Energy Benchmarking, Rating, And Disclosure For State .
DOE/EE-0731FACT SHEETExisting Commercial Buildings Working GroupMay 2012Energy Benchmarking, Rating, andDisclosure for State GovernmentsWhat is Energy Benchmarking?Key PointsBenchmarking is the process of comparing inputs, processes, or outputs within orbetween organizations, often with an aim toward motivating performance improvement. Benchmarking typically measures performance using an indicator per commonunit (e.g., cost per unit produced), which allows for comparison over time, to others,or to an applicable standard.When applied to building energy use, benchmarking can provide a mechanism formeasuring how efficiently a building uses energy relative to the same building overtime, other similar buildings, or modeled simulations of a building built to code or adesired standard. Building energy use is typically measured in energy use per square2foot (ft ). To make comparison even easier, buildings can also be rated against predetermined scales that can provide a single rating or score, taking into accountvariations in building operating characteristics, climate, or other factors. By makingenergy performance information readily available, disclosure of such ratings canfacilitate market transformation toward more energy-efficient buildings.Why Encourage Energy Benchmarking?Commercial buildings comprise nearly half of building energy use and roughly 20% of1, 2total energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.Government-owned buildings are nearly 25% more energy-intensive than non1government-owned buildings. Energy expenditures average more than 2 per1square foot in commercial and government buildings, making energy a cost worthmanaging.To manage energy costs, they must be measured in a way that allows for decisionmaking. By making energy performance measurable and visible, local governmentscan encourage building owners to improve the efficiency of their buildings, which candrive new investment and create an estimated 5 to 15 green jobs per 1 million3invested. For example, a recent study found that energy performance benchmarkingprompted energy efficiency investment in over 60% of participants through improvedenergy management processes, building upgrades, and behavioral efficiency4projects. Energy efficiency services companies in New York City and San Francisco are5seeing a 30% increase in business in response to local benchmarking laws. Efficient6buildings are also more profitable and more valuable at resale, which can increaseproperty tax revenues. Building owners seek benchmarking data to differentiate abuilding or company, help value rental rates, and inform the sale or acquisition of4existing buildings. In this role, disclosure of benchmarking data can also help strengthenlocal real estate markets.By using benchmarking data to drive energy performance improvement in publicbuildings, governments can save taxpayer dollars while paving the way for benchmarking policies aimed at the private sector. Similarly, disclosing public buildingenergy performance data can build public trust and confidence in the effectivenessof such policies. But, like most individual policies or practices, benchmarking anddisclosure are not sufficient to realize the full efficiency potential of the commercialbuildings market. Benchmarking should be considered a foundational element that canimprove awareness of building energy performance and drive users to undertake otherenergy-efficient practices.May 2012www.seeaction.energy.gov Energy benchmarking is astandardized process ofmeasuring building energyefficiency. Benchmarking publicbuildings is a low-cost wayto identify buildings thatare good candidates forenergy audits andupgrades. Local governments canlead by example with theirown buildings, then phasein benchmarking anddisclosure for the privatesector. Benchmarking anddisclosure policies canfacilitate market-basedcompetition and driveinvestment in energyefficiency, creating localjobs. About SEE ActionThe State and Local EnergyEfficiency Action Network (SEEAction) is a state and local effortfacilitated by the federalgovernment that helps states,utilities, and other localstakeholders take energy efficiencyto scale and achieve all costeffective energy efficiency by 2020.About the Working GroupThe working group is comprised ofrepresentatives from a diverse setof stakeholders; its members areprovided atwww.seeaction.energy.gov.1
