| Annual savings potential: Annual public cost: Public cost per ton: Implementing agency: Horizon year: |
18,300 tons $200,000 Less than $5 Department of Building Inspection 2010 |
Assumptions
- Recommissioning typically reduces building energy use by 15 percent
- Recommissioning initially costs building owners 17 cents per square foot, net of the PG&E rebate, but pays for itself in less than one year
- Life cycle of energy efficiency improvements is 10 years
Analysis
A
requirement for existing commercial buildings to undergo an energy
performance study and make cost-effective upgrades — retrocommissioning
— would benefit San Francisco’s emissions profile and building energy
bills. The challenges to implementing this strategy are twofold: the
upfront cash needed by building owners to implement recommendations,
and the principal-agent problem of tenants typically bearing the costs
of energy inefficiency to begin with. To get around these problems, the
City could create or seek private financing for a revolving loan fund
to help pay for improvements. The City instead could allow for the
regular pass-through of costs to tenants, or could do this in addition
to the revolving loan fund. Imposing a retrocommissioning requirement
whenever a property is sold or is the subject of smaller renovations
would be a cost-effective way to obtain emissions reductions from
existing buildings that aren’t otherwise covered by the Green Building
Ordinance.
Relative impact
In 1990, commercial buildings were
responsible for 16 percent of San Francisco’s greenhouse gas emissions
and 33 percent of the emissions from buildings.
What we do now
San Francisco’s new Green Building
Ordinance requires fundamental commissioning — ensuring the optimal
energy performance of building systems — for new large commercial
buildings and for existing buildings undergoing major renovations.
Retrocommissioning, or recommissioning, is the study of the energy
performance of existing buildings to ensure that building systems such
as lighting and HVAC are working as intended. A retrocommissioning
study typically finds operational inefficiencies and recommends
cost-effective improvements. It rarely finds a need for expensive
capital improvements, but rather suggests ways to fine-tune systems and
implement energy efficiency upgrades. Commissioning is a component of
new green building construction standards under LEED and Energy Star.
A retrocommissioning requirement for large commercial
buildings is similar to the requirement of a home energy performance
test of residential buildings. However, retrocommissioning is not just
the test, but also the implementation of the cost-effective
improvements the test identifies. Currently, PG&E provides a rebate
of 10 cents per square foot for a retrocommissioning assessment. The
rebate is contingent on the building owner being able to implement the
recommended measures within 12 months of the assessment.
What we could do
Retrocommissioning can be an
expensive up front investment for building owners and managers. The
median per-project cost identified in the LBNL study was $34,0001.
San Francisco could target retrocommissioning requirements for specific
building types and vintages to make the requirement most efficient. To
ease the burden, some kind of public financing could be linked to a
requirement to conduct retrocommissioning when a building is sold or is
remodeled in any way that requires a building permit from the
Department of Building Inspection. Given the cost-effectiveness and
short payback time of retrocommissioning, San Francisco could create a
revolving loan program rather than providing a subsidy in the form of a
rebate. Borrowers would be able to pay back the loans after recouping
their costs through energy savings.
Cost
A 2004 nationwide study of 150 large buildings by Lawrence Berkeley
National Laboratory found that retrocommissioning costs averaged
approximately 27 cents per square foot. It also determined that that
the process saved an average of 15 percent of building energy use and
paid for itself in less than one year.2
As with other potential energy efficiency requirements, the Department
of Building Inspection would require additional spending to ensure
compliance. We include a DBI cost of $200,000 in staff time and
resources to effectively administer this requirement.
Carbon Savings Potential
Approximately 18.5 million square feet of office, hotel, retail and other commercial space was transferred in 20073.
If commercial buildings that are recommissioned upon resale can improve
their energy profile by 15 percent, approximately 18,300 tons of carbon
could be saved4. After 10 years, 183,000 tons will be abated annually.
The cost per ton of carbon borne by the City is about $1. Although it
would probably pay for itself within one year, the up front private
cost of retrocommissioning 18.5 million square feet would be about $3.1
million, or $18 per ton.
Endnotes
1 This included a variety of building types, including
office, education, health care, lodging and public safety. The median
year of building construction was 1978.
2 Mills, Evan et al., “The Cost-Effectiveness of
Commercial-Buildings Commissioning: A Meta-Analysis of Energy and
Non-Energy Impacts in Existing Buildings and New Construction in the
United States”, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Dec. 15, 2004.
3 Data including square footage and building type provided by the City Assessor’s Office.
4 Carbon-equivalent emissions per square foot by building
type obtained from new Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory energy
benchmarking Web site, energyiq.lbl.gov/benchmark.html.

