Energy Benchmarking in Facility Management: Using the Right Toolsg g g

Christopher P. Hodges, P.E., CFM, LEED AP, IFMA Fellow (Moderator)

Kimberly Dominguez, CFM

Patrick Okamura CFM, CSS, CIAQM, LEED AP, IFMA Fellow

David Thomas, CFM, LEED-AP O&M

Agenda1 I t d ti t ti1. Introduction to energy consumption

benchmarking (Hodges)2. Energy consumption in a “traditional”

environment (Dominguez)3. Energy benchmarking in a manufacturing

environment (Okamura)environment (Okamura)4. Energy consumption in a public assembly

(convention center) environment (Thomas)5 O i i t t b h ki5. Ongoing improvements to energy benchmarking

tools (Hodges)

Portfolio Manager• Free, online tool• The industry standard in commercial real estate• Track changes in energy, water, GHG emissions over time

within a single building or entire portfolio• Understood and used by many owners managementUnderstood and used by many owners, management

companies, local governments, potential buyers and lenders

B li E U

Portfolio Manager

Energy Utilization Index (EUI)/Energy Intensity - measure of the total energy consumption over the course of a year kBTU/SF

Baseline Energy Use

total energy consumption over the course of a year, kBTU/SF

Pros:• Industry standard approachIndustry standard approach• Simple to calculate• Easy to compare buildings year-to-year

Cons:• Not weather-normalized• Does not account for building use factors.

Portfolio Manager

ENERGY STAR rating – a benchmarking tool

Pros:• Weather-normalized• Accounts for building use factors

T k f ili f• Track facility performance• Assist with achieving EPA Recognition & LEED certificationsLEED certifications

Cons:• 1-100 rating not available for all building types1 100 rating not available for all building types

General Space Energy & WGeneral Space Water

Location

Gross Floor AreaArea types 12 Consecutive

Months ofYear builtBuilding type

Area typesHours of use# Occupants

Months of consumption

data

# Computers

Data Entry

S 75

Portfolio ManagerScore = 75Energy Star

Label Potential

Rating system models based on US DOE’s Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS)

Prioritize portfolio-wide upgrades and improvements

Focu

s

InvestAdj t Maintain

Adjust Investev

el o

f F

Adjust MaintainLe

High EUI Average EUI Low EUI

Energy Use Intensity

High EUI Average EUI Low EUI

Agenda1. Introduction to energy consumption

benchmarking (Hodges)2 Energy consumption in a “traditional”2. Energy consumption in a traditional

environment (Dominguez)3. Energy benchmarking in a manufacturing

environment (Okamura)environment (Okamura)4. Energy consumption in a public assembly

(convention center) environment (Thomas)5. Ongoing improvements to energy benchmarking

tools (Hodges)

NEA Headquarters,at a glance:• 470,000 SF• Washington, DC• Constructed in 1936, renovated in 1991 • Began certification effort in 2007• Internal Team – 7 people

Facilities Group• External Team• External Team

Energy Audit Case Study

Started with a rating of 63…• Set up schedules within the building control system to shut the air

handling units off when zones were unoccupied

• Used economizer mode on air handling units during cooler weather to avoid running chiller plantto avoid running chiller plant

• Minimized/eliminated use of steam humidifiers within 19 air handling units and rebuilt/replaced steam traps.

• Programmed ‘Optimized Start’ for air handlers with Energy Management Control System (EMCS)

• Purchased ENERGY STAR equipment

• Installed variable frequency drives for cooling tower fans

I ll d i i• Installed motion sensors in restrooms

• 10% Reduction in energy costs in Year 1Energy Audit Case Study

10% Reduction in energy costs in Year 1

• Total Project Cost = $45,445

$16,800 for Energy Audit$ , gy

$28,645 on Energy Conservation Measures

• $365,000 Total Savingsg

Year Annual Energy Costs

ENERGY STAR Rating

200 $1 28 69 632007 $1,287,769 632008 $1,161,042 702009 $1,050,303 77

$913 764

Received ENERGY STAR

Label in 20092010 $913,764

(Estimated) 87 (Estimated)

$738,000 in Baseline Savings*

(2010 Savings Estimated)(2010 Savings Estimated)* Savings calculated assuming a constant 2007 energy cost over 2008 and 2009.