FACT SHEETExisting Commercial Buildings Working GroupBerkeley National Laboratory’s EnergyIQ, and ahost of proprietary tools.Who is Affected?Benchmarking and disclosure policies can affect keystakeholders, including: Public and private building owners and managersmust benchmark their facilities and disclose theresults.Interest groups that represent property managers,real estate professionals, tenants, and energyservice providers may help educate owners andmanagers. Utility companies may facilitate access to energydata. Building, energy, or environmental agencies mayreview and post data online (with support frominformation technology agencies if applicable).How Does It Work?States can start by benchmarking a sample of their ownbuildings, using the results to develop a broader policythat requires all public buildings to be benchmarked atleast annually. Governments can also reach privatemarkets with mandatory benchmarking and disclosurepolicies and voluntary public-private partnerships, suchas energy challenges. The remainder of this fact sheetfocuses on policies requiring private sector action.Other SEE Action fact sheets provide information onpublic-private partnerships and ratepayer-fundedprograms that promote benchmarking.2.Governments are best positioned to create a commonmarket-based currency for energy performance.Recognizing this and states’ roles in creating the legalauthorization for benchmarking, some states havemoved to encourage or require benchmarking andperformance information disclosure in their own portfolio of buildings and in private real estate markets.Public BuildingsStates can benchmark their own buildings to track theperformance of public buildings over time anddetermine which facilities to target for energy efficiencyupgrades, as outlined below.Select appropriate combination of benchmarkingmethods. Benchmarking can be conducted usingmultiple approaches including: May 2012Statistical. A building’s energy performancecan be compared on a statistical basis to a population of comparable buildings. Benchmarkingtools that use this approach include the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA)ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager, Lawrence Same building/building portfolio. The energyperformance of a building can be benchmarkedagainst itself to track performance over time.In addition to tracking energy consumption,this can be a useful approach for measuringchanges in an organization’s carbon footprintor sustainability profile over time. Energy simulation. A building’s energy performance can be benchmarked against anenergy simulation of a building with similarphysical and operational attributes. For7example, Minnesota’s B3 Benchmarking tooluses an energy simulation to compare abuilding’s actual energy use to expected energyuse if built to code.A recent California study found that buildingowners and managers are most interested incomparing a building’s performance against itselfover time (81%), followed by comparison to anational rating scale based on similar buildings4(65%).Implementing Benchmarking Policies1.May 2012Benchmark one or more public buildings. Startwith a sample of buildings that are suspected orknown to be large energy users or poor energyperformers or that reflect a diversity of buildingtypes that are representative of the government’sbuilding portfolio. This early benchmarkingexperience can help inform future benchmarkingand disclosure policies and provide an opportunityto update building records used for maintenanceand other purposes. Key data include: Building characteristics (e.g., age, gross floorarea, percentage of gross floor area that isheated and cooled, presence of a garage) Operating characteristics (e.g., weeklyoperating hours, number of computers) Energy and water (optional) usage data.EPA offers a Portfolio Manager Data Collection8Worksheet to help gather necessary data inputs.Similar data are required for other benchmarkingtools.3.Establish a benchmarking policy or plan for publicbuildings. Based on the results of the sample ofbuildings benchmarked, develop a policy or plan forbenchmarking the entire building portfolio at leastannually. It may be worthwhile to establish a wayto automatically transfer utility billing data to thebenchmarking software. Some utilities offer thistype of automated benchmarking service. Publiclywww.seeaction.energy.gov2
FACT SHEETExisting Commercial Buildings Working Groupdisclosing the results can build public trust andconfidence in the effectiveness of such policies. Forexample, see Arlington County, Virginia’s, Building9Energy Report Cards.4.Use benchmarking results to improve energymanagement. Figure 1 shows how benchmarkingcan help prioritize energy efficiency projects. EPAPortfolio Manager is an example of one benchmarking tool available. It generates a 1 to 100energy performance score comparing a building toits peers using data from the national Commercial10Building Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS).Buildings with a score below 50 are, statisticallyspeaking, in the lower half of energy performersnationwide and therefore may require capitalinvestment to improve their efficiency. Buildingsscoring in the average to above-average range (50to 74) can improve energy performance byadjusting their approach to energy management,largely through low-cost operations and maintenance improvements that can be identifiedthrough more detailed retro-commissioningstudies. Buildings scoring 75 and higher can focuson maintaining successful practices, whilecontinuously striving for even higher performance.Other