Air Conditioned Sidewalks Not Cool

Photo of Adidas store downtown via Paolo Mastrangelo's Flickr.

Last year City Councilwoman Gale Brewer proposed a bill that would fine establishments $200 per open door/window in air conditioned spaces (as well as heated spaces in the winter), the bill wasn't fully backed by the Bloomberg administration and never saw the light of day...until now! The NY Post reports that the environmentally friendly bill is now supported by Bloomberg and "is expected to win council approval tomorrow."

The bill has a couple of exemptions, for restaurants with outdoor seating and small stores (under 4,000-sq-ft). Those who aren't exempt and who are found luring customers in with cool air will first be issued a written warning, it isn't until they are found committing the act again within 18 months that the fines come down (after the second notice it gets raised to $400). Brewer notes some of the positive outcomes, saying: "Hopefully, it will prevent the brownouts and the blackouts. If we are serious about our planet, this is just one small way that you can contribute."

Those against the bill aren't necessarily anti-green, but they are against the "nanny-state mentality" and placing restrictions on businesses. And as one employee as Sunglass Hut in Times Square said, "Having the doors open increases business. It does wonders for us. I feel like they should find a between solution to the energy crisis." However, Eric A. Goldstein (a senior lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council) told the NY Times, “The only group that should be opposing this sensible legislation is OPEC."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Jen Carlson in News on August 13, 2008 10:55 AM

Comments [rss]

Såkandulæredet

As soon as the cost of energy wasted with open doors exceeds the extra sales generated by having those doors open, the stores will stop doing this. But part of the reason the electricity is so expensive is because its being wasted like this. ANyway, with all that being said, I'm not sure what the solution is.

Bottomless Chips

Should we let them??? Donald Trump could fill up 100 warehouses with air conditioners and run them 24 hours a day, thereby depriving others of an essential resource

No, but you don't get Trump to stop it through laws. You get him to stop through ideas.

Again, this is why the NY Times and BOA buildings are "green." No law mandated them to be super green, but the ideas behind global warming got them to willingly build such a building.

JenChungsBaby

There are individuals who could afford to run enough air conditioners, appliances, whatever to suck up every last watt of electricity that Con Ed could provide, leaving nothing for anyone else. Should we let them??? Donald Trump could fill up 100 warehouses with air conditioners and run them 24 hours a day, thereby depriving others of an essential resource. Would that be OK juse because he has the cash???

This is so stupid. We're not talking about a luxury item, we're talking about electricity. It's provided in a regulated market by a gov't regulated monopoly and its use can also be regulated by the gov't to meet reasonable goals.

Art Vandelay

As a marketing executive, I'd argue the cool, refreshing air, and welcoming, open doors are really just effective advertising.

Spoken like a true marketing executive (concerned only with $$$$$$, and no regard for the common good). It's thinking like yours that makes laws like this necessary.

glennQNYC

As a marketing executive, I'd argue the cool, refreshing air, and welcoming, open doors are really just effective advertising.

I'd suggest my clients pay (or at least claim to) the higher electric rates ConEd charges for their "green" power if they felt the need to pander to the enviromental extremists.

stargirlinnyc

"And by the way, guess how most of our electricity is produced. Coal. That's right, fucking COAL. That means added load on the grid from wasted A/C units causes more CO2, more cancer-causing particulates, more smog and more global warming from power plants."

That's why retailers should move towards using wind power - it's a nominal increase in cost & helps the enviornment all around.

http://www.conedsolutions.com/business/greenpower/default/

NannyState

The City of Phoenix Arizona has large outdoor a/c units for visitors and in New York, this. We're still in America, right?

paolo mastrangelo

ha, that photo was the first thing I thought of when I read that article in the paper today!

everyAframe

Whoopsie daisy -- stand by for Adidas "green/we care" ad campaign and something like a pro-enviro jam band fest featuring Dave Matthews.

Snoopy

There is plenty of power to go around. It is in the distribution of same that the whole thing falls apart.

If Con Ed would get into modernizing rather than sitting back and moaning their infrastructure perhaps we could solve some of these problems.

As a nation we have to rethink the viability of nuclear energy.

Bottomless Chips

then the market needs regulating

You can't just say, "Oh we have to regulate it."

What does that even mean? Give me an example of how you would that would be fair to everybody?

interlard

Jeez! This simple point seems to have stirred some real a-holeish "debate".

