Des Moines Energy Policy Task Force Committee Session #4 July 12, 2018
Task Force Structure and Leadership Convened by Mayor Frank Cownie Co-Chaired by City Council Members Josh Mandelbaum and Bill Gray Facilitated by Kevin Pokorny Staffed by Kent Newman City Energy Adviser One of several actions we are taking as part of our larger work under Energize Des Moines
Schedule for remaining meetings Meeting #1 Thursday April 26 - Background/context for policy development and current goals; goals for the task force; benchmarking 101 and overview of benefits; review of policies and outcomes from other cities Meeting #2 Thursday May 17 Review of Des Moines Building Stock and which buildings to include; overview of ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager Meeting #3 - Thursday June 14 Implementation and phasing of benchmarking and transparency by building type; strategies beyond benchmarking to achieve savings Meeting #4 - Thursday July 12 - Reporting process; what information should be included; how information will be shared and used; options for displaying energy and water information Meeting #5 - Thursday August 16 Information/Communication; compliance and enforcement; education and workforce training; resources and services available to assist under-performing buildings Meeting #6 - Thursday September 13 - Final workshop to develop draft policy; Policy Development Committee will continue as needed
Session Agenda Recap of Sessions 1-3 Reporting process What information should be included How information will be shared and used - Reporting - Transparency Options for displaying energy and water information
Session One - Key Takeaways City Policy background and context What the City is doing Opportunities for multiple economic benefits from energy efficiency policy for large buildings Benchmarking 101 Review of policies in other cities; outcomes Opportunities for consideration in Des Moines
Key Strategies for 2017-2018 Lead by Example in Municipal buildings Enhance Building Code Compliance through Education and Assessment Offer Building Operator Training Launch Energize Des Moines challenge 11.17 Create a Task Force to develop policy options for energy efficiency Explore Energy Efficiency Financing options
Why are we here? What are our goals? We have a responsibility to make our community healthier, safer, and more prosperous Reduce operating costs for property owners and tenants Assist our most vulnerable neighbors by reducing utility cost burdens Attract new businesses and tenants, & keep the commercial real estate market competitive Explore options for financing tools to make efficiency improvements Improve building efficiency through improved building code compliance and building operator training Create awareness of the value of energy efficiency in buildings
The big goal for this Task Force: Help shape a policy that leverages these benefits for Des Moines
What does that mean? How do we do that? Create Transparency Craft a policy that requires annual energy and water benchmarking for the largest buildings in Des Moines Make energy and water information publicly available so the market can reward energy efficiency Trigger Action Regular energy/water audits to assess efficiency of existing building systems Improve operations (re-tuning, retro-commissioning) and implement cost effective upgrades Ensure Continuous Improvements Review and consider other City policies to provide incentives for energy and water efficiency in new buildings Develop comprehensive training programs and generate new career path opportunities
Session Two - Key Takeaways Benchmarking case study Des Moines Public Schools Review of Des Moines Building Stock, particularly large existing buildings Evaluating options for which buildings to include: Size threshold Phasing/timeline for compliance of primary categories of buildings Analysis of Des Moines buildings energy use and GHG emissions Analysis of Des Moines commercial building stock
ENERGY STAR Certified Buildings Ranking In 2018, Des Moines is ranked #7 among Midsize cities by number of ENERGY STAR buildings There are 66 ENERGY STAR Certified buildings in the metro region 62 are within City limits; 58 are Des Moines Public Schools Only 7.6% of buildings above 25,000 sq. ft. in Des Moines are ENERGY STAR Certified Energy STAR Certified Buildings Ranking Des Moines 2018
Session Three - Key Takeaways 25,000 sq. ft. threshold addresses: o o o 73.1% of commercial sq. footage 44% of Des Moines building energy use 17.9% of commercial buildings Phase-in trade-offs; potential phase-in timeline for buildings to come under policy; reporting; transparency Potential for accelerated timeline to engage more properties sooner o City of Des Moines buildings could report and share scores in 2019 o Include MF with all other Commercial properties >25K in 2020 Exemptions Policies beyond benchmarking to achieve savings: o energy audits, retro-commissioning/retuning Comprehensive approach: o o Performance/compliance path for high performing buildings; Prescriptive pathway for under-performing buildings