tools may use different scales, butaccomplish similar ends: (1) analyzing buildings’operating efficiency and (2) identifying the mostcost-effective energy investment opportunitiesacross a portfolio of buildings, thereby helping toprioritize the use of limited resources.Level of FocusPrioritize portfolio-wideupgrades and improvementsAdjustInvestInvest125Adjust50Document the costs and benefits ofbenchmarking. Cost-benefit data can be invaluablein developing policies and programs that influencethe private sector to follow the government’sexample. For example, Arlington County’sbenchmarking and efficiency improvement projectscompleted from 2007 through 2010 have reducedthe energy intensity of its building stock by nearly10%, saving the equivalent of more than 300 U.S.homes’ annual energy use and 450,000 in avoidedenergy costs each year. The county has seen a 20%return on investment for projects uncoveredthrough benchmarking and other energy11management techniques. Arlington County issharing its lessons learned through a communitywide green business challenge, Arlington GreenGames.6.Monitor and verify results. Pre- and post-projectbenchmarking can be used to document energysavings from energy efficiency retrofit projectsidentified through benchmarking. Some benchmarking systems provide greenhouse gas emissionsdata that can help calculate emissions inventories.Private BuildingsState governments can also influence the private realestate market by following the steps outlined below toadopt mandatory benchmarking and disclosure policies.1.Assess the feasibility of benchmarking anddisclosure policies in your state. Stategovernments should determine whether there isactive support in the public and private sectors andwhether state law and regulatory practices permitor inhibit such policies.2.Engage key stakeholders. Engaging stakeholdersfrom the beginning can speed the adoption of andincrease the long-term effectiveness of the policy.Key stakeholders are likely to include: Real estate owners and managers. Thesegroups, typically represented by associations orother networks, are critical to the developmentand execution of benchmarking policy. Real estate brokers. Brokers are importantbecause they arrange the purchase and sale ofmost properties. Tenant organizations. As a primary consumerof benchmarking information, tenants canbuild support for the policy and ensure thatpolicy design serves user needs. Electric and gas utilities. These energy suppliers can provide the energy use data that is100ENERGY STAR EnergyPerformance ScaleFigure 1. Example of how benchmarking can help prioritizeefficiency upgrades among buildings with different scoresSource: U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyMay 20125.Maintain75May 2012www.seeaction.energy.gov3
FACT SHEETExisting Commercial Buildings Working Groupthe basic currency for benchmarking, in somecases through an automated process. 3.Utility regulators. State legislatures andexecutive agencies can engage regulators ofratepayer-funded programs to gain broadersupport in the utility sector.Energy services experts. Engineers, consultants, contractors, and building service firmscan provide policy support educate clients.Define the scope and mechanics of therequirement. Consider what building types will becovered, the ownership type and size of affectedbuildings, the implementation timeframe, disclosure requirements, and possible exemptions. Ifspecific analytical tools or software are to be used,define such technical requirements and how theywill be administered and supported. Such detailsneed not be specified in enabling legislation, butcan be worked out through agency proceedings.4.Adopt policy. Governments may consider a phasedin implementation schedule based on building size,type, etc. to help building owners and managersstart small and work up to a portfolio-wide benchmarking program similar to the approach recommended for public buildings.5.Support post-launch activities. To most effectivelyearn market acceptance, benchmarking anddisclosure policies should be supported witheducation, outreach, and technical assistance.There is a learning curve with using PortfolioManager and other benchmarking tools, and it maytake more than one cycle before users are4proficient in data entry. The many stakeholders inthe affected markets need repeated opportunitiesto learn about and become familiar withbenchmarking, new requirements, technical tools,and processes. It is especially helpful if governmentagencies facilitate access to energy data by workingwith utilities and energy service professionals.Conversely, the benchmarking data can beinvaluable to utilities in improving existing energyefficiency programs and designing new ones.Providing ongoing support for compliance andquality control can also be vital.May 2012May 2012Existing Policies/ProgramsState of California: Assembly Bill 110312Adopted: 2007 / Effective: 2012.Affected Property Types: Non-residential public and2private buildings larger than 5,000 ft .Key Requirements: