Comment 90% reduction in emissions is quite achievable (Score 1) 215
I founded an award-winning startup a couple years ago whose software tells you what your potential energy savings are, using only your street address and zipcode as inputs, so I've been tracking developments like this closely. What the experts call "sealing the envelope of the building," or thoroughly insulating the structure, does give you the biggest bang for the buck (although the ROI for triple-paned windows, as the article suggests, just isn't there). But that's not terribly sexy because once the insulation's in it's hard to brag to the neighbors about something that's invisible. An array of solar panels or a cool wind turbine are much better for that.
And NYC's solar potential is decent, at 4.08. That means that on average NYC gets 4.08 hours of peak solar production every day. A 200 Watt panel in NYC would therefore produce 200 Watts/hr for 4.08 hours, or roughly 0.8 kwh/day. You need 15 of those panels to produce the 12kwh/day, or 440kwh/month, that the average family uses.
When you consider those kinds of numbers, it quickly becomes obvious that all the chatter about "stressing the grid" with increased demand for electricity is FUD. What they're really worried about is this, which is already happening in Germany with the solar capacity they have today. That is, the profit curve for the fossil-fuel powered utilities has been gutted by renewables because they make most of their moneye during the height of the day when the demand is highest, and coincidentally exactly when solar performs best.
Especially now that we have seen several times this year, thanks to Hurricane Sandy and the Superstorm last week, that the grid is not reliable everyone is reaching the collective 'aha!' moment that causes a huge shift in energy consumption behavior and that the fossil fuel companies are terrified of.