to understand the opportunities to reduce the overall cost of electrification by changing how the buses are charged and how they're managed. So we'll explore a few opportunities for that on the next slide. And finally we want to make sure we're looking at potential strategies to roll out electrification and really how to prioritize equity goals. Next slide please. Great. So, as I mentioned part of this work is to look at how we can optimize school bus operations. Once the buses are electric so we have a few research topics that we're looking into here with our analysis. The first one is managed charging so electricity costs change throughout the course of a day there's certain periods where it's more expensive to use electricity. So by making sure that we're incorporating that into decision making about when to charge the buses, the operators could save quite a bit of money by making sure they plug in the buses to charge when electricity demand and prices are the lowest. So that's one strategy we're looking at in our analysis to see how feasible that is for actual New York City buses. The second is looking at two way charging or vehicle to grid. So vehicle to grid is when a electric vehicle actually discharges electricity back to the electric grid, and they can get compensated for doing so. So one strategy we're looking at is if bus operators could do this with the school buses in New York City, and potentially earn a revenue stream for doing that. So school buses are widely considered to be a really good candidate for testing out vehicle to grid. So B2G is something we talk about a lot with regards to transportation electrification, but school buses especially are really identified as a potential candidate for this because they have such well defined travel patterns. They have a route in the morning when they're driving students to school and then they have a route in the evening when they're late afternoon, when they're taking them home and so there's a time in the middle of the day when they're parked and that time overnight and in the evening is a great time to potentially utilize B2G and earn some additional revenue. So that's a second strategy we'll be looking at to see how viable that is for New York City. The next two questions are more operational questions with regards to how to how to do the infrastructure for charging the buses. First is how many chargers to install. So charging stations are pretty expensive and will need to be installed when we're electrifying the buses. But does every bus need to have their own charger or are there potential cost savings we can have by having them share. So that's something we're looking into with regards to feasibility for New York City too. And then finally, higher power chargers might make there be more opportunities for vehicle to grid, but that's also more expensive so exploring the trade offs with that as well. Next slide please. So I wanted to walk through the approach we're taking for this analysis. There's two main steps. First, the main research item is analyzing the school bus route data specifically for New York City and understanding what the charging behavior will look like. So first we're collecting all of the travel data from New York City school bus fleet. So we want this analysis to be really specific to the school buses in New York City to be able to make sure our findings and recommendations are all specified for the city's buses. Using that travel data, we're looking at the driving patterns to determine when buses need to be on the road driving and doing their routes versus when they're parked. And in addition to that where they're parked, are they parked at a vendor lot where they would have their access to their charging station or are they parked elsewhere in the city where they might not have access to charging at that time. From that data we will analyze the potential charging profiles for the electric school buses. So understanding based on those driving patterns and when the buses need to be on the road. When do they need to be charging, when are they available to be charging and when do they actually need to be charging to make sure they have sufficient energy in their battery to be able to conduct their whole route. And then finally, looking at V2G. So with all of that in mind, making sure we're supporting the travel needs of the buses and supporting the charging needs to get their routes done. Is there potential for V2G there based on all of that, all of that data. The second stage of this analysis will be looking at the lifetime costs and benefits of electrification. So first we'll be looking at all the different costs associated with this transition. What are the upfront bus costs? What are the charger costs? And any other infrastructure or sorry, the infrastructure for the chargers and then the charging cost themselves. So the electric bills they would be paying for the charging. Second, we'll be looking at potential savings. So how can we potentially save money by managing the charging so that the buses charge at cheaper times of the day. And also, is there a potential for revenue from V2G by discharging back to the grid. And then finally, we'll be looking at all the other benefits that are associated with electrification. So comparing to diesel buses. What are the avoided costs of not having to buy diesel for the buses? What are the operations and savings, operations and maintenance savings as well. Next slide. So as part of this analysis, we'll be looking at what the overall transition is to electrification. So to do this, we need to think about how are we electrifying the 10 or 11,000 buses in the fleet. What does that transition look like over time? So we're planning to include two scenarios. The ones I've shown here are not final. These are just draft scenarios we're looking at. But the first one in the turquoise line is looking at a more even accelerated rate of electrifying buses over time. So putting a pretty straight ramp up to get to the 2035 goal. The second option is a potentially lower cost option where we do expect that electric bus costs will decrease over time. That's a trend that we've seen in the EV industry as batteries costs come down, the vehicle costs come down as well. So that could be one way to potentially reduce costs by having a bit of a slower ramp to get started and then accelerating thereafter. But this will also have trade offs. That means some of our key benefits of electrification may be delayed. So that's something we want to explore to see what it looks like. So I think that's the last slide I had. It looks like there might be one comment in the chat. Travel patterns are promising. Just like private trash haulers, these buses shouldn't be traveling to multiple boroughs throughout the day. Yeah, that's exactly right. So yeah, the buses typically have more limited routes and we are working with Department of Education to understand the actual routes for New York City and how many miles are in each route and what the total travel distances for each bus to make sure the