Requires disclosure of EPA PortfolioManager benchmarking data to the California EnergyCommission and transactional counterparties upon thesale, lease, or financing of a building. Begins with2buildings larger than 50,000 ft in 2012. Mandates thatutilities have processes in place to upload 12 months ofenergy consumption data to Portfolio Manager uponrequest from a customer.State of Massachusetts: Green Communities Act13Adopted: 2008 / Effective: 2009.Affected Property Types: Non-residential publicbuildings.Key Requirements: Requires local governments toestablish an energy baseline as a criterion for achievinggreen community status, thus qualifying the localgovernment for state funding for energy projects.Requires communities to use a benchmarking baselineas a starting point for a 5-year plan to reduce energy14use by 20%. Allows communities to choose their ownbenchmarking tool, though the state promotes use ofMassEnergyInsight or EPA Portfolio Manager.State of Minnesota: 2001 Minnesota Session Laws,Chapter 212 Section 3 (part of the Buildings,15Benchmarks, and Beyond [B3] Project)Signed: 2001 / Effective: 2003.Affected Property Types: Non-residential public (state,2local, and school) buildings larger than 5,000 ft .Key Requirements: Encourages building owners tobenchmark building energy performance using the Stateof Minnesota B3 Benchmarking tool, which compares abuilding’s actual energy use to expected energy use ifbuilt to code and automatically integrates with EPAPortfolio Manager to obtain an ENERGY STAR energyperformance score and certification if desired andeligible. Allows jurisdictions to compare the energy usedby various buildings to focus efficiency investments onbuildings with poor energy performance. Directs thestate to develop a comprehensive plan to identify andimplement efficiency measures in public buildings witha simple payback of less than 15 years. Links with otherprograms as a screening tool to identify cost-effectiveenergy efficiency upgrades.www.seeaction.energy.gov4
FACT SHEETExisting Commercial Buildings Working GroupState of Washington: Senate Bill 585416U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ENERGY STARAutomated Benchmarking System,www.energystar.gov/istar/has.Adopted: 2009 / Effective: 2010.Affected Property Types: Non-residential public and2private buildings larger than 10,000 ft .Key Requirements: Requires disclosure of EPA PortfolioManager benchmarking data to transactional counterparties upon the sale, lease, or financing of an entirebuilding. Requires that utilities have processes in placeto upload 12 months of energy consumption data toEPA Portfolio Manager upon request from a customer.Directs the state to publically disclose benchmarkinginformation. Phases into effect: 2010: Owned or leased public buildings larger than210,000 ft 2011: Private buildings larger than 50,000 ft 2012: Private buildings 10,000 to 49,999 ft .22Complementary Policies/ProgramsBenchmarking is just one component of an effectiveportfolio of ratepayer-funded commercial energyefficiency programs. Although it can tell a buildingowner how a given building rates, it does not explainhow to develop solutions, how to finance them, or howto implement them. Thus, benchmarking should be partof a larger framework that includes components such asenergy audits, retro-commissioning, and financial andtechnical assistance. For example, the above Washington state law requires public buildings with an energyrating below the statistical benchmark performanceaverage to complete energy audits. If the audits identifycost-effective energy savings, the projects must beimplemented. For access to related SEE Actionresources, visit www.seeaction.energy.gov/existing commercial.html.Other ResourcesEfficiency Cities Network, “Building LabelingOrdinances.” /ECN03012011.pdf.Institute for Market Transformation, Energy DisclosureWebsite, www.buildingrating.org.Northeast Energy Efficiency Partnerships. ValuingBuilding Energy Efficiency through Disclosure andUpgrade Policies: A Roadmap for the Northeast U.S.http://neep.org/uploads/policy/NEEP BER Report 12.14.09.pdf.SEE Action, Benchmarking and Disclosure: State andLocal Policy Design Guide and Sample PolicyLanguage. www.seeaction.energy.gov/pdfs/commercialbuildings benchmarking policy.pdf.May 2012May 2012U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ENERGY STARPortfolio Manager, www.energystar.gov/benchmark.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ENERGY STARTarget Finder, www.energystar.gov/targetfinder.U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, State and LocalGovernments Leveraging ENERGY te Local Govts Leveraging ES.pdf.For more information, contact:Cody TaylorU.S. Department of Energy202-287-5842cody.taylor@ee.doe.govTracy NarelU.S. Environmental Protection S. Department of Energy. Buildings Energy DataBook, Chapter 3. March Intro3.aspx.2U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Inventory ofU.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2009,Table ES-8. April 2011. ort.html.3U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, RapidDeployment Energy Efficiency (RDEE) Toolkit: Planning &Implementation Guides. www.epa.gov/cleanenergy/documents/suca/rdee toolkit.pdf.4NMR Group, Inc. and Optimal Energy, Inc., StatewideBenchmarking Process Evaluation, Volume 1: Report,April %20CPUC%20Letter%204-11-12.pdf.5Hurley, A.K.; Burr, A. Building Energy Disclosure LawsPush Companies to Hire. www.bepanews.com/images/pdf/Disclosure Laws Push Companies Hire.pdf.6Burr, A. “CoStar Study Finds Energy Star, LEED Bldgs.Outperform Peers.” March 26, ate of Minnesota, B3 Benchmarking ProgramWebsite, www.mnbenchmarking.com.www.seeaction.energy.gov5
