FM opportunity

There’s no doubt that readers of many industry titles will have been deluged with a myriad of individual articles on subjects such as EPCs, DECs, air conditioning inspections, the Carbon Reduction Commitment energy efficiency scheme (CRC), changes to Part L and so on. There’s clearly much to discuss, but as useful as these features are in providing an overview or opinion on the individual subjects, they often leave the reader wondering how this fits in with the reality of their professional life, or impacts their building operational strategy.

It’s hardly surprising that when faced with this plethora of legislation, a building owner, occupier or operator’s initial reaction is to focus on ensuring statutory compliance, as the immediate requirement is to de-risk the business and avoid potential penalties.  Consequently the legislation is seen as a burden to business instead of a benefit. In terms of a business case, rising to the legislative challenge is driven primarily by economic rather than the equally important environmental, social and technological drivers.

For example, the CRC – the UK’s mandatory climate change and energy saving scheme introduced in 2010 – is gradually pervading the environs of the board room of high energy consuming companies. Directors are slowly getting to grips with their legal responsibilities within the scheme to disclose their annual electrical consumption and, in the case of larger energy users, to buy allowances equal to their annual carbon emissions.  Even the most senior executives are starting to appreciate the potential impact that the CRC could have on the “bottom line” and the severity of the penalties for non-compliance.

Perhaps it is useful to remind ourselves why this legislation was introduced in the first place and forget about the need for a carrot and stick approach (although, unless a strategic approach is taken to addressing CRC, there will be very few carrots and a rather heavy stick for organisations). Whether or not you are a believer in climate change or peak oil theory, the legislation aims to encourage what most of us should be trying to achieve anyway: more efficient buildings and systems, less energy use, lower (relative) energy costs and consequently an improved environment.

So how does a building manager or a facilities manager go beyond mere compliance and turn the burden into a benefit?

Clearly there is overlap in the objectives of all of the elements of recent energy–related legislation; with some offering a more effective framework for performance improvements than others. For example, air conditioning inspection reports, if well produced, can be used to inform a strategic plan combining the valuable outputs of the energy and carbon legislation compliance with best practice in property management.  This best practice includes:

Energy management strategy
To achieve really significant improvements in energy and carbon efficiency, you need a structured approach to managing your energy usage. It is therefore critically important to develop an energy management strategy to integrate initiatives such as those suggested below and engage with other stakeholders. The Carbon Trust website is an excellent resource to help develop an appropriate strategy, as well as providing invaluable practical energy management advice.

Managing energy consumption
Managing energy consumption by comparing actual meter readings with utility invoices and regularly reviewing tariffs should be a matter of good management practice, irrespective of CRC; if for no other reason than to ensure that you are getting what you pay for, at the best possible rate – and not (as has been found in some cases) paying for someone else’s consumption. Undertaking regular reviews of how and where energy is being consumed is vitally important. This seems like basic common sense but all too often energy consumption within a building is not properly understood and therefore cannot be properly managed and controlled. Consider upgrading your energy metering – it is impossible to manage what you cannot measure.

Benchmarking and comparing trends
Logically, if you have this data, why not compare it with previous years to establish trends and identify anomalies?  CIBSE’s TM22 provides an excellent framework for this analysis, even allowing comparison with generic benchmark buildings to give a quick overview of how your building compares to its peers. ECON 19 is also an excellent source of benchmarking information for office premises.

Managing maintenance
If unexpected anomalies are found in consumption trends, they should be investigated to understand what has caused the blip. You can compare these anomalies with reactive and planned maintenance visits. If you have a computerised maintenance management system, you can use this to collate feedback on plant, equipment and system operation from your own maintenance activities, or those of your maintenance service provider.

Reviewing systems regularly
It’s vital to implement a regular review of the time scheduling of plant, systems and lighting, so that daily and weekly time controls are scheduled at the most appropriate points throughout the year, to reflect the changing daylight hours and temperature requirements. To minimise energy consumption, review temperature set points, via your Building Management System if you have one, to prevent unnecessary over heating or cooling. Consider enhancing lighting controls systems to enable automatic compensation for available daylight.

Lifecycle planning
Develop a building and systems lifecycle programme to pre-empt the likely year in which a repair or replacement will be required. Nothing lasts for ever. Use this as a tool to establish future capital and maintenance budgets and mitigate business risks. You can use all the information provided by your AC Inspection Report, maintenance service provider and help desk to inform this process.

Undertake feasibility studies
The building and systems lifecycle plan can be used to trigger feasibility studies at the appropriate time to consider opportunities to replace plant and systems with those that are more energy efficient, or to introduce low and zero carbon technologies.

All options should be based on current and future business needs and occupancy levels, as well as the wider political, economic, social and technical business case.  Like-for-like replacement of existing plant is unlikely to be a satisfactory solution in the future, so a more considered approach must be adopted.

Perhaps this fully integrated approach might be deemed an unrealistically, unachievable, utopian view. Hard pressed building or facilities managers will no doubt cite a lack of time and budget, lack of management, stakeholder or service provider support as the chief obstacles to achieving this strategic vision.

However, reallocation of resources, efficient use of available funds, stakeholder engagement and an integrated approach to planning, management and implementation are all vital if we are to survive in the new world of carbon reduction.

Andy Holt and Greg Kemp are from international consulting engineers, Hilson Moran. Visit: hilsonmoran.com