Category Archives: Sustainability

Making Your Building Healthier: It’s Not A Gimmick; It Can Make You A Profit!

There has been a lot of stories on the news for decades now about the high cost of health care in the U.S., the brunt of insurance costs borne by companies and organizations. According to one publication, companies and employees now spend an average of $18,000 annually per employee for health costs, a 61% increase in 10 years. And this is likely to grow in the near future, an unsustainable path for business. And that is the direct monetary cost. Additional costs to business include missed work, distraction, bureaucracy, turnover. Ways that a building owner can upgrade its stock that demonstrably will improve the health of the renters’ employees can be shown to be a positive force for the tenant’s bottomline and put your property in great position in the rental market. Even if you move the costs of such upgrades into the tenant’s rent, it is likely to be smaller than the savings in that annual payment for health care.

Now, some of you may be skeptical, but a lot of research has been performed about this and there is no question that a “healthy” building does lead to fewer sick days and higher performance, something that businesses and tenants know are critical for survival. In addition, “healthy” buildings can be cost-effective and produce a strong ROI.

Is there a “magic” or simple formula that will make a building “healthy” and reduce such costs and sick days in a quantifiable? No – at least not right now. The USGBC has developed “WELL” standards which, when implemented, will raise the chances that workers will have fewer sick days, be more focused and productive, etc. WELL buildings are certified that the owner has implemented the most modern, tested strategies to optimize the health of those that use or live in the space. See: https://www.wellcertified.com/en/explore-standard

Consider implementing WELL standards in any new construction or renovation. Perhaps you may not want to go all the way to become certified at this time. But any upgrades you can install that can be shown to improve the health and well-being of the users will put you in a better position in terms of tenant retention or attracting higher level (and higher paying) tenants.

It is critical to recognize that this is not “cookie cutter”. You must begin by understanding each individual property. Is it in an urban, suburban or rural area? Are there other health issues around (contaminated sites or major polluters nearby)? Data is important. What has been the sick day history of previous tenants? Have there been certain patterns?

With this understanding, you can better focus your strategies to those more likely to be successful for more users, whether it be concerning water, air, infrastructure, light, etc.

CCES has the technical experts to help your building become “healthier” by developing the right specific strategies for your buildings and implementing them to the best effect – to increase the odds that users will be healthier, more focused, more productive, and satisfied. All factors to improve tenant retention and attraction and better for your long-term bottom line. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

The Value Of Modernizing Your Aging Buildings

According to the US Energy Information Administration, only 12% of existing commercial buildings have been built since 2003 and more than half were constructed before 1980. The median age of such buildings is around 32 years. https://www.eia.gov/consumption/commercial/reports/2012/buildstock/

Many cities and states in the US have developed goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, commonly by 80% from a 1990 baseline by 2050. New buildings that are certified as LEED are helpful in meeting these goals. However, the statistics above demonstrate that meeting this goal and also reducing energy usage and demand to more effectively manage the grid cannot be met unless existing buildings modernize. More utilities are developing incentives for existing buildings and municipalities laws or new codes to require existing buildings to be more energy efficient.

Incentives are a positive, but only help the bottom-line a little bit, and sometimes have strings attached. Laws are useful, but often result in building owners addressing the letter of the law and not doing all that can be helpful to be more energy efficient.

Building owners should look at modernizing their existing stock as an investment opportunity with many potential financial benefits for the following reasons:

1. Long-term, reliable energy and other cost savings. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), energy savings of 50% to 75% can be achieved in commercial buildings that implement smart energy efficiency measures. Their biggest problem is aging building envelope, causing boilers and air conditioning units to work harder to develop the heat or cold lost to the aging envelope.

Since heating and cooling constitute the largest portion of energy consumption, most old buildings lose energy due to poor interiors and exteriors. Retrofitting older buildings can help with a significant reduction in energy needed to heat or cool the building.

Of course, upgrading lighting to LEDs is a sure-fire financial winner, with significant, reliable cost savings. When upgrading lighting, don’t forget to include lighting controls to keep lights off when the room is not occupied and daylighting to dim your light fixtures when sunlight is entering a room. Why pay for energy when natural light can help?

