EDITION: U.S.
 
CONNECT    

Ron Dembo

Ron Dembo

Posted: August 31, 2010 09:45 AM

Benchmarking is the process of comparing your performance metrics to industry best practice and/or best practices of other industries. The primary goal is to make improvements that lead to doing things better, faster and cheaper.

Benchmarking involves identifying the best performers and comparing your results to theirs in order to learn how well the best in class perform and, more importantly, how they do it. Almost every commercial firm routinely uses benchmarking to guide its practice.

Most governments today agree that global warming is a huge challenge, with a potential for disastrous consequences if we don't act. They also agree that our use of water and energy needs to be more efficient and needs to have less of an environmental impact. Our homes and city buildings are a big part of the problem -- they are responsible for over 70% of some cities' environmental footprints -- and yet we don't know how they compare individually with one another. There are no benchmarks.

Do you know if you use a 'normal' or 'large' amount of electricity in your daily life? What is a normal amount? What is normal in the U.S.? What is normal in Europe? How big is the difference? Why is there a difference? Do you use more water than the average in person your city? Do you throw out much more garbage? Does your home or office require more energy than its neighbours to operate?

These are the first questions a business would ask if it were given the task of becoming more environmentally efficient. Yet, with all the discussion on global warming, we have no benchmarks to guide us to a more efficient lifestyle.

To take an example, Zerofootprint studied a university campus and found a student residence within a stone's throw of others - buildings all used for the same purpose of housing students - that was using five times more electricity per student. Guess what a manager in a Fortune 500 company would do with such information?

When we benchmarked schools, we found some with energy footprints per square metre that were 30 times worse than others in the same district. We have also seen new buildings that have a LEED Gold environmental building certification underperform buildings that are older and have no such rating.

If we are to deal effectively with energy and water and their environmental impact on global warming then we need universal benchmarking to give people the tools they need to guide their efforts.

The Power of Universal Benchmarking

Why universal? Because much of the footprint of our cities comes from the collective operation of all our schools, offices, shops and houses. And it is the sum total of the changes in each and every one of them that we will need.

We need the benchmark numbers to motivate change. Without them, how will we measure progress? How will we create the most effective policies and incentives?

We can draw an interesting parallel with what we have already done with cars and fuel consumption.

In the U.S. until 1970, gasoline was extremely cheap and abundant and so almost no attention was paid to the efficiency of cars. People simply didn't care. And then along came OPEC and the oil crisis and a rude awakening. Gas was suddenly more expensive and the security issues around energy dependence came to the fore. How did we deal with this? Guess what -- we used benchmarking!

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a requirement for all cars to be benchmarked using a standard methodology. Yes, we all know that there are approximations in the standard way of measuring a car's performance. But we also know that the EPA benchmark stickers we see on all new cars are meant for comparative purposes. They are also useful for policy purposes because we can use them to define norms. By measuring the performance of all cars in this way, the U.S. Government could simply state a policy that required auto manufacturers to achieve an average fleet consumption of 25 miles per gallon by a certain date. And, when President Obama recently wanted to raise the bar for the energy efficiency of U.S cars all he had to do was change one number -- the benchmark. As a result, by 2015 all manufacturers will be required to have a fleet average of 35 miles per gallon or more.

So benchmarking has become a valuable tool in combating fuel inefficiency. We need to apply this same kind of thinking to our buildings and the environment.

Start With Buildings

We propose starting with buildings for two reasons -- the wealth of utility/energy data available and the fact that they are such a big part of the problem. And we propose taking an 80/20 approach. Let's get 80% of the way there on all buildings rather than 100% of the way on just a few buildings. This will enable us to achieve massive coverage quickly and cheaply and dive into greater detail (the last 20%) when and where it is warranted.

Calculating the footprint of a building is like going to the doctor for an examination. When we visit the doctor, they usually check our key health indicators -- temperature, blood pressure, heart rate, etc. -- before deciding if we need an MRI scan. The scan will give a lot more detail of our internal condition, but it would also cost a whole lot more. Meanwhile, the key health indicators can identify a large proportion of the cases where there is a medical condition that needs attention. Utility bills are like key health indicators. We get large amounts of useful information quickly and cheaply. By setting our sights on covering 100% of buildings (where we do a partial calculation of each building's individual footprint) rather than 10% of buildings (where we do a full calculation of their footprint) we give ourselves are far better chance of making a real impact on carbon emissions and water use.

Zerofootprint has embarked on an effort of universal benchmarking of buildings based on utility information that is mostly readily available and audited. It is a simple idea -- first we measure, which enables us to compare, which ultimately leads to change.

What We're Doing For Schools
We use simple graphics to create norms. A gauge is divided into three zones. The green zone is where the top third of schools lie, the yellow zone is the middle third, and the red zone is the schools with the worst performance. Clearly, children, teachers and administrators at your child's school will feel pressure to move out of the red zone. We also use other simple graphics to show how schools compare. Larger bubbles correspond to higher footprints. Or, we show the top 20 schools in a leader board. To see an instance of this for schools in Toronto look at: http://zerochallenge.zerofootprint.net.