analysis is really focused on the city of New York City of Split. And then it looks like someone sent a link. So I haven't taken a look at this yet. They're noting that EV prices are rising higher than internal combustion engine prices. We can definitely take a look at the information that you sent. What we've seen is that a lot of prices have declined over time with light duty electric vehicles. Part of the challenge that might be in the article you're sending is that there's also higher end models that are coming out. And so those have higher associated costs with a vehicle like a school bus. So we expect that costs will will decline as battery technology improves and battery costs come down. But definitely understand the point that that with like a mix of models coming out in the light duty sector that that might be different. But yeah, I'll definitely take a look at the resource you set. Thanks for sharing. I think we can open it up if anyone has any questions they want to ask on the phone. Thank you, Dan. I don't know if Zach you want to move on to the next topic. Yeah, we can just pause just in case anybody had a thought and certainly we can save time for the end. Okay, we'll move on to the third and final topic for this evening. This is really about how the grid. will respond to electrification in the future but we're trying to predict what this future may look like there's a lot of uncertainty around how quickly these technologies are going to come into the market we have policy goals that want an accelerated pace and we need to understand if our current grid is ready for that. So I'm going to introduce Sierra Spencer, who's leading this topic. Thanks Zach are you able to hear me okay. Great. So yeah, I will be talking about the grid readiness project that we've been conducting. This project has been coming out of the local law local law 154 which requires that the city conduct a grid readiness study that looks at both the transmission and distribution systems in the city to address the transmission system we've been conducting a qualitative assessment of different efforts that are underway to expand transmission lines into the city. And to do that we've been referencing works by the New York ISO, as well as NYSERDA to understand how electrification has been treated and forecasted by these different entities and so listed are some some different examples of those works. So what I'll be talking about for most of today is the distribution level analysis. So for this we're conducting a quantitative assessment of how electrification will impact the city's distribution grid. And here we're expanding on some other works that have already been done on to the city for the city, but we're here looking at the effect of both widespread transportation and building electrification. And yeah this will be the focus of today's presentation. So I can go to the next slide please. So the goals of the distribution level analysis. And we're evaluating the impact of building and transportation electrification on the peak demand at the con Edison network level. So we're looking at how the con Edison grid is just kind of structured throughout the city. And at these network levels will be identifying the extent to which electrification will cause the exceeded capacity for what is currently available on the distribution grid. And based off of these assessments will be making actual recommendations for how the city can best prepare for electrification. And then we'll also be conducting this analysis, particularly through the lens of the city's disadvantaged communities and environmental justice areas, and making separate and distinct recommendations where applicable for these areas within the city. So following methodology for this analysis we're using the forecasting anywhere tool, and this is the tool that's able to provide a geospatial distribution of where electrification will occur throughout the city. At the network, the con Edison network level. And this is informed by the actual availability the technical potential that we see currently in the city, for example where they're currently parking spaces available that could accommodate and this is also the tools also informed by some scenario specific inputs that we can can use with the tool. And forecasting anywhere utilizes machine learning with historic data, as well as forecasted adoption trends to determine how likely each building and vehicle in the city is to electrify. So, this table has some examples of some of the forecasted adoption adoption trends that are captured with the tool, and noting that this is not an exhaustive list, but an example of some of the trends and factors that we've considered. So for example, the ease of building electrification where we've seen historically that single family homes have been easier to electrify the multi family homes. And that's a trend that we think will persist into the future so something that we're capturing with our distribution of where electrification will occur. We also are considering compliance with local on 97 and our forecasting that buildings with higher missions that will subsequently face higher penalty costs from local on 97 will be more likely to electrify noting that there's not an exact correlation but just kind of a general trend that is captured with our analysis. For example from vehicle electrification. And so we'd be, we're capturing the fleet electrification requirements. So any state and city requirements for school buses or transit buses to electrify are something that we're able to capture with the forecasting anywhere tool. So some draft results so noting that these are still in the works and that these are draft results but are starting to show indications of the types of results that we will be getting from this analysis. On the left hand side we see a map of New York City divided out into the con Edison network levels. And here the con Edison network levels are color coded based off of the peak load impacts from electrification. And this is the impact in terms of megawatts, or peak demand that are added from building and transportation electrification combined. And so darker coloring indicates a larger peak impact, whereas lighter coloring indicates a smaller peak impact. So just note for this map that peak impact is sometimes a proxy for electrification adoption but it's not necessarily depending on the timing of of when the peak loads will be occurring. So is a fair proxy but there may be some specifications in terms of timing of when some of the vehicles will be charging or when buildings, electric appliances will be used with when the peak load is created. And then on the right we see a map also still with the network levels but color coding based off of the available headroom on the con Edison network after electrification occurs. And so this is showing with lighter colors that there is still a lot of headroom left on the network after buildings and vehicles electrify in 2040 and darker coloring indicates that capacity is starting to be exceeded and is being. Yeah, reaching