Implementation Phasing And Reporting Deadlines
Potential Timeline for Des Moines Timeline for buildings over 25,000 square feet: May 1 2020 Benchmarking Report Due: Government Buildings Transparency: Government Buildings May 1 2021 Benchmarking Report Due: Non-residential Commercial Buildings May 1 2022 Benchmarking Report Due: Multifamily Buildings Transparency: May 1 2023 Transparency: Multifamily Buildings Non-residential Commercial Buildings
Potential Accelerated Timeline for Des Moines City has benchmarked 14 buildings > 25K sq. ft. and could be ready to report all muni buildings in 2019 Timeline for buildings over 25,000 square feet: May 1 2019 Benchmarking Report Due: Government Buildings Transparency: Government Buildings May 1 2020 Benchmarking Report Due: All Commercial Buildings, Including Multifamily May 1 2021 Transparency: All Commercial Buildings, Including Multifamily
Beyond Benchmarking Benchmarking serves as the foundation for a complementary suite of energy efficient policies and programs Challenge Programs Certification of Building Operators Energy Efficient Municipal Portfolio Supporting Programs Energy Audits Retuning Financing Policies Benchmarking & Transparency
Benefits of a Potential Des Moines Policy A benchmarking and transparency, audit, and retuning policy is projected to generate: $10 Million in energy savings in the first 5 years $90 Million in cumulative savings with 1.6 Billion kwh avoided through 2030 $85 Million in investment and 400 new jobs created through 2030 More than $3 Million per year in annual air quality benefits by 2023, $44 Million in cumulative savings by 2030, primarily from reductions in asthma symptoms for children and the elderly CO2 Emissions Reduction through 2030 24-30% 10 Billion gallons of water saved by 2030
Reporting and Transparency Schedules City Reporting Schedule Transparency Schedule Chicago (9.2013) Municipal and Non-Residential 250,000 sf: Jun 2014 50,000 sf: Jun 2015 Multifamily 250,000 sf: Jun 2015 50,000 sf: Jun 2016 One year grace period; first year of transparency cannot occur before the second year of reporting Los Angeles (12.2016) St. Louis (2.2017) Municipal 250,000 sf: Jun 2014 50,000 sf: Jun 2015 Non-Residential and Multifamily 100,000 sf: Jul 2017 50,000 sf: Apr 2018 20,000 sf: Apr 2019 Municipal 50,000 sf: Dec 2017 (April thereafter) Non-Residential and Multifamily 50,000 sf: Apr 2018 Municipal Same year as first reporting year Non-Residential and Multifamily One year grace period Transparency occurs same year as first reporting year of data
City Policy Buildings Included Additional Elements Date Passed Number of Buildings Area (sf) Water Tracking Other Requirements Orlando Dec 2016 826 125.6 million Non-res and MF 50k sf - Audit/RCx every 5 years if ENERGY STAR < 50; Qualified Benchmarker Los Angeles Dec 2016 14,000 900 million Non-res & MF 20k sf ASHRAE Level II Audit & RCx every 5 years Chicago Sept 2013 3,500 900 million Non-res & MF 50k sf Voluntary Data verification every 3 years Atlanta April 2015 2,900 402 million Non-res & MF 25k sf Municipal 10k sf Audit every 10 years, unless ENERGY STAR certified or similar
NYC Benchmarking & Transparency Policy: A survey of New York City facility managers found that, after the enactment of the City s Benchmarking and Transparency Policy, at least 75% took action to improve energy performance in their buildings.
Demonstrated Water Savings In Minneapolis: Public buildings showed a nearly 12% decline in water consumption from 2015 to 2016 Total water consumption dropped 5.9% in consistently benchmarked buildings
Sample Schedule Template Energy Policy Task Force Gov t buildings benchmark and publish data First Benchmarking Reporting Deadline Group A Notification letters sent First Group B Audit or Returning Due Group C notification letters sent First Group D Audit or Returning Due Group E notification letters sent 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 Policy Passed Notification letters Sent to all commercial and MF properties First Public Posting of Data First Group A Audit or Returning Due Group B notification letters sent First Group C Audit or Returning Due. Group D notification letters sent First Group E Audit or Returning Due
What is best timeline for phasing policy in Des Moines? o Standard (staggered by 1 year for 3 property types) o Accelerated Include Audits and RcX? o Every 5 years? 10 years? Include Water metrics?
