What is Digg?Sponsored by wix.com
66 Comments
- athinnes, on 10/01/2009, -2/+30Dugg for using Sears Tower and not Willis.
- AbyssNOLF, on 06/25/2009, -8/+24You know what else was green? The ***** Hulk!
- keithwired, on 06/26/2009, -1/+13While that seems like a ***** of money at first glance, just think of how much energy a huge tower like that uses on a daily basis. The electric bill for one day of electricity is probably ridiculous so the $350 million would be recouped in a shorter amount of time than you'd think.
- EnergyGeekCa, on 06/26/2009, -3/+13All buildings and home should have solar panels and where possible wind turbines. Of course we'll have to look into the health and safety issues involved. And keep in mind the recycling of these devices when they come to the end of their lifecycle. But with proper planning using them everywhere makes sense!
- wontstoptalking, on 06/26/2009, -0/+9The Sears Tower won't be around that much longer anyway.
It's soon to be Willis Tower.
For shame, Willis Group Holding. For shame. - Chakat, on 06/26/2009, -1/+8Given current oil prices, about 34 years. However, this is just factoring the savings in raw energy costs. Factor in the increase in value these upgrades provide, and the subsequent abilities to increase rent, the project will probably pay for itself in 10-20 years, which is typical for long-term infrastructure upgrades.
- bobertoq, on 06/26/2009, -0/+7"... taking environmental sustainability to new heights..."
Haha! - inactive, on 06/26/2009, -2/+9Love the Sears tower and this is awesome and everything but give us the damn Chicago Spire already.
- bulentm, on 06/26/2009, -0/+7I'm still not calling it Willis Tower. Sears Tower FTW!
- inactive, on 06/26/2009, -0/+6And I'm pretty sure he destroyed buildings.
- Twoje, on 06/26/2009, -0/+5Just wondering...how do you safely traverse a solar paneled roof to clean out the gutters?
- TrueJournals, on 06/26/2009, -0/+5Actually, that nickname (most likely) has nothing to do with the amount of wind Chicago gets -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_name_%2 ...
- crazzy88ss, on 06/26/2009, -0/+5I'm just wondering, how long will it take to recover that $350 million?
- HappyScrappy, on 06/26/2009, -0/+4The article doesn't say it will produce most of its own power and indeed that'd be impossible with the limited roof space available.
It will reduce its draw from the grid through a combination of power usage reductions and self-generation. And frankly probably a huge dose of lies.
I'm all for reducing the power consumption, but expecting a building that densely populated to produce most of its own power is pretty optimistic. - QreepyBORIS, on 06/26/2009, -0/+3Whatchu talkin' 'bout?
Funny, though, Sears hasn't been in the building for about 5 years now and yet the name holds strong. I know that's what I'll be calling it decades from now...old habits die hard. - feliks2, on 06/26/2009, -0/+3Ok, lets install wind turbines and terraced gardens on cars.
- junkfoodjoe, on 06/26/2009, -4/+7I thought it was called Ron White's Big Ol' *****' Building now.
- Chakat, on 06/26/2009, -0/+3In most big buildings of this size, you don't have just one set of elevators, you have sets of elevators that only go in, say, a 20 floor range so that people can get to their destination efficiently.
- Countess666, on 06/26/2009, -0/+3hate to do this...
but the twin towers went down pretty straight and clean, specially considering it wasn't planed in the slightest.
with a few measures to contain the dust carefull planning they can bring down any tower. - Chakat, on 06/26/2009, -0/+3@Digger1123
Why? What's so bad about solar power? - Trent1492, on 06/26/2009, -0/+3"Too many decades to be worth the time and money invested in it."
This message brought to you by the fossil fuel association. - BradMajors, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2There goes the view.
- crazzy88ss, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2Well that's why I asked. Just wondering.
- manbeef, on 06/26/2009, -1/+3yes, as stated in the article.
- centran, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2Despite the joke... This is fairly new technology. A lot of it has been around in vary degree's of efficiency. However, connecting everything together as an entire low-cost, efficient system hasn't been around that long.