Agenda1. Introduction to energy consumption

benchmarking (Hodges)2 Energy consumption in a “traditional”2. Energy consumption in a traditional

environment (Dominguez)3. Energy benchmarking in a manufacturing

i (Ok )environment (Okamura)4. Energy consumption in a public assembly

(convention center) environment (Thomas)( ) ( )5. Ongoing improvements to energy benchmarking

tools (Hodges)

Energy Consumption in a Manufacturing Environment

What We Had:

• Energy Star Rating of “27”• Building was Built in 1957g• Mix of Infrastructures• Lack of Metering Capacity• Documented 30% Reduction in Energy Savings• Determined Facilities Team

Scottsdale Site Annual Power Consumption 1991- 2010

80000000

90000000

100000000 KwH

30% KwH 

60000000

70000000

80000000Reduction

30000000

40000000

50000000

0

10000000

20000000

Note: KwH costs have increased nearly 30% since 1991

Annual Energy Savings of 15 MW for the last 10 years 

Energy Consumption in a Manufacturing Environment

Benchmarking Difficulties:

• 2 to 1 Computer to Employee Ratio• Lack of Useful or Relevant Data• Wide variety of industrial & Engineering Applications• Extensive Component Testing• Intensive Engineering, Laboratory & ResearchCli• Climate  

Energy Consumption in a Manufacturing Environment

Alternative Databases:

• Commercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS) #334Man fact ring Energ Cons mption S r e (MECS)• Manufacturing Energy Consumption Survey (MECS)  Climate Data

• North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) building Type

• IFMA 2007/2008 O/M Survey Data for Manufacturers

Approach to EAP2 EUI Values across the Climate Zones:

• Option A or B were not options• Option C3 Approach Selected• Energy Use Intensity Ratings• Leveraged Climate Zone• Leveraged Energy Intensive BusinessLeveraged Energy Intensive Business• Confirmed Our Energy Use was 19% Lower Than National Average Climate Zone 5 starts with 2,000 CDD, whereas the

Phoenix Metropolitan Area 30-year average is 4 125Phoenix Metropolitan Area 30-year average is 4,125 CDD with 1,125 HDD, which places one of the highest energy burdens in Climate Zone 5 on the GDC4S Scottsdale Facility.

Energy Consumption in a Manufacturing Environment

Achieving LEED EB

• Selecting the Appropriate Option• Spot Metering – Alternate Approach• Use of Largest Data Set Option “C” Calculator(8 common bldg’s)

• Having Access to Historical Data• Having Access to Historical Data• Quantified energy use by BTU/Employee • Aligned Climate, Temperature and Relevant g pBuilding Data

Agenda1. Introduction to energy consumption

benchmarking (Hodges)2 E i i “ di i l”2. Energy consumption in a “traditional”

environment (Dominguez)3. Energy benchmarking in a manufacturing gy g g

environment (Okamura)4. Energy consumption in a public assembly

(convention center) environment (Thomas)(convention center) environment (Thomas)5. Ongoing improvements to energy benchmarking

tools (Hodges)

Energy consumption in a public assembly (convention center)assembly (convention center)

environment

900 000 sq ft900,000 sq. ft4 city blocks long2 city blocks wide2 city blocks wide2500 tons of

coolingg10 Megawatts of

electricity on h h fl !the show floor!

Benchmarking difficulties for a convention center

• Fear of KNOWING the unknown • “What you don’t know can’t hurt you!”y y

• Many cities have not required sustainability in public assembly venues

• Self Regulate or wait to be regulated….

• Limited dataV i d f t d d tt d• Varying degrees of use-event days and attendance

• Bad economic years look great on a sustainability curve!