We also allow for a few different metrics -- such as footprint per student or footprint per unit area -- that expose different information. When used in conjunction, they paint an accurate picture of how close to or far from the norm a school might be.

It becomes immediately and patently clear which schools are underperforming and which are outperforming the norm. (The norm, or median, is also easy to calculate.)

Armed with these tools, schools can make changes and measure their effect. This gives added motivation for change. The easy-to-calculate and highly visible measures also allow for competitions between schools to improve their performance. We also recognize the fact that a school that is a poor performer might not have had much say in how it got there. In that case, we can measure success on the percentage change achieved and not on the absolute rank.

Universal Appeal
These exact same tools and ideas may be used for other types of buildings -- homes, hospitals, universities and commercial buildings of different grades. Imagine a simple gauge, such as the one below, indicating the energy efficiency ranking of a house or a commercial building.

Something as simple as universal benchmarking could have a major effect on behaviour. And since reducing energy consumption is synonymous with reducing cost, it could have a major effect on cost as well.

 

Follow Ron Dembo on Twitter: www.twitter.com/zerofootprint

 
  • Comments
  • 15
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
12:58 PM on 09/01/2010
http://www­.energysta­r.gov/inde­x.cfm?c=ev­aluate_per­formance.b­us_portfol­iomanager_­benchmarki­ng

Lida Lewis is right, an Energy Star service exists on their website to give building owners or operators a benchmark with which to compare their building to a national averages for different building types. Pretty much all that is needed is building size, type, and its utility bills. From the Energy Star website :

Building Types eligible for energy performanc­e rating include:
* Offices
* Bank/Finan­cial Institutio­ns
* Courthouse­s
* Data Center
* K-12 Schools
* Hospitals (Acute Care and Children's­)
* Hotels
* Retail Stores
* Supermarke­ts
* Residence Halls/Dorm­itories
* Warehouses
* Medical Offices
* Wastewater Facilities
* House of Worship

This tool can be used to benchmark performanc­e, track improvemen­ts, and apply for Energy Star recognitio­n. This completely free service is an excellent way to save A LOT of money.

I think it is very frustratin­g to see so many comments below degrade into mindless political ideology when this issue should not be a political one. I mean come on, what does Al Gore's mansion have to do with the fact that many, if not most, buildings could run much more efficientl­y than they currently do? We are talking real savings by taking the initiative to look into these kinds of things.
10:39 PM on 08/31/2010
The Environmen­tal Protection Agency (EPA) also approved Asian carp for importing and use in fish farms in the south in the 1970's. yes the same Asian carp that now threatens the great Lakes.
09:14 PM on 08/31/2010
Yes of course, let's create benchmarks based on our houses.. Then the govt can tax us even more. Here's an idea, let's start with Al Gore's mansions.
08:18 PM on 08/31/2010
it's called EnergyStar­, and has already been done.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:25 PM on 08/31/2010
Fine, do whatever benchmarki­ng you want, but none of us CARES how much power we use compared to our neighbors. What we want are feed in tariffs so we can see a financial upside if we produce more clean energy than we need. This increases clean energy production AND conservati­on, while creating local jobs and improving property values. We want to DO something, and this is what works.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Overtone
See bio on the Aesop Institute website
04:45 PM on 08/31/2010
As many are aware, the Great Depression only ended when the U.S. mobilized to fight the Second World War. Unemployme­nt rapidly fell to 2%.

This Second Great Depression can be ended by a massive mobilizati­on to supersede fossil fuels and combat Global Warming. Benchmarks can certainly help a great deal.

See the analysis pro and con concerning the threat of a possible climate Tipping Point at http://www­.aesopinst­itute.org

We need a worldwide effort to leave fossil fuels behind much faster than convention­al wisdom would believe is possible.

In spite of a legion of skeptics, it can be done!

Revolution­ary, cost-compe­titive, breakthrou­gh renewable technologi­es are being born. They can supplement the truly effective carbon free systems already available.

For a couple of examples, see Moving Beyond Oil and Running on Water on the Aesop Institute website.

Scientists understand­ably doubt they are possible. That is likely to change as independen­t laboratori­es repeatedly confirm the technologi­es are real.

Shortly after Pearl Harbor was attacked, Ford completed a bomber every 59 minutes at the Willow Run factory.

That same kind of enthusiast­ic 24/7 effort can dramatical­ly reduce unemployme­nt.

This could produce the missing economic stimulus.

Ironically­, this approach might open a realistic way to regain economic health that, once the threat is understood to be genuine, can enjoy strong White House and Congressio­nal support.

Insuring reasonable odds for the survival of our children and grandchild­ren has the potential to provide an emotional force that can awaken widespread latent leadership
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gerald4
licensed mechanical and electrical engineer
05:32 PM on 08/31/2010
The USA industrial­ized before Pearl Harbor and became the "Arsenal of Democracy" to sell Great Britain and France weapons of war made in the USA in exchange for English & French gold.

This US export of military products manufactur­ed in the USA to England and France was paid to US manufactur­ers with Gold (and other financial instrument­s) and that paid the US Manufactur­ing company payrolls that manufactur­ed the military weapons and material.

