Share This Page

Norwin acknowledged for its energy-saving efforts

| Wednesday, Sept. 18, 2013, 9:00 p.m.

Switching off lights and powering down copy machines over weekends has saved the Norwin School District a little more than $500,000 over the past two years.

Through conservation efforts, the district reports, it has been able to cut its energy spending by 22 percent. Cenergistic, an energy conservation company based in Dallas, honored the district on Monday night with the Award for Energy Stewardship.

“It's a wonderful savings to your school district,” Tim McNamee, of Cenergistic and the EPA Energy Star program, said. “You're quickly getting up to 30 percent savings.”

The award comes following the district's participation in an energy conservation program administered through Cenergistic. The program is based on changes in employee behavior, such as turning off lights and machines when they're not needed.

Over the past 25 months, costs for electricity, gas, water and sewer services in the district dropped from about $2.4 million to $1.8 million. That's about $523,300 in savings.

McNamee also noted the program has helped the district reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions it releases, also known as a carbon footprint.

Though the program, the district has saved 3,946 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions — equivalent to removing 708 automobiles from the roadway or planting 100,937 pine trees over 10 years, he said.

Christopher Baker, supervisor of energy conservation and custodial services for the district, praised employees for their improvements in energy conservation.

“We're not going to use the energy unless we need to,” Baker said. “For example, when students are not at school, we don't use the air conditioning.”

Amanda Dolasinski is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8626, or adolasinski@tribweb.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.