FACT SHEETExisting Commercial Buildings Working GroupMay 20128U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ENERGY STARPortfolio Manager Data Collection /PM Data Collection Worksheet.doc.9Arlington County, Virginia, Building Energy ReportCards. rgy.aspx.10U.S. Department of Energy. Commercial BuildingEnergy Consumption Survey. www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cbecs.11Arlington County, Virginia. "Return on Investment:Energy efficiencies yield big nts/9768ReturnInvestment.pdf. February 27, 2007.12State of California. Assembly Bill 1103,www.energy.ca.gov/ab1103/documents/ab 1103 bill 20071012 chaptered.pdf.13Commonwealth of Massachusetts. GreenCommunities Act, hapter169.14Commonwealth of Massachusetts. “Patrick-MurrayAdministration Awards 8.1 Million in Grants toCommonwealth’s 35 Green 5-greencommunities.html.15State of Minnesota. 2001 Minnesota Session Laws,Chapter 212 Section 3. www.revisor.mn.gov/laws/?id 398&year 2002& type 0.16State of Washington. Senate Bill ill 5854&year 2009#history.Disclaimer:This information was developed as a product of the State andLocal Energy Efficiency Action Network (SEE Action), facilitatedby the U.S. Department of Energy/U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency. Content does not imply an endorsementby individuals or organizations that are part of SEE Actionworking groups, or reflect the views, policies, or otherwise ofthe federal government.May 2012www.seeaction.energy.gov6
Energy Report Cards.9 4. Use benchmarking results to improve energy management. Figure 1 shows how benchmarking can help prioritize energy efficiency projects. EPA Portfolio Manager is an example of one bench-marking tool available. It ge
Bad benchmarking Benchmarking has its limitations. Whilst good benchmarking is about performance and best practice, bad benchmarking can lead to mediocrity. Bad benchmarking is using data to justify average performance, rather than challenging and driving improvements. This
1. Rating Analysis 2. Financial Information 3. Rating Scale 4. Regulatory and Supplementary Disclosure Rating History Dissemination Date Long Term Rating Short Term Rating Outlook Action Rating Watch 08-May-2021 AA A1 Stable Maintain - 16-May-2020 AA A1 Stable Maintain - 15-Nov-2019 AA A1 Stable Maintain - 17-May-2019 AA A1 Stable Maintain -
1. Rating Analysis 2. Financial Information 3. Rating Scale 4. Regulatory and Supplementary Disclosure Rating History Dissemination Date Long Term Rating Short Term Rating Outlook Action Rating Watch 16-May-2020 AA A1 Stable Maintain - 15-Nov-2019 AA A1 Stable Maintain - 17-May-2019 AA A1 Stable Maintain - 15-Nov-2018 AA A1 Stable Maintain -
4 GRI 102: General Disclosures 2016 6. Reporting practice 33 Disclosure 102-45 Entities included in the consolidated financial statements 33 Disclosure 102-46 Defining report content and topic Boundaries 34 Disclosure 102-47 List of material topics 35 Disclosure 102-48 Restatements of information 35 Disclosure 102-49 Changes in reporting 36 Disclosure 102-50 Reporting period 36
For submitting aggregated and nonaggregated energy data requests to SDG&E for compliance with state and local benchmarking regulations. Prepared by the Center for Sustainable Energy for the City of San Diego. Cite this reference as Baptiste, R. S., 2020, SDG&E Benchmarking Data Request Portal User Guide, Center for Sustainable Energy. .
We will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of composite indicators focusing on their two probable uses, benchmarking and quality improvement. Composites for benchmarking Benchmarking of providers based on only one or a few indicators of quality may be problematic for several rea-sons. First,
The tourism sector began to apply benchmarking in the mid-1990s. Wöber (2001) distinguishes these areas of benchmarking focus in tourism: (a) benchmarking of profit-oriented organisations, (b) benchmarking of non-profit organisations, and (c)
Unit 39: Adventure Tourism 378 Unit 40: Special Interest Tourism 386 Unit 41: Tourist Resort Management 393 Unit 42: Cruise Management 401 Unit 43: International Tourism Planning and Policy 408 Unit 44: Organisational Behaviour 415 Unit 45: Sales Management 421 Unit 46: Pitching and Negotiation Skills 427 Unit 47: Strategic Human Resource Management 433 Unit 48: Launching a New Venture 440 .