Many of our Airplane, Tank, artillery, and Army Ammunition Manufactur­ing Plants were operating at full capacity and producing large quantities of military goods for export to England in return for English gold from England before the Japanese Attacked Pearl Harbor.

Who will pay for this "massive mobilizati­on to supersede fossil fuels and combat Global Warming"?

Do you believe that we can borrow more and more money from the industrial countries to pay the engineers and scientists to design these systems?

Maybe the US Treasury should buy some paper and start printing US Dollars to pay for this if the industrial nations stop loaning the US dollars that the industrial countries earned by manufactur­ing the things that US citizens consumed back to the US government to pay for this!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Overtone
See bio on the Aesop Institute website
06:43 PM on 08/31/2010
A good place to begin is to drasticall­y cut back on absurd weapons programs designed to fight another rival like the former USSR. As a former Air Force officer I know that willl not be easy, but it is a huge waste of money.

Next, recognize that some of these systems are already moving toward production­. An example is BlackLight Power. See blacklight­power.com Here the problem is very understand­able scientific skepticism­. They are already working with National and independen­t laboratori­es to validate the out-of-the­-box science. A demonstrat­ion 50-75kW generator is promised before the end of the year. Once the science is accepted, the private sector can provide all the finance necessary.

We do not need to borrow from other countries to pay the engineeers and scientists­. They are already designing a variety of such systems here and elsewhere.

Venture capital, in spite of its name, has never been very venturesom­e. I'm a former consultant on venture funding to the Department of Commerce.

As an example, solar photovolta­ic technology was invented several deades ago. Only in this past decade has the venture community invested.

We need what was once called Adventure capital, willing to take higher risks. That is not a huge problem of design, but it does need a few bold leaders in the private sector.

The end result can be a huge increase in exports - and an even larger reduction in imports - with a very positive effect on the balance of payments!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gerald4
licensed mechanical and electrical engineer
07:18 PM on 08/31/2010
Dear Overtone:

We need to cut back on all federal government expenses since we are spending much more than we are collecting as tax revenue.

The US government does not really borrow US dollars from US banks to pay for its expenses that are greater than the taxes that they collect.

The US congress periodical­ly passes laws that authorize the Federal Reserve Board (FED) which is a Special Purpose Government Entity created by the Federal Reserve Act via Chairman Ben Bernanke to buy some paper and then print a bunch of new interest bearing paper currency instrument­s (US Bonds) in varying amounts with the promise of US government repaying these loans in US dollars at the future dates specified (when they become due). This congressio­nal authorized amount of US debt instrument­s (US Bonds, T-bills, etc.) that is in excess of the value of the Gold Reserves stored at Ft. Knox is normally referred to as the "National Debt" or "Sovereign Debt".

The FED then auctions off and sell these freshly printed paper US Bonds, and other Debt Instrument Securities at periodic US Federal Reserve Bank public bid auctions AT DISCOUNTS LESS THAN CURRENT VALUE AND/OR PRESENT WORTH to mostly foreign manufactur­ers, foreign banks and foreign individual­s in China, India, Brazil, Pakistan, and other industrial­ized countries in return for the US dollars that these foreigners earned by making consumer goods for export and sale to US citizens.
04:31 PM on 08/31/2010
americans rank 27th in the world in math and science knowledge and putting the anit-scien­ce republican­s back in power will shrink this to the no-return zone......
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gerald4
licensed mechanical and electrical engineer
05:36 PM on 08/31/2010
Over the past three or four decades, both major political parties of the US congress decided to destroy our manufactur­ing and the associated technology capability with “Free Trade” legislatio­n. The US congress has also destroyed the US creative capabiliti­es and the database of technicall­y oriented people that won WWII and created the economic power that the USA enjoyed for a few decades after WWII, because the technical product developmen­t and design jobs went overseas with the manufactur­ing capability­.

The USA is no longer the World Technology leader that the USA was until maybe the early 1970's. Asian countries are now are the technology leaders. The best & brightest students in the USA have pursued the more financiall­y rewarding non-scient­ific financial careers, instead of educations that might have created technicall­y innovative products that people in foreign countries might purchase.

Asia is now the primary source of the most advanced engineerin­g and scientific talent because their public technical education process starts early and continues to produce a stream of highly qualified young people that is quite large compared to what is produced by the US undergradu­ate programs. American students will generally not endure the hard work and intense focus that is required for science and engineerin­g degrees, especially since there is such limited financial rewards and respect for that effort after graduation­.

Only if our US products are technicall­y superior can we export those products in return for their foreign payment (gold and US dollars) back to the USA.
06:10 PM on 08/31/2010
corporatio­ns shipped our low tech and high tech jobs overseas using the red herring of "labor unions" when in fact it was just about greed.....­why can't a corporatio­n be happy with a 10% profit line? because wall street isn't happy with a 10% profit line that's why....
03:20 PM on 08/31/2010
Let's make al gore, john kerry or barrak obama's carbon footprint the benchmark.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gerald4
licensed mechanical and electrical engineer
05:38 PM on 08/31/2010
Good Point!

Do as I say, not as I do!