In addition, such modernizations and new technologies inevitably lead to cost savings in terms of O&M. Modern buildings with intelligent systems use 20% to 40% less energy and result in 8% to 9% lower operating expenses. https://c.ymcdn.com/sites/www.nibs.org/resource/resmgr/BSA/20140108_moa_jones.pdf

2. Meet sustainability goals. Many commercial buildings rent space to private firms that have written sustainability or climate change goals, including reductions in energy usage and/or greenhouse gas emissions. These companies develop multiple strategies to ensure meeting the goals. Working in a building that is energy efficient can keep a tenant happy or attract potential tenants which may have difficult goals to meet. Either way, an energy efficient building can put your building in greater demand (resulting in greater revenue) for your units.

3. Reliability in a world of growing energy use. More companies do more and more things to stay competitive, including, but not limited to bigger and greater data centers. It has been estimated that energy demand will rise 50% between now and 2050. Is your building able to reliably supply energy to tenants. Remember, risk may include serious incidents affecting business viability occur, which, of course, could lead to litigation. Therefore, not wasting energy and bringing in sufficient amounts for all situations is critical, and may require some modernization of the building and its wiring.

This includes automated controls, sensors, monitoring of energy use and feedback, “smart” technologies, and backup power. Being in control of energy usage and distribution puts you in a more powerful position. Are such new technologies expensive? No, they are not as automation has brought down prices. Not having modern features can be more costly to your business as a building owner.

4. Better performing business, greater demand for your space. A modern, green retrofit building with efficient energy systems has been shown to lead to improved worker performance and reduced sick time compared to companies in existing buildings that have not retrofitted appropriately.

A recent Harvard study found that worker cognitive functions improved with better indoor environmental quality and ventilation, including a 50% increase in focus, doubling in crisis response, and a tripling in information usage and strategic thinking scores. A follow-up study found positive impacts on sleep and wellness. https://green.harvard.edu/tools-resources/research-highlight/impact-green-buildings-cognitive-function

5. Rising revenue for a modern building. Continuing on these themes, providing potential tenants with the most modern technologies, reliable energy service, and beneficial working conditions will result in greater market demand. Buildings certified as energy efficient (LEED, Energy Star) are in greater demand and can charge greater rents than stodgy, inefficient buildings with not a lot of specialization to offer the tenant.

Modernizing older buildings with improved energy efficient systems appears to be expensive and a “hassle”. However, the technologies are established, have little chance of failing, and results in many positive items that will raise both the value of your property and the demand to rent space from it, raising revenue and lowering cost significantly. This can only be done, however, if retrofits are implemented intelligently, led by experienced architects and engineers.

CCES has the technical expertise to help you plan and implement smart upgrades to your existing building to gain the benefits listed here. Our experts can help you lower energy usage and costs reliably and to maximize the benefits and, with the help of incentives, minimize the payback and hasten growth. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Should I Be More Energy Efficient or Should I Go For Renewable Energy?

Building owners and managers are seeing more and more evidence of the growing costs of energy and realize these costs must be managed and lowered. But how does one most effectively do this? Does one evaluate the current systems that use energy (HVAC for comfort, lights for lighting, plug load) and make smart upgrades to improve its efficiency (do the same or more using less electricity or gas/oil)? Or does one invest and implement renewable energy to bypass the local utility and take advantage of the free resource generating energy (solar, wind, geothermal)?

Certainly being more energy efficient is a good thing financially for your building. It is in your interest to operate your equipment – for which you paid a lot of money – properly and efficiently; you want to get your money’s worth. If a system (an area of lights, a rooftop unit, a boiler, some PCs) is wasting energy day after day, it is in your interest to replace or upgrade it with equipment that works as well, but uses less energy. On the other hand, renewable energy is all the “rage”, with prices declining. There is certainly security; we know, if designed right, solar, wind, etc. work reliably. Being less dependent on your local utility is a good thing. Which one should a smart building owner/manager lean toward?