Break
How Information will be shared and used Reporting - Responsible party - Qualifications Data Transparency Collecting Energy and Water Data - What data would be useful to be published for private property owners? Data Quality
Elements of a benchmarking & transparency policy Benchmarking Reporting Transparency Building Owners Property Managers Policy makers Utility program administrators Researchers Real Estate Market Buyers and tenants Financing and investment firms
Make energy and water performance data TRANSPARENT to the market EUI 56 kbtu ft 2
How BMT policies spur market transformation City (Report Author) Benchmarking Data Dissemination Reported Energy Reduction Annual Energy Reduction Chicago Market Transparency 1.6% (2013-2014) 1.6% (City staff) 1 New York City Market Transparency 5.7% (2010-2013) 1.9% (U.S. DOE) 2 New York City (MIT) 3 Market Transparency 9% (2010-2013) 13% (2010-2014) 3% - 3.25% San Francisco Market Transparency 7.9% (2010-2014) 1.9% (City staff + ULI) 4 Seattle Transactional Disclosure 0.6% (2011-2013) 0.3% (City staff) 5 Washington, D.C. Market Transparency 9% (2010-2013) 3% (District staff) 6
How information will be shared and used Determine what data is collected through Portfolio Manager What will be submitted/reported to city for compliance? What will be made public and when? (transparency) City will create a Master Portfolio Manager account and custom reporting template
Benefits of providing and displaying information Demonstrate compliance Create a level playing field Promote friendly competition among businesses Enhance companies Green Reputation marketing Improve value of efficient buildings Target outreach for specific business owners/organizations Support potential energy efficiency standards of new or rehabbed buildings when city incentives are provided Determine contribution to city-wide sustainability goals
What information is collected? Data Group Example Data Field Minimum Recommended by EPA Property Information Energy Performance Metrics GHG Emissions Water Performance Metrics Data Accuracy Additional Potential Fields Building IDs Detailed Building Use Breakdown Operating Characteristics Address, property type, area, primary use(s), year built, contact info Site/source energy use and EUI, weather normalized site/source energy use and EUI, energy use by fuel (electric, gas, other), on-site renewables Total, direct, and indirect GHG emissions Indoor/outdoor water use, water use intensity Estimated value flags, missing data in key fields, gaps/overlaps in energy or water meters, data quality checker CoStar ID, unique city ID Area by use bank branch, college/university, courthouse, data center, shopping mall, fast food restaurant, etc. Operating hours, workers per shift, number of computers
Most cities collect more data than they publish
How information will be shared and used
Data must be accurate and trustworthy
Options to ensure high quality data Portfolio Manager Data Quality Checks (by submitter) Additional automated data error checks (by City) Automated uploads of utility meter data not available here yet Certification for benchmarkers? Third-party verification (annual or periodic) Robust help center and training offerings
Options for displaying energy & water information City or Company Web sites Online Databases and/or Maps Building Scorecards Building Entrance or Lobby Sustainability or Benchmarking Reports Real Estate Listing Services CoStar, others
Building Scorecards Compare the building s performance to similar local buildings Estimate the energy and dollar savings that could be realized through energy efficiency improvements Inform recipients of actions they can take to save energy and decrease the costs of retrofits
Chicago Energy Rating System
DOE Building Energy Asset Score National standardized tool for assessing the physical and structural energy efficiency of commercial and multifamily buildings Asset Score generates a simple energy efficiency rating that enables comparison among buildings, and identifies opportunities to invest in energy efficiency upgrades Available for voluntary use and is 100% free to use
New York City Benchmarking Database
Visualization Map Philadelphia Example
Examples of Building Displays
Reporting Formats Summary Reports
Reporting Formats Los Angeles
Any additional thoughts or questions about: Collecting Energy & Water Data Data Quality Reporting Transparency
Additional Discussion Should benchmarkers be credentialed? If so, what kind of credentials? What is the appropriate way to guarantee data quality? What should be published and how should data be presented? Labels, scorecards, maps?
Schedule for Remaining Meetings in 2018 Meeting #5 - Thursday August 16 Compliance; Information, communication and enforcement; education and workforce training; resources and services available to assist under-performing buildings Meeting #6 - Thursday September 13 Final workshop to develop draft policy; Policy Development Committee will continue as needed