- lordmike, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2That's great! Just as long as I'm not the guy up there installing it... I'm getting dizzy just thinking about it... Those people who do maintenance at the top of the tower... they are very brave souls indeed... I'd be scared to death to be up so high...
- SpodTeK, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2Wonder how long it would take for the green revamping to pay for itself or be worth it
- IUAndar, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2Clearly, sir, you never played SimTower
- lewystud, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2agree...heres to hoping the economy turns and the spire redefines the skyline
- inactive, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2I've ALWAYS wanted my car to produce most of its own paper.
- Ferretman, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2Hey! That's a good idea on their part; they are clearly to be applauded.
We do this BIT BY BIT, not with the nonsensical "Cap and Tax" legislation. - rancor01, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2FTA: In such a huge tower, with 4.5 million square feet of office and retail space, 16,000 windows and 104 elevators
104 elevators?!? That cant be right, can it? It only has 110 floors.. - Relikh, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2I still say comiskey park. Screw US cellular field.
- Konrad9, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2***** no move to another floor! We'll conga up there somebody grab my butt!
- Colecoman1982, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2If I had to guess, I'd say that a good portion of the motivation for stuff like this is to grab attention in the hopes that people will start using "Willis Tower" instead of "Sears Tower". I'm not a Chicago native, but I've been living here for a number of years. I can tell you that there are a decent number of people here that are pissed about the re-naming. It hasn't been talked about quite as much as the re-naming of Marshall Fields, but I think by the time it actually happens I'll be hearing about it a lot more in the local news.
- jason2087, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2Wrong...
Right now the Sears tower is begging for tenants. After this overhaul of the exterior and interior they will remodeled and the sears tower will be a much more desirable office space, the tower is outdated and the 70's interior just doesn't make it desirable for tenants. Not to mention the addition of the new hotel designed by Adrien Smith will add to the demand for the office spaces again. Right now the Sears tower has low tenants and is extremely costly to run. This will help solve both aspects. - inactive, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2Large buildings need several because stupid physics get in the way beyond 20-25 floors.
- studdenfadden, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2It has 104 elevators of which 16 are double-decker cars:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sears_Tower - firesights, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2So.... how about getting the Chicago Spire up? Anyone?
Hello? - Digger1123, on 06/26/2009, -1/+3It will be many decades before it is every paid off, and that is if they are lucky.
- feliks2, on 06/26/2009, -0/+2And I'm wondering what the hell happens to this thing when it gets too old and creaky to maintain? I'm sure theres no way to safely demolish it with explosives like most tall buildings are done. With over 100 floors the required precision would be too much. Would they have to dismantle it piece by piece or something?
- Chakat, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1Indeed. Chrysler moved out of its eponymous building in the 50s and it's still called the chrysler building.
- Digger1123, on 06/26/2009, -3/+4Well, making solar panels will burn more dinosaurs and dump more toxic ***** than they will save, so he has a leg up on you in that race.
- CheesyMandez, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1Hey Ron, think we ought to clean up a bit?
- Countess666, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1its not meant to be paid off by the energy savings alone.
it just says "some" in the article.
the rest as said comes from increased rent income. - gdha, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1Great move on their part. Stop sucking everyone's electricity!
- falconear, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1Digger1123: This is apparently your motiff, "Solar and wind power suck!I hate all things green! I would bathe myself in oil if if I could!"
I don't get you people. Even if it's not the end-all-be-all of alternative energy, shouldn't we be doing whatever we can? - Ferretman, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1You don't think the $20K - $40K surcharge putting panels on a typical house will turn off too many folks?
I think it's great as an option, to be sure, and there are many places that are offering it as such. I'm just curious what the "sell-through" rate is on these--probably depends on how high electricity is in your area, I'd guess. - neoquietus, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1Typically very tall buildings are demolished piece by piece until they are short enough that they can be explosively demolished.
- JoeYboo, on 06/26/2009, -0/+1It is a sad state of affairs when marginal efficiencies are the best ideas we invest in these days.
A better investment is in power technology. That way you hedge against the use of oil and progress a new tech. Conservancy is not a means to and end, and is more of a publicity stunt than anything. -
Show 51 - 68 of 68 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is