Well, it is best to optimize both strategies, but in a particular order. It is tempting to install solar panels or a wind turbine right away. It’s a great “show” piece for stakeholders, incentives are available in many places, and prices are coming down. But it is best to emphasize energy efficiency first. Have a thorough energy audit performed by an experienced, certified (P.E., CEM, or CEA) professional. That auditor will undoubtedly identify multiple smart strategies to save energy, with numbers demonstrating that each potential strategy will pay back the initial costs for the strategy in a reasonable amount of time, taking into account local incentives. Do not take the numbers literally. For example, if a payback of a certain strategy is listed as 3.2 years, it may end up being a little shorter or longer because factors involved in the audit and calculations are changeable. However, in a well-performed audit, the real payback is usually close to the predicted. Seriously consider and implement one or more listed strategies in the audit report that your company is comfortable addressing. Measure and note the decline in electricity or gas/oil usage. Remember that most energy efficiency projects have other benefits that renewable energy does not confer, such as improved productivity and reduced O&M costs and efforts. So you are getting these confirmed financial advantages relatively early.

Now that energy usage has been reduced and efficiency improved, you can consider alternative sources of energy. Solar panels and wind turbines are improving in effectiveness and reducing in price in time, so a slight delay in their procurement is probably in your favor. But more important, with energy usage minimized, now you can design the proper sized and placed system, reducing the upfront costs. If you bring down your electricity usage, say 20% because of improved efficiency (better lights, plug load, improved weatherization, upgraded HVAC), that could reduce the number of solar panels or wind turbines needed to reach your goals, reducing the capital costs you would need to get from Financial or any type of loan you may take out. And this will reduce the labor needed to install the equipment and leave you room on your roof or property for other things.

Sources estimate that currently energy efficiency typically costs one-third to half the full cost of rooftop solar. Therefore, it makes sense to prioritize efficiency before sizing a rooftop system, reducing the number of panels needed. For example, if a 40 kW commercial solar system can be reduced to 30 KW because of reduced need for power (improved efficiency), then the upfront cost for the panels can be reduced by $15,000 or more, a financial incentive to optimize energy efficiency first. It would not be good to install a large system and then after implementing energy efficiency projects find out that such a large system was not needed after all for the long-term future. Obviously, the exact numbers may vary based on efficiency and renewable energy incentives available.

CCES has the experts to perform a thorough and useful energy audit of any building type, providing normally multiple smart strategies to reduce energy usage effectively and at a reasonable payback. We can project manage the strategies you select to ensure that you get the maximum benefits (on top of utility cost savings) of the selected upgrade. And then we can help you decide on which renewable energy source is right for your building and work with established vendors to ensure that a good system is installed, providing you with maximum benefits and is smooth to operate. Contact us today at karell@CCESworld.com or at 914-584-6820.

Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rise for 1st Time in 3 Years

The International Energy Agency (IEA) announced that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions rose by 1.4% in 2017, the first rise in three years. GHG emissions have reached a historic high of 32.5 gigatonnes (Gt), a resumption of growth after three years of global emissions remaining flat. See https://www.iea.org/geco/. The increase in CO2e emissions, however, was not universal. While most major nations saw rises, some others experienced declines, including the U.S., United Kingdom, Mexico and Japan. The biggest decline came in the U.S., mainly because of growing installation of renewable sources of energy.

Improvements in global energy efficiency slowed down in 2017. The rate of decline in global energy intensity, the energy consumed per unit of economic output, slowed to only 1.6% in 2017, lower than the 2.0% decline in energy intensity seen in 2016.

The greatest growth in global energy demand was in Asia. China and India together represented over 40% of the increase. Energy demand in all advanced economies contributed over 20% of global energy demand growth, although their share in total energy use continued to fall.

Notable growth was also registered in Southeast Asia (which accounted for 8% of global energy demand growth) and Africa (6%), although per capita energy use in these regions still remains well below the global average.
In November 2017, the US EIA projected that growth in global CO2e emissions from energy-related sources will slow to 0.6% per year through 2040 despite increased energy consumption.

CCES has the experts to help your firms understand the technical aspects of all climate change rules and to help you organize a successful Climate Change or Energy program for diverse company types. We have helped others benefit! Contact us today at karell@CCESworld.com or at 914-584-6720.

