IBJNews

City plans to install solar panels at public works buildings

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis plans to install solar panels at three of its public works buildings in an effort to make those facilities more energy efficient.

The city has put out a request seeking companies or teams of firms qualified to install solar photovoltaic systems at operations buildings and garages. The winning respondent will be required to finance, build, own and operate the system, according to the request for proposals released Monday.

The initiative is the third solar-energy project Indianapolis has undertaken. The city has installed solar-thermal systems, which help to heat water, at three parks facilities, and has put solar panels on the downtown City-County Building.

Those efforts are part of a push started after Mayor Greg Ballard took office in 2008 to make 61 city-owned buildings more efficient with $18 million in upgrades to lighting, HVAC equipment and building controls.

John Hazlett, director of the city’s Office of Sustainability, said the city may examine installing solar-energy systems in additional buildings. An incentive through Indianapolis Power and Light Co., which pays for renewable energy that’s generated and sold back to IPL, has made solar-energy opportunities a bigger priority.

“That makes deployment of renewable energy really attractive,” Hazlett said. “It's certainly having us take a closer look at solar.”

Hazlett wouldn’t discuss specific details about the cost or expected savings from the latest solar endeavor before companies submit responses to the request for proposals.

The deal's financial structure would be similar to that of the park facility improvements. In that arrangement, the city issued a bond at 3.2-percent interest to cover the roughly $391,000 upfront cost for the improvements. That bond will be repaid over about a decade with annual energy-cost savings of about $34,000.

If the city doesn’t achieve the level of savings needed in a given year, the company that installed the solar-thermal systems is required to cover the difference, Hazlett said.

For the latest solar project, the city plans to enter into a contract of up to 10 years with two 10-year options to renew. Potential providers include equipment manufacturers and companies that install and design solar panel systems.

A handful of solar companies are based in Indianapolis, including Ermco Inc., Earth-Solar Technologies Corp. and Johnson Melloh Solutions.

More local solar energy projects have begun to crop up in recent years as technology has improved and utilities have offered incentives, said Patrick Flynn, program manager at the state’s Office of Energy Development. Still, the state lags behind others with sunnier climates or more generous incentives or renewable energy standards.

Some examples of local buildings with solar-energy components include the Major General Emmett J. Bean Federal Center on East 56th Street; the Hilton Garden Inn downtown; and the Broad Ripple Brew Pub on East 65th Street.

“Solar has been around for a long time,” Flynn said. “But it’s becoming more and more of a viable option for companies and government entities.”

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Awesome!
    This is great news and should be used more. There are many companies that will install and operate these systems with repayments in energy savings. I believe we should mandate solar and other alternative energy efforts on government sponsored projects like North of South and others! Keep it up and I look forward to more announcements!

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT