The Ceausescu’s might be long gone, but their ‘People’s Palace’ remains an energy nightmare
By Dolores Benezic / Translated from Romanian by Vlad Limbean
Article courtesy of 2Celsius.net
Bucharest's Palace of the Parliament, or People’s House (Palatul Parlamentului or Casa Poporului in Romanian) is the world’s second-largest administrative building. The largest, for those you scoring at home, is the Pentagon in the United States. Constructed over the course of two decades under Ceausescu’s communist regime and another two decades since the advent of democracy in Romania, the People’s House is already in serious need of rehabilitation. Celebrated and reviled in equal measure, the Bucharest behemoth started to degrade before its completion and official inauguration. The piping allows high water losses, and the vents are in subpar condition. In winter, snow flitters into through the carpentry, water seeps from the terraces, and heat escapes through poor insulation. Each of the building’s 31 lifts consumes as much electricity as a city tram, while its transformers are like ticking time bombs.
In the absence of an energy audit, which no company has dared to carry out in such a huge building, no one knows exactly the proper way forward nor what kind of investment is necessary to make the People’s House a more energy-efficient structure.
Labyrinthine lighting
Mr. Constantin has been working in the People’s House since it became operational in 1994. At that time no one knew where light switches were, and enormous crystal chandeliers were constantly illuminated. Constantin’s boss, Alex Tanase, says that janitors during this early period – all of whom were women – were referred to as ‘hockey players’: “The hockey players were running along these long halls trying to turn lights on and off, as they could never figure out the right switches,” Tanase recalls.
Today, the lighting system is computerised and runs according to need. Some energy is saved, but not enough. Constantin’s occupation, on the other hand, has remained a relic of the past for 15 years. Each day he diligently walks some four kilometres throughout the People’s House, measuring room temperatures between 6:30 and 7:45 in the morning, as a nurse monitors newborn babies. Prior to the emergence of mobile phones, Constantin needed to rely on a network of landline phones in the building to safeguard against getting lost.
Temperature is important for some conference rooms that are plated with expensive materials. From reading thermometer results, Constantine adjusts the ventilation or heat from an underground ventilation facility.
“Can you give me a VIP on C6, level 0?” Tanase requests by telephone from lighting system operator. VIP means all lights turned on in a given building sector – the most energy-costly scenario, which is used when important people come to visit or major conferences are held, but most of all when cleaning staff are at work in the area. “The workers need to see through all the nooks and crannies so that everything can be properly cleaned,” Tanase explains.
Under an ‘economical’ lighting scenario, only the side lamps are lit. A step above that is the ‘normal’ scenario, in which chandeliers are half-lit. Finally, there is the ‘VIP’ scenario, which calls to mind something out of Las Vegas. Tanase says that all lights are turned off only rarely, as Guard and Protection Service’s surveillance cameras require a certain level of visibility.
High costs normal and necessary?
Tanase claims that the People’s House registered its greatest expenditure in energy costs in 1997. “We first started using energy-efficient light bulbs in 1998, but the shift involves fantastic costs,” he says. “An incandescent bulb costs 5,000 lei (approx. EUR 1.2), while an energy-efficient one costs 300,000 lei (approx. EUR 75). You have to wait half a year to change the bulbs in a hall anyway, but we’ve managed to change about 30 percent of the bulbs in the entire building.”
Architect Anca Petrescu supports the energy-saving efforts, but is upset that the replacement bulbs undermine the “aesthetic philosophy” of crystal chandeliers. “One needs to actually learn how to put a light bulb into a crystal chandelier that costs millions. You don’t just randomly place it there,” Petrescu complains. “Otherwise you just see dots of light instead of iridescent colours. There have been a few foreign visitors that have pointed out the misplacement. The awkward placement neutralises the intended effect of the chandeliers.”
Petrescu also says that in such a large building, intensive consumption and high costs are normal and necessary. “Why are people so surprised? Many kilowatts are consumed when the conference centre is being used. When you light a large area, you also get an income from renting the space. You eventually break even. These are public institutions, and you can’t do anything about it,” she concludes.
Comparisons with European Parliament
Many people would beg to differ with Petrescu. At a time when the world is focusing on carbon footprints and turning to renewable energy, the People’s House epitomises energy waste.
In sheer annual numbers, it requires double the quantity of drinking water (575,000 cubic meters) than the three buildings of the European Parliament (EP) put together (i.e. Brussels, Luxembourg, Strasburg). Continuing the comparison, the People’s House produces annual waste of approximately 2,700 tonnes, the same as the three EP buildings combined. The key difference is that the EP buildings recycle 50 percent of all waste, a practice only recently, and timidly, introduced at the People’s House.
Despite the pretentious chandeliers, numerous lifts and other energy-unfriendly devices, the People’s House consumes only 15.6 kWh, about the same as the EP building in Luxemburg. The building in Strasburg consumes twice as much, while the one in Brussels consumes four times more. On the other hand, the energy consumed at the EP buildings is 100-percent green, deriving from solar panels, wind turbines, hydroelectric sources, etc.
In terms of surface area, the three EP buildings and their annexes total 1 million square meters, while the Peoples’ House contains 330,000 square meters.
Cracked heater? That'll be EUR 70,999, please...
The building’s high water consumption is due to outmoded pipe infrastructure. The People’s Palace has 150 kilometers of pipes, but a mere 10.5 kilometres have been refitted. “People’s Palace water consumption has quadrupled since 2004,” says Tanase, “and some 575,000 cubic meters of water were consumed in 2008. The increase is partly due, however, to the building’s higher occupancy rates.”
Expenses also have increased. They occur without anyone even considering the possibility, and only come to anyone’s notice much later. “In a normal house it’s quite usual that a pipe might crack, not to mention in a building the size of a small town,” Tanase continues. “Today, for instance a pipe cracked. If there happened to be a hall underneath with decorations of 4-karat gold or fine wood it would be quite tragic. A while ago a heater broke down and it wasn’t noticed for some time. The water drained, but wasn’t noticed by the technicians because it was a small detail. Until the water started flowing into the hall ways, considering the immensity of the structure, the problem wasn’t even found out. The final repair cost was EUR 70,000.”
The 'Freon devourer'
As People’s House administrator, Alex Tanase’s job provides satisfaction and frustration in equal measures. His overhauling of the main heating unit of the building increased efficiency by 25 percent. The building’s ‘chill factory’, on the other hand is a different story. After a tender for a cooling-system overhaul took place, a firm that didn’t even take place in the bid contested the results.
Deep inside the People’s House is a great chamber of multiple containers filled with venting and cooling machines. Two such containers work non-stop for the main hall alone. Further back, there are five inoperative ‘steam engines’ constituting the main cooling unit that was shut down in 2008. “They would roar like airplanes when turned on and consumed 470 kilos of Freon each year,” Tanase explains.
The ‘chill factory’, manufactured by a now-bankrupt company from the former German Democratic Republic, used to consume 3,250 kWh. “The operating costs were great even at 5 to 7 percent capacity. It was badly designed from the start. It was running on R22 Freon, which was subsequently banned, so we shut it down,” says Tanase. It worked until 2008, providing air conditions for the ground and first floors.”
The architect Petrescu argues that when the machines were top of the line when they were installed: “They were of the ’89 generation bought from the GDR, but they weren’t completely finished. I mean, the water from the heating unit had to be recycled, and they weren’t completely installed. I was staggered to find out that the water from the freezing unit was thrown in the sewer, which wasn’t right. The water had to be cleansed and then used on the lawn. That’s the way it was planned.”
Ceausescu: concerned about consumption?
Petrescu admits to being a little out of touch with global concerns for energy efficiency. But she does recall former dictator Nicolai Ceausescu had solicited a few modifications for energy saving when the People’s House was in the design stage.
“Carbon footprint? What the hell is that?” asks Petrescu. “I’ll look it up. In any case, even before 1989 there was a preoccupation with energy saving. My project involved placement of a glass wall in front with spaced columns. I was asked to reduce the size of the glass surface to save energy. They wanted to attach sheets of polystyrene over stone and marble. The biggest idiocy! The walls were very thick. For six months the National Institute for Research and Development in Construction studied wall thickness in order to keep thermal exchange to a minimum.”
House of pane
At the time this writer paid a visit to Petrescu at her ground-floor office inside the People’s Palace, temperatures were below freezing, and a thick blanket of snow covered Bucharest. A layer of snow that had blown in through office’s windows was as thick as the snowfall outside. A few radiators operating in the office were a poor substitute for a proper heating system, and the temperature was rather on the chilly side.
“These windows are more than thermopane,” she indicates. “There are three layers of glass, with thermopane on the outside and an aluminium frame – the best insulation. We had to do this everywhere, but the windows won’t lock shut. It’s not normal that they haven’t been repaired in 20 years, but the windows weren’t my design. They were made according to data from the NIRCD [National Institute for Research and Development in Constructions and the Economy of Constructions].
Not even the administrator’s office stays is snow-free. Tanase says that this is not due to improper care, but to bad design and irreparable old age. He also claims that changing the People’s House windows would be Romania’s “deal of the century.” He does not, however, believe that anyone would approve such an effort. No doubt that the tabloids would be out in force claiming ‘Congress buys itself another luxury item,’ Tanase reckons.
Because the building needs an energy audit, which is compulsory for every household in Romania starting from 2009, Tanase went on the lookout for an auditor three years ago. “In 2007 I posted an announcement for firms to come and audit the People’s House. No one came,” he says. “Companies would prefer to copy-paste the same little protocol they use for small households, instead of earning between anywhere from one to three euros per square metre to properly audit the second-largest building on the planet.”
In fall 2009, the Chamber of Deputies rallied a committee of field professionals to perform the audit. Unfortunately, the committee failed to produce a result, Tanase says. Now he has an offer from a Dutch company that has pledged to do the work gratis, counting instead on the credit of prestige for investing in such a massive undertaking.