Using Utilization and Activity Data in the Workplace

This blog and newsletter has published many articles on how to smartly save energy. But a broader issue to address, which will also save energy is about proper space utilization. How and when is our space being used throughout the day? If this issue can be managed well, then savings, not just in energy usage, but in rents and other expenses can be saved, as well. While many companies track when different spaces are used, also cataloging how effectively space is used can provide information about both the cost and the value of corporate real estate.

Many companies track worker population and usage of different portions of their space in order to understand the cost of their space, such as tracking employee density, square footage, energy consumption, and other costs. But additional studies can result in deeper understandings about how space results in greater efficiency, productivity, and retention.

To determine whether a company is getting its cost worth of a space, utilization data, such as how often spaces are used over a given time and by how many employees, is most important. Utilization refers to how often spaces are in use over a given period of time. Knowing the usage (or lack of usage) of space can help the company plan future usage better, more effectively using real estate costs. It also affects energy usage, as with utilization data, one can program thermostats more accurately to respond to real needs to keep warm or cold.

The follow up question is how best to obtain utilization data. The simplest way is to collect data that already exists, such as reservations for conference rooms. However, this way is inexact, as many of us know of people who reserve a conference room or other area and then never use it (but reserve it “just in case”) or use it for a much shorter time than planned. Thus, such data may need to be supplemented by humans actually walking down the halls and recording what’s going on from time to time to see if what is reserved is really happening. Of course, technology exists, too, to obtain this data. Sensors not only turn on and off lights, but also can collect data about how many people are in a room for a given amount of time if designed and programmed properly. Of course, researching, procuring, installing, and using such technology can be expensive. Depending on the accuracy needed, this can be helpful or an occasional walk-through by people can provide the accuracy needed.

How is this related to energy? Someone told me a story that is quite relevant. She told me that a review of reservations, backed up by some visual data indicated that a certain conference room, popular most of the time, was mainly unused in the summer. This room is in the southwest corner of the building and, therefore, tends to get warmer on a given summer afternoon. A check of the thermostat showed that it was set for 74 deg. during the day, perhaps a level not comfortable enough with the afternoon sun coming in. Resetting the thermostat for a few degrees lower encouraged others to utilize this conference room more.

But getting back to the broader question, it is paramount that your organization decide what your goals should be: to lower real estate or energy costs, or improve productivity? This will help you decide whether you want to focus on gathering more utilization data or more activity data of your employees throughout the facility. Then one decides whether it wants to utilize and coordinate sensor technology around the property (“passive” approach” and what type of technology or use instead human observations and/or interviews, of which there is software to manage responses and “crunch the numbers”.

CCES has the experts to help you study energy usage in your facility, including where in the building or doing which functions uses the most energy (and costs), and can help you pinpoint the most cost effective energy saving strategies. Contact us today at karell@CCESworld.com or at 914-584-6720.

Tips To Gain Support for Your “Green” Program

One of the most difficult items for an environmental/sustainability manager to deal with is showing progress in a program that you know is beneficial, but others at the firm do not understand or are fearful of. How do you educate your colleagues and get them on your side, so you have support as you implement changes to be more “green”? Here are some proven ideas on how some companies promote “green” programs.

1. The standard is set at the top. There is no question that culture and change and importance of philosophy starts at the top, with – quite literally – the CEO. Whether it is just saving energy costs or a comprehensive sustainability program, the CEO stating support for the program goes a long way. I was involved in a project to establish a sustainability program for an entity and the head person was all for it. He understood the benefits and wanted to maximize these and get ahead of his competitors. He sent a mandate to cooperate and move toward a more sustainable future. An environmental committee was established. But then the Great Recession hit and several existential issues came up for the firm. The leader lost interest in sustainability. Then, members of the environmental committee stopped returning my emails and voicemails; the project ground to a halt. I convened a meeting of this committee and most members revealed to me they did not believe in climate change or sustainability, Al Gore was a ___ (well, I won’t use the language here!), sustainability was a foreign plot to take over the US, etc. When the head was interested in sustainability, these employees had to cooperate. But once the leader lost interest, they let their true feelings show and it derailed the project.