If a business is burning up too much electricity and putting us in danger of more brown-outs, then the market needs regulating. There is only so much power to go around. Duh.

Bottomless Chips

Free market? What kind of crack are you smoking? There is no free market. That's a buzz word you moron. All markets are regulated. And pretty tightly I might add. Thank goodness they are too.

The US was relatively regulation-free for a long period.

Why is it good that markets are regulated? Please explain.

Bottomless Chips

Ideally we wouldn't HAVE to, but when corporations behave irresponsibly, they are asking to be regulated...Also, CORPORATIONS ARE NOT INDIVIDUALS. They are entities which exist solely to make money and they put that above any and all other concern

When corporations act irresponsibly, they fail. Say you pollute a river, the other people on the river will sue and win as you're ruining their property. So, it's most cost-effective to run your business ethically. That's why pollution is much lower in the US, per capita, than communist or former communist nations---because of our belief in private property rights.

What's wrong with making money? Corporations aren't greedy, individuals are. You try and cut corners you fail. Someone else steps in who doesn't repeat your mistakes and is more ethical.

Snoopy

The gas guzzler tax does not apply to trucks, only passenger vehicles. See:

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/FEG/info.shtml#guzzler

A Hummer is considered a truck, either the H1 or the H2 which is basically a Suburban with fancy bodywork. Get it right Politburo!

SP

Free market? What kind of crack are you smoking? There is no free market. That's a buzz word you moron. All markets are regulated. And pretty tightly I might add. Thank goodness they are too.

Art Vandelay

I agree with you all. If we were to place regulations on everything that wasted energy, we would reduce our carbon footprint. I disagree with you all on implementing such overbearing regulation because you can't enforce it, and the laws that would be chosen be would subject to pandering and corporate corruption.

Ideally we wouldn't HAVE to, but when corporations behave irresponsibly, they are asking to be regulated. You'd also think we'd never need to have a law about not making toys with lead, but that too turns out to be necessary. You'd think you wouldn't need a law asking truck drivers not to leave their engines idling on the street, or dumping their used oil down storm drains, but apparently you do. When people or corporations behave in ways that harm others, we need laws to prohibit that behavior.

Also, CORPORATIONS ARE NOT INDIVIDUALS. They are entities which exist solely to make money and they put that above any and all other concerns.

Bottomless Chips

And by the way, guess how most of our electricity is produced. Coal. That's right, fucking COAL. That means added load on the grid from wasted A/C units causes more CO2, more cancer-causing particulates, more smog and more global warming from power plants.

What no one has addressed yet (and I've asked 2 or three times now), is who's going to enforce all of these laws?

I agree with you all. If we were to place regulations on everything that wasted energy, we would reduce our carbon footprint. I disagree with you all on implementing such overbearing regulation because you can't enforce it, and the laws that would be chosen be would subject to pandering and corporate corruption.

Dr. Chadwick, should we prosecute those who run the A/C too much in their homes, too, as they add to the carcinogens in the air?

Art Vandelay

Nanny state my ass.

I think it's pretty disgusting that I'm asked turn down my A/C to help the power grid on the hottest days, only to have some asshole store blasting cold air onto the sidewalk through open doors.

And by the way, guess how most of our electricity is produced. Coal. That's right, fucking COAL. That means added load on the grid from wasted A/C units causes more CO2, more cancer-causing particulates, more smog and more global warming from power plants.

If business owners act like children, they get treated like children. And the fines should be about 10x what they are.

Bottomless Chips

You enforce energy use in much the same way that the city has for decades enforced water use -- you require all new construction or renovation to use energy saving fixtures. The only kind of toilet you can install legally in the city is one that uses 1.6 gallons per flush, while old toilets used 5 gallons/flush or more. That's one reason why the city's water use has gone down by 35 percent in the last thirty years even though the population has increased. My office at work has a light switch that turns off the lights if nobody is in the room for 1/2 hour. Require that in all new construction. Simple. It's not rocket science.

The current NY Times building and the new Bank of America building are both "green."

Hmm, and done without the heavy hand of government. Interesting.

My company has has a green initiative, too. All done without enforcement of the green gestapo.

Why was this done?

Because it's cheaper and more profitable to not waste resources. Whether it be toner, paper, computers, or energy---it's going to save the company money.

Alas, the reason why a free market is best in protecting the environment.