Portfolio Manager Benchmarking Report • State agencies • Public universities • State community and technical colleges October 2016 through September 2018 Contacts: Chris Liu, Director, Enterprise Services, (360) 407-9202 Annette Meyer, Deputy Director, Enterprise Services, (360) 407-9203 William Frare, Assistant Director, Facilities Professional Services, Enterprise Services, (360) 407-8239 Roger Wigfield, Energy Program Manager, Enterprise Services, (360) 407-9371 Donna Albert, Energy Engineer, Enterprise Services, (360) 489-2420 To accommodate persons with disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats by calling the Department of Enterprise Services at (360) 407-8059. TTY/TDD users should contact Enterprise Services via the Washington Relay Service at 711 or 1-800-833-638 Portfolio Manager Benchmarking Report October 2016 through September 2018 Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................... 2 OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................. 5 BUILDING ENERGY BENCHMARKING ........................................................................... 8 PRELIMINARY AUDITS ...............................................................................................12 INVESTMENT GRADE AUDITS .....................................................................................12 BUILDING ENERGY RETROFITS ...................................................................................12 SUCCESS STORIES ......................................................................................................13 ISSUES AND CHALLENGES ..........................................................................................16 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................17 APPENDICES APPENDIX A - Energy Benchmarking Law (RCW) .........................................................20 APPENDIX B - DES Portfolio Manager Webpage ..........................................................25 APPENDIX C - DES Audit Recommendations ...............................................................26 APPENDIX D - DES Energy Savings Performance Contracting Program .........................34 APPENDIX E – Site Energy Use Intensity (EUI) 2009 – 2017 ..........................................35 APPENDIX F – Benchmarking Status of Campuses and Buildings ..................................36 1 Portfolio Manager Benchmarking Report October 2016 through September 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS The Building Energy Benchmarking Law (RCW 19.27A.190) requires agencies, colleges and universities to track building energy use and make their buildings more energy efficient. This biennial report is required to summarize the statewide portfolio manager master account reporting data. Background The EPA’s Energy Star Portfolio Manager is an interactive energy management tool that allows tracking and assessment of energy consumption across an entire portfolio of buildings in a secure online environment. It can be used to identify under-performing buildings, set capital improvement priorities, verify efficiency improvements, and identify successful energy management practices in state facilities. Challenges to successful building energy benchmarking can vary. If energy use data is not entered into the Portfolio Manager tool, reporting will be incomplete. Many agency and college campuses that are served by campus steam loops are not metered at the building level, so building energy use data is missing. Agencies have limited resources to apply to metering and building energy benchmarking which also leads to incomplete data. Key findings The 2009 law went into effect when the state was making staff and capital funding reductions. Those constraints hindered agencies, colleges, and universities from meeting the statute timelines. While funding has limited the implementation of the law, agencies, colleges, and universities have made substantial progress. The greatest barrier to state-owned facilities complying with the law is a lack of meters on individual buildings. It is impossible to effectively manage the energy use of large buildings that are not separately metered. State agencies, colleges, and universities should be properly resourced so that tracking and reducing energy becomes a higher priority. Recommendations Incorporate building energy benchmarking into funding requirements – Agencies, colleges, and universities are not complying fully with the benchmarking law. Because of this, we do not know whether agency, college, and university building energy use is trending toward our greenhouse gas goals. Consider requiring current building benchmarking data in Portfolio Manager as a condition of capital funding. 2 Portfolio Manager Benchmarking Report October 2016 through September 2018 Install energy meters on state buildings – Millions of square feet of state agency and college buildings are not separately metered. It’s impossible to benchmark and track the energy use of a building that is not metered. Expand the Resource Conservation Management (RCM) program – The RCM program helps facility managers reduce energy bills and make more cost effective maintenance and capital investment decisions. Provide funding to expand the RCM program to serve more agencies, colleges, and school districts. Consider funding a specialized RCM position to provide building energy benchmarking assistance. Ensure adequate staffing of facilities maintenance and operations – Facilities maintenance and operations must be adequately staffed and trained to keep occupancy schedules up to date, observe trends, troubleshoot problems, and adjust building systems to reduce energy use. Fund Zero Energy Buildings and Zero Energy Renovations – Currently, new buildings and renovation projects are adding to the greenhouse gas emissions of agencies and colleges. New buildings that are capable of using less energy than they make should be prioritized. Renovations that dramatically reduce building energy use should also be considered and funded. Build a modern work environment, to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – When possible, right- size facilities and reduce commutes by using strategies such as shared spaces, hoteling, distance learning, flexible work hours, and cloud computing as described in Executive Order 16-07 and on the OFM Modern Workplaces website. Create a culture of conservation and sustainability – • In many cases, energy conservation measures are not implemented, even though financial analysis shows that the energy savings can pay for the energy conservation measures over time. • Decision makers consider cost effective energy retrofit proposals to be riskier than higher future operating costs. • Higher future greenhouse gas emissions are not always considered. • Facilities investments which produce long-term financial benefits or reduce organizational greenhouse gas emissions do not receive sufficient recognition. • Major operational and facilities decisions are not driven by greenhouse gas reduction goals. There are also thousands of energy-related decisions made every day by building occupants and agency staff. Possible no-cost or low-cost energy saving opportunities originate in these day-to- day decisions. Management support for energy savings efforts is essential. A culture of conservation and sustainability helps everyone find the best way to complete their mission while still striving for their energy reduction goals. Empowering everyone to make decisions that reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions is consistent with Lean principles. 3 Portfolio Manager Benchmarking Report October 2016 through September 2018 Establish a cycle of continuous improvement – Completing all cost effective energy conservation measures is ongoing. As soon as five years after a comprehensive building energy retrofit is done, a new energy audit is likely to find additional cost effective energy saving measures. Changes in operations, degradation of equipment, new ideas and strategies, and new technology constantly create opportunities for reducing energy use. When state government has a focus on continuously implementing all cost effective energy conservation measures, we save money and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 4 Portfolio Manager Benchmarking Report October 2016 through September 2018 OVERVIEW RCW 19.27A.190 Energy Benchmarking Under state law (RCW 19.27A.190), “benchmarking” is a tool for finding energy savings in state buildings. Buildings that have high-energy consumption must go through a process of energy audits. If the audit identifies a cost-effective upgrade, the agency is directed to implement it, subject to available funding. What Is Building Energy Benchmarking? Building Energy Benchmarking1 is recording a building’s energy use over the course of a year. This establishes a baseline that can be used to compare against similar buildings or against itself over time. Energy Use Intensity (EUI), is the unit used in benchmarking. The EUI is the total energy used in one year divided by the gross square footage of the building (kBtu/sqft). Buildings that use electricity, natural gas, propane, wood, or steam, can all be compared using this common unit of measurement. Buildings with a higher EUI use more energy per square foot than buildings with a lower EUI. The EPA Energy Star Portfolio Manager also provides scores for some building types, including offices, warehouses,