Since the “top” is so important to jumpstart a “green” program, it is important that you, as a manager, reach the CEO or other head and educate him/her on what the program is all about (I dealt with a senior VP of a company who thought a “green” program was just planting trees. Really!). Emphasize the benefits, but do not overpromise or give the impression these items will appear overnight. This education is not one-time, and it must be continual. You must keep track of how the program is doing and inform the leader. Also, manage expectations. Make sure leaders understand that achievements occur slowly, but they themselves will lead to more benefits down the road.

2. Establish a winning culture/brand. Perhaps more important than a strategy or procedures is establishing a “green” culture, such as no tolerance for environmental or OSHA violations or looking to avoid wasting of energy, water, etc. First, know the entity, its history, its own culture and people, and then you can establish a “green” culture that is likely to be accepted by most people. Software programs exist to help assess the current culture of a company. People like consistency, and stating and maintaining goals like these make others realize the value of a “green” program to a company (besides saving costs) and that the program is here to stay. This culture should be spread to other groups to give the environmental group a positive identity. Take the time to explain to all who will listen the culture and how they benefit.

3. Go beyond the workplace. While the top rung of management is most important to support a “green” program, it is important to communicate the program to all levels of stakeholders. Support is needed from all layers. One way to achieve this is not just to implement changes to reduce energy use, water use, etc. at the facilities, but also to recommend strategies for employees to engender energy, water, etc. savings themselves at home. Let them be “heroes” to their families for saving money or the planet, and they will return the support tremendously.

4. Communicate rationally, yet emotionally, too. We engineers tend to communicate using only facts, numbers, savings, comparisons, etc. It’s what we’re used to. But to promote a “green” program, this will not work for many; their eyes will glaze over! Therefore, in addition to communicating the facts, it is also important to engage one’s calls to action in their hearts as well as their minds. The “green” program not only benefits the bottomline, but also the livability of the immediate area and the Earth as a whole. Make others feel like they are part of something consequential, and you will engender more support. Of course, with a “green” program, there is much to choose to show positive consequential outcomes.

5. Assess and adapt. One strategy does not always work well or approaches need to change as a “green” program progresses and matures. Periodically assess where your “green” program is – not only how it’s doing, but also its acceptance in your company. You may need to make some changes to the communication or to who you communicate with to engender further support. Assess and adapt to new realities to gain followers and momentum.

6. Don’t give up. The first Earth Day may have been in 1970, but for many, the environment is this fuzzy concept that does not affect them. Education about the environment has lagged, and many still do not understand its importance to everyday life. And sustainability is an even newer concept. Certainly anybody who is a leader likely did not learn about sustainability in Business or Engineering School “back then”. People innately feel that if they did not learn it in school is must not be important.

Therefore, it is not only the rational and emotional message, but the fact that it is sustained that will make people learn and understand the importance of these concepts. Constant education and communication about different aspects of environment, energy, and sustainability are needed, not only during the early stages of establishing a program, but later on, as well, even after the major elements of the plan are in place. Communication by multiple means has been shown to be effective.

CCES has the experts to help your company establish a “green” or sustainability or energy conservation program – not just the technical expertise, but we can help you organize it and begin the communication process to engender support in your firm. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Saving Energy Can Also Improve Air Quality

This blog has covered extensively the many financial benefits of saving energy. According to a new report from the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) and Physicians for Social Responsibility concludes that saving energy can reduce the number of asthma attacks and other adverse health effects of air pollution from power plants. See http://aceee.org/research-report/h1801. This report concludes that reducing annual electricity use by 15% nationwide would prolong more than 6 lives every day, prevent nearly 30,000 asthma episodes each year, and save Americans up to $20 billion annually in avoided health care costs.

The cause and effect is simple. When less energy is needed, power plant emissions decrease, reducing byproducts of combustion of coal, oil, and natural gas into the atmosphere, some of which are tied to asthma, lung cancer, and other maladies. The report estimates that this reduction in pollution and harmful health effects would be enough to pay the annual health insurance premiums for nearly 3.6 million families.

The report estimates total potential avoided adverse health effects, such as heart attacks, respiratory illnesses, premature deaths, and emergency room visits to treat asthma, that could be achieved with a 15% reduction in electricity use across the country. Using USEPA modeling tools to identify the quantity of pollutants which would be avoided, the report ranks states and the 50 largest cities by their potential health benefits. According to the analysis, New York City would see the greatest benefits (more than $1 billion/year in avoided health costs), followed by Chicago, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Detroit. The dollar value of avoided health cost would average more than $70/person in the highest impacted cities, with Pittsburgh seeing the greatest per capita benefits: over $200/person on average. West Virginia would see the greatest benefits per person for a state: $184 on average.

Therefore, this evaluation demonstrates that a viable strategy to improve public health is to encourage improves energy efficiency. A further benefit is that the vast majority of energy efficiency measures results in energy savings and, therefore, reduced power plant emissions, over many years, meaning public health would benefit and costs reduced for many years. While the degree of benefit is certainly quite site-specific, any facility that undergoes an energy upgrade, becoming more energy efficient, can state that they likely will have, as an additional benefits, reduced emissions in areas around the power plant it gets power from and improved health of those nearby residents.

CCES has the experience to help you implement a smart energy efficiency program to reduce energy demand, reduce costs, and reduce air emissions from your facility and from the power plant that supplies you with electricity. We can help you economically reduce emissions from other sources to show a positive societal contribution. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Plan for Installing Occupancy Sensors

A few years ago I performed an energy audit for an office building and developed a good half-dozen sound energy strategies to save them money. While discussing occupancy sensors with the building’s owner, he understood its value. I offered to help, but he turned me down. He was going to go to the nearest Home Depot to pick up some on sale and install them himself. Well, big mistake. I suppose this owner so understood the simplicity of how an occupancy sensor works that he felt that no thinking was necessary. On the contrary, proper planning will make the difference between a reliable, cost-saving venture vs. an unsuccessful one. A few things to consider:

1. Invest time, determine where sensors can save the most by observation. Determine which areas have long periods of dormancy and can use occupancy sensors to save energy and which areas are regularly used. Yes, one can guess the need for occupancy sensors by evaluating a room’s use (for example, an IT room, where, theoretically, people enter rarely). One can review conference room reservation logs, but in many cases, rooms are fully booked, but hardly actually used. Thus, spend a few days to observe which rooms are actually unoccupied for long periods. Perhaps there is significant flow in and out of the IT room after all; perhaps a conference room really is or is not used as much as the logs show.

2. Accurate, up-to-date floor plans. Once areas are identified, plans are needed to determine which lights and electrical panels serve each space to place the sensors appropriately. With this information you can determine in which rooms to place occupancy sensors (connected to which panels) to get the best effect.

3. Placement of sensors. This is crucial to their effectiveness and occupant satisfaction. Sensors should be capable of “seeing” anyone who comes in the door. In some cases, multiple sensors may be needed for odd-shaped rooms or for spaces shielded by high cubicle walls or cabinets. Do you place the sensor high up on a wall “to see” more of an area, but make it inconvenient to repair? Or closer to where people work?

4. Pick your occupancy sensor brand carefully. Don’t buy them just because they are cheaper or are on sale. There are differences in quality and sensitivity. Installing the “wrong” sensors can affect morale and efficiency. If your budget allows, consider dual technology sensors, those that sense both motion and thermal, particularly for large or odd-shaped spaces. You don’t want lights going out just because people in a room have not moved in some time. This just happened to me. The host was quite embarrassed.

5. Provide early notification to staff. Establish an installation schedule and give advance notice to staff approximately when occupancy sensor installation will occur in their areas. Send staff either a brochure or some summary of the specs. of the sensors, so they have an idea of what it can and will do.

Final question: does one still procure occupancy sensors if one has switched to LEDs? Installing LEDs and saving energy costs should not preclude one from installing occupancy sensors. Even reduced wattage lamps, such as LEDs, represent wasted electricity and cost if on for many hours when a space is unused. The math may be different (lower savings because the cost of wasted electricity is lower), but in most cases there should be a reasonable, if somewhat longer payback for using occupancy sensors.