over over the available capacity given the amount of electrification that is anticipated. And yeah, noting that both of these results are shown for 2040 and we're planning on generating results like these first snapshot years of 2030 2035 and 2040. And then the next slide please. Some of the next steps. Some of the key conclusions that we're looking to draw from this analysis are being able to evaluate how electrification impacts change over time and be able to determine when grid constraints, given when headroom is likely to be exceeded are likely to emerge. Be able to compare the grid impacts under different types of load management and flexibility scenarios. So these are some of the scenarios that we're planning on evaluating. And from this will be able to determine how load management and flexibility are able to mitigate the impacts of electrification on the city's grid. So we will be evaluating the grid impacts from electrification particularly in disadvantaged communities and be able to determine if these communities are more like more or less likely to see grid constraints emerge from electrification. And that concludes the slides that I have on the grid readiness study I'm happy to answer any questions that anyone might have. I haven't seen any come up in the chat so far but let's see. One question. How will grid upgrades and improvements to sustain EVs impact utility bills. Yeah so I think that is getting more some of the cost benefit analysis in the school bus electrification study that Krista went over and so that was looking specifically at the impacts on school bus bills, and looking at how this electrification will translate to customer bills is out of scope for the grid readiness portion were mainly focused on how the city's grid and its ability to distribute the electricity that is needed will be facilitated. And so looking at bills beyond the school buses from electrification are out of scope of what we've been looking at with this project. Any other questions either in the chat or can also open up if anyone has any they'd like to raise. Okay I see another question in the chat. Although a different topic will the upcoming Penn Station project will this be considered. So we, I guess I'm not familiar with the Penn Station projects specifically but will I think we're hoping to broadly capture any changes in kind of available potential or where electrification is able to occur. Although yeah I can't comment on this specific project at this time. I'm referencing that, you know, there's a Penn Station project at Penn Station in Manhattan where they're going to build like 11 super talls and it's going to be this whole big massive project and then the grid is going to need more capacity just to handle that so is that just looking at the whole grid entirely. This is taking on a very big part of the grid with this new Penn Station project. Okay, yeah I mean, I think that seems like something that we would hope to be able to capture. I, yeah, we can definitely look into that a bit more and see if there are any kind of specific forecasted trends and that given geographic area that are not currently being captured but should be based off of that project. I think right now a lot of our forecasts for adoption. Yeah, are hoping to broadly capture those types of trends. But yeah we'll make sure that the geographic distribution is kind of capturing those large projects. I just want to throw out a question of kind of, I don't know, selfish personal interest. The co-op complex where I live, excuse me, received a D grade from the city that embarrassingly enough we feel like we're a pretty progressive community but the D kind of blights that a little bit. Where a postwar six building complex in Upper Manhattan, and I just wonder if that D grade is rather typical of buildings of that vintage, and whether the impending, hopeful, dramatic improvements in building efficiency that local law 1197 I believe mandates will improve the outlook in terms of electrical usage and reduce burden on the grid and any of any or all of that. Yeah, yeah I think kind of differences in building energy usage and the ease of electrification are something that we're capturing so we have kind of a few different distinct building vintages that we are modeling for for different types of buildings. We haven't been able to, I think we'll ultimately have the capability but haven't done this yet to look at how electrification trends will vary across different buildings. We expect older buildings to have higher emissions or like you referenced, like having lower grades that would be more incentivized to electrify earlier, or perhaps on the flip side that older buildings are harder to electrify given some of their logistical and technical challenges. And so that's a trend that we're hoping to eventually be able to pull out of this analysis that isn't something we've been able to hone in on quite yet. We toss out one last one since I'm really self indulging tonight. I'm really fascinated by heat pumps but I understand them only superficially. When we when we're talking about heat pumps we're talking primarily geothermal energy, I guess right is does air sourced thermal energy play a role here as far as New York buildings are concerned or is, is that a question to be to be asking. That's a good question I think we are looking primarily at air source heat pumps. If I'm remembering some of the technology, technology specifications correctly. And I'm not sure if any of the building electrification analysis is kind of has diverged from that at all but I do believe that we're looking at air source heat pumps. Okay. Thank you. I can just chime in with we're definitely looking at air source heat pumps primarily for all the different building typologies and the retrofits. We're looking at geothermal or ground source heat pumps for some of the new construction analysis but the retrofits are really focusing on air source. Good to know, thank you. Any other questions. All right then I can hand it back to Claudia. Thanks so much Sarah and thanks so much everyone for your really thoughtful questions and engagements tonight. I just wanted to close with a plug for our survey. It's accessible here on the QR code and we can put the link in the chat as well. It's open for two more weeks through December 21. And there are some ranking like multiple choice questions as well as some short answer questions so we really welcome your feedback and ideas. The goal over the next few months is to really incorporate public feedback and translate our research findings into specific city commitments that the government can take in the near term to put us on track to some of these long term participation goals, and we will publish that in a energy plan report the power up report by Earth Day of 2023 so hope that you continue to participate in this process with us. Sign up for our newsletter at nyc.gov slash power up and hope to see you participating again soon. The survey is in the chat so really appreciate your guys's attention and feedback tonight.