By Don Young, International Facility Management Association (IFMA)
Taking part in a webcast this week, I couldn’t stop thinking about ice cream.
The webcast actually had nothing to do with my favorite dessert. It was about the third annual Energy Efficiency Indicator (EEI) survey that IFMA is happy to partner with Johnson Controls on every year.
Johnson Controls, of course, is headquartered in Wisconsin – America’s Dairyland – but that isn’t what put an image of ice cream into my head, either.
Here’s what did: Most of the time, I’m pretty good about choosing the no-sugar, no-fat ice cream when the urge strikes. I have to admit that sometimes, though, I give in and have a scoop of “fully-loaded.” I know I should stop doing this altogether. But I don’t. There’s a disconnect between what I know I should do and what I actually do. And that is exactly what the results of this year’s EEI survey show:
• 71% of business leaders are paying more attention to energy efficiency than they were a year ago (that’s up from 62% in 2007)
• 58% say energy management is extremely or very important (up from just 20% in 2007)
But here’s the kicker:
• 10% fewer business leaders expect to spend capital dollars on energy efficiency improvements
• 6% fewer expect to invest operating dollars into energy efficiency
Businesses know what they should do, but fewer are actually doing it. Why? The number one reason is capital budgets that are shrinking due to the economic slowdown. Number two is the relatively longer payback on energy efficiency investments. Uncertainty is yet another big reason – uncertainty over the direction of energy prices, financial incentives and government regulation of carbon emissions.
Still, in the midst of this uncertainty and economic turmoil, organizations are making significant investments in energy efficiency. Two of them took part in the webcast:
The Department of Energy’s Oak Ridge National Laboratory signed a $89 million energy savings performance contract with Johnson Controls to dramatically increase energy efficiency and use of renewable energy on its 500-acre, 400-facility campus in Tennessee. When completed, the improvements will reduce fossil fuel use by 85%, save 170 million gallons of water a year and supply 21% of the facility’s power needs with on-site renewable energy facilities.
The Empire State Building, one of the most recognized and admired skyscrapers in the world, recently contracted with Johnson Controls to perform $20 million in energy efficiency upgrades to the 102-story Manhattan icon that will cut energy usage by 38% and reduce the structure’s carbon footprint. The project will serve as a model for energy efficiency retrofit projects that have sensible payback periods and enhance the profitability of owners.
The question I had is this: how were these two organizations able to look beyond the barriers preventing others from investing in energy efficiency? Their own responses during the webcast spoke loud and clear on that subject.
“It’s just good business,” said Tim Clancy, Director of Operations at the Empire State Building. “The investment pays back in lower energy costs, and we end up with a more valuable building.”
“I agree that it’s good business,” added Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s Deputy Director of Facilities and Operations Jimmy Stone. “It’s how we’re going to be a viable organization going forward.”
No disconnect there. Two facility management professionals who recognize the critical roles they play in helping their organizations control costs and operate sustainably. They and their organizations are proof positive that strategic capital investments in high-performance building technologies can and do lower energy consumption, maximize efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
As the economy improves, credit markets ease and the regulatory picture becomes clearer, we’re certain to see more organizations like them lining up for their scoop of energy efficiency, with some renewables sprinkled on top.