Petrescu has also been looking around for a solution. “I found someone to do the audit,” she says. “I went to Munich and then to the University of Frankfurt. Also, our universities here could do this. I’m looking for someone who is objective and neutral. I’ve found universities who would perform the audit for 15,000 euros. The audit is everyone’s preoccupation. I checked. I’m also very interested when I hear about propositions for windmills on the building and other crap.”
Built to last, but for how long?
While waiting for competent energy audit, the People’s House continues to waste vast amounts of energy. Even though refurbished, the heating unit can’t handle the entire structure. The ventilating system is equally inefficient, so all offices are equipped with AC units that encumber the structure’s electrical grid. It requires Tanase’s expert touch to prevent the system from buckling under the strain. “I don’t think the electrical grid was designed to withstand all the appliances currently in the building,” he says. “For example, I have three computers on my desk. The electrical panels and fuses, which burn and pop like nuts, date back to Ceausescu. The building also has sixteen electrical converters. A new converter costs 30 billion lei [approx. EUR 7.5 million], plus 10 percent for installation. We still have converters that run on oil. If one of them blows up, people will die. All of them were already outdated when they were brought in. There were also converters like this in bomb shelters, but even they’ve been switched. We’re the last ones left with these.”
Petrescu, on the other hand, reassures Tanase that he has nothing to worry about: “I think the electrical grid has a lot of potential, so I wouldn’t worry about it. Each device is built to withstand 30 to 40 percent above capacity. Shouldn’t we ask the designer of the electrical documentation? He’s dead, but his son is alive, and maybe he can tell us or do a study. Once you give a structure a lifespan it means that you proportion everything so that the building will last as long as intended. If the building is made to last 500 years, you don’t give it an electric grid with a 15-year life expectancy.”
Parliament's green project
pinion is nearly unanimous that the People’s House, which houses nearly 20 separate institutions, in addition to the Romanian Parliament, needs an energy overhaul. Sulfina Barbu, a member of the Chamber of Deputies, initiated the ‘Green Parliament Project’ in summer 2009, in collaboration with Green Revolution Association. The project entails separate waste collection, paper recycling, replacing lighting materials and electrical appliances with more economical units.
“It’s necessary to rationalise our consumption to reduce the huge bills, which are paid for out of the public’s pocket,” says Barbu. “‘Green Parliament’ means a building friendly both to the environment and the public budget.”
The project has shown promising results in no less than six months, according to the deputy: “From June to October, 11-and-a-half tonnes of paper, three-and-a-half tonnes of plastic, and a half tonne of glass have been collected from the Chamber of Deputies. Building on this experience, there is now a legal initiative in place requiring all public institutions to practice separate waste collection starting in 2010. For this I’ve received the support of the Green Revolution NGO.”
Last fall, Green Revolution organised three major conferences concerning the need for the People’s House to reduce its carbon footprint. Specialists from several fields discussed opportunities for reducing consumption of water and energy, and to create a system for waste collection and recycling.
Little hope for zero-energy solutions
Anca Petrescu concedes that the building she’s been working on for more than 30 years could consume less, but says that this won’t be achieved through “wacky” initiatives like windmills on the building, a basement filled with biomass, or solar panels on the roof: “Savings come through rationalisation. Take air conditioning, for example. We had vent-convectors in all the offices. When they started refurbishing the building around 1992 or 1993, people didn’t know what these pieces of junk were. And they started cutting down the pipes. They were for ventilation and heating. And they ran through the entire structure and were hooked to the main ventilation unit. The building was designed at top technological conditions, but things weren’t used appropriately.”
Nor is the building administrator too keen on windmills. Instead, Tanase believes that the primary source of savings would come from improved electrical units: “There are ideas, solar panels, and windmills. But efficiency is greater if you reduce the number of light bulbs and renew the infrastructure. It’s a total pipe dream to believe that this huge building could consume zero energy. You can’t drive a bus that will handle like a small car.”
Auditing redux: insurmountable complexities
“I can’t believe they haven’t found a company to perform the audit,” says president of the Energetic Auditors Association, Emilia Cerna Mladin. “Rather, they’ve never had the money to pay for it.” Mladin considers that such an operation for the People’s House – what he calls “an energy disaster” – is both difficult and risky due to the unprecedented complexities it presents.
“We proposed an audit to Tanase two years ago,” Mladin continues. “But it is indeed a very challenging operation. Its complexity stems from the many elements that are linked to security and control. Moreover, at the time we proposed the audit, the building completely lacked any architectural or technical plans. Those items alone are very expensive, maybe more expensive than the audit itself.”
The standard audit price for normal buildings ranges between one and three euros per square metre, but Mladin believes that the price could drop to less than a euro per square metre for a building of such size. But Mladin also believes that it is senseless to carry out any rehabilitation work without first carrying out an audit.