• 3rd Party impacts- clients decorators needs and use of the3rd Party impacts clients, decorators needs and use of the facility

• Same employees different results :/

• Alternative databases for public assembly environments

What’s Happening NOW??E S P f li M• Energy Star Portfolio Manager groups

IFMABOMAAUSTIN- Now required for all commercial facilities over 5000sq.ft.

• Energy Star for the Entertainment Sector Partner groupAustin Convention CenterCharlotte Convention CenterMonona Terrace Community and Convention CenterNorthshore Harbor CenterOregon Convention CenterPalmer Event Centere ve Ce eSaint Paul RiverCentreSan Diego Convention Center Virginia Beach Convention CenterVirginia Beach Convention Center

What is on the HORIZON….

• IAAM and IFMA Sustainability work groups creating databases and standards/best practices

• IFMA Foundation producing excellent “How to’s” in all areas of sustainability

• More and more regulations nationwide

Approach to LEED – EB certification

Measure against yourself (current 12 mo period against a 3 year average)g y g )

Pros

• Very simpley p

• Easy to control

ConsCons

• Limited point opportunity

• How long have you been implementing energy saving• How long have you been implementing energy saving initiative???

Approach to LEED – EB certification

Measure against other leaders within the Energy Star groupsStar groups

Prosilli i i• Willing participants

• Easily obtainable dataCons• Cream of the cropp• Not a representative cross-section

Approach to LEED – EB certificationCompile data from facilities outside of Portfolio Manager

PPros• Better cross-section

B tt t it f i l k t t• Better opportunity for regional or market segment comparisons

Cons• More resistance• How will this impact me???p• Open records act

Agenda1. Introduction to energy consumption

benchmarking (Hodges)2 Energy consumption in a “traditional”2. Energy consumption in a traditional

environment (Dominguez)3. Energy benchmarking in a manufacturing

i (Ok )environment (Okamura)4. Energy consumption in a public assembly

(convention center) environment (Thomas)( ) ( )5. Ongoing improvements to energy benchmarking

tools (Hodges)

What does this mean to Facility Managers?

The IFMA Energy Challenge: ENERGY STAR

What does this mean to Facility Managers?

• Utility costs for the average IFMA facility is $2.56 per square foot • $200 Billion per year on electricity, gas and water in commercial $ 00 illio pe yea o e ec c y, g s d w e co e c

facilities• A 10 percent improvement in building energy efficiency would save

about $20 billion in operating cost, reduce greenhouse gases, and id i i i ib i b liprovide a significant contribution to your company’s bottom line.

Reduce baseline facility energy use by 15% f y gy yor more, and provide a process for continuous improvement in energy

Jurisdictions in over 30 countries and six U.S. States have adopted mandatory building energy rating

efficiency

policies (The Corporate Social Responsibility Newswire, 10 Feb 2010)

Credits:

ENERGY STAR and the

IFMA Challenge: Saving Energy in Your Facilities

Maureen RoskoskiLaurie GilmerGreg Hughel

Alyssa Quarforth

Resources for improving energy efficiency

http://www ifmafoundation org/ Morehttp://www.ifmafoundation.org/

http://www.ifma.org/More on the way . . .y

ENERGY STAR www.energystar.govENERGY STAR is a joint program of the United States ofAmerica Environmental Protection Agency and theUnited States of America Department of Energy helpingto save money and protect the environment throughenergy efficient products and practices.

Commercial Building Energy ConsumptionCommercial Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS): www.eia.doe.gov

CBECS is a national survey conducted by the UnitedStates of America Department of Energy every four years.The survey collects data such as building characteristicsThe survey collects data such as building characteristicsand energy usage from buildings located across theUnited States

American Society of Heating, Refrigerating andy g, g gAir-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE)www.ashrae.org

Questions???

Energy Benchmarking in FacilityEnergy Benchmarking in Facility Management: Using the Right Tools

Christopher P. Hodges, P.E., CFM, LEED AP, IFMA Fellow (Moderator)

Kimberly Dominguez CFMKimberly Dominguez, CFM

Patrick Okamura CFM, CSS, CIAQM, LEED AP, IFMA Fellow

David Thomas, CFM, LEED-AP O&M