CCES has the experts to help you perform a full assessment of your lighting and total energy usage and needs, and provide detailed smart strategies to reduce usage, demand, and cost that have worked for others. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

Reducing Water Usage Saves Energy, Too

While the focus of this blog has been on energy use and demand and greenhouse gas emission reductions, it should not be forgotten that an effective sustainability and self-improvement plan addresses other issues, such as water conservation, solid waste generation (or lack thereof), etc. A recent study indicated that while California was just short of meeting its goal of a 25% water use reduction in 2015, when most of the state was in a severe drought, the policies implemented in the program did result in additional benefits. See https://phys.org/news/2018-01-california-bonus-effects.html

Coming off a four-year drought, California ultimately reduced water usage by 524,000 million gallons. In addition, it was determined that this action resulted in a decrease in electricity usage of about 1,830 GWh, which exceeded electricity savings achieved by investor-owned electricity utilities’ efficiency programs during the same period. In addition, significant declines were seen in natural gas and oil usage for generators in water service. This also resulted in reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of about 524,000 metric tons of CO2e.

California implemented a Water Action Plan, with strict guidelines for continuing to manage water use in the state. These guidelines were localized to the needs of the state’s 410 urban water suppliers. Businesses and homeowners have and will continue to face restrictions such as bans on wasteful practices such as hosing sidewalks and watering lawns after rain. Strict planning, measurement of water use, and reporting were also required.

These results should not be a surprise as previous inventories have indicated that water transportation, treatment, distribution and end-use consumption account for 19% of total electricity demand in California. With significantly less water to manage and use, electricity demand would be expected to and did decline.
This can be a lesson for other states, counties, and communities that wish or need to decrease total energy usage and/or greenhouse gas emissions. Reduced water usage (particularly, reduced waste) will lead to significant energy savings and greenhouse gas emission reductions.

CCES has the experts to help your entity reduce water, as well as energy, usage waste and maximize the financial gains for you. Contact us today for a free, no-obligation discussion about the matter at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.

U.S. Saving Energy And Reducing GHG Emissions – By Staying Home

Because of changes in technology and culture, Americans are spending more time home than ever before. Working from home, shopping online, streaming movies (instead of going to the movie theater), even “staycations” and otherwise “chilling”, Americans are travelling less and a new study shows that this has made a difference in our carbon footprint. See http://www.wral.com/americans-are-staying-home-more-that-s-saving-energy-/17299025/

New research suggests that these new technologies and their acceptance enable Americans to spend more time home, reducing energy use, and, with it greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

Researchers found that, on average, Americans spent 7.8 more days at home in 2012, compared to 2003. For people 18 to 24, it is 14 more days at home and 4 days less time travelling in a year. They calculated that this reduced time going to work, the mall, restaurants, etc. reduced national energy demand by 1,700 trillion BTUs in 2012, or 1.8% of total energy use.

The reduction in time travelling appears to have the greatest impact on energy saved and GHG emissions reduced, as energy intensity of travelling is 20 times greater than staying at home. Even the time Americans travel is more efficient than in the past, saving energy. Decades ago when most families had a breadwinner and a homemaker, the worker commuted to work and returned straight home, while the homemaker would go out shopping. Now it is more common that the person returning from work stops off at the store to buy some things on the same return trip. This reduces total miles travelled.

The trend is certainly solid of more and more firms allowing workers to work from home. Online services and video conferencing allow the worker to be as efficient at home where the energy intensity is lower than in most offices. At the same time, companies are saving money and energy by consolidating office space. The growth in the U.S. of entrepreneurs working at home instead of renting space is another likewise trend.

One additional growing HR trend that appears to be increasing energy use is the nearly doubling of part-time workers in the U.S. during this period. More employers are hiring people on a part-time basis only, and many workers survive by holding more than one part-time job, raising the potential commuting distance and time and, thus, energy use.

CCES has the expertise to help your company manage and reduce energy use by the design of your facility and audit and upgrade of your energy using equipment. We can examine your operations and advice you on how to take advantage as employee counts change. Contact us today at 914-584-6720 or at karell@CCESworld.com.