Public Energy Benchmarking Causes Embarrassment in U.K.

By Nadav Malin

An October 2, 2008, story in the Guardian publicized poor energy ratings from government-authorized assessors for several high-profile public buildings in the U.K., one day after a law took effect that requires public buildings over 11,000 ft2 to display their energy and carbon useage. The Palace of Westminster and the Bank of England both scored a “G” on the A-to-G scale. Several new and supposedly efficient buildings also fared poorly, including the Foster + Partners-designed London City Hall, which earned an “E.” The average for the 3,200 buildings assessed was “D,” and less than 1% achieved an “A” rating.

Building performance expert Bill Bordass applauds the public scrutiny but cautions that these scores reflect, in part, weaknesses in the rating system itself. “The system was introduced hastily, and the technique, the benchmarks, and the assessor skills all need to evolve,” he said. In particular, Bordass noted, the benchmarking system makes it difficult to adjust a building’s score based on special factors such as energy-intensive activities, high occupant density, or long operating hours.

Bordass predicted that building managers would respond to their poor scores both by tuning up their performance and by taking steps to properly document the reasons that they use more energy. “We really need to let the system evolve for a year or two” before reading too much into the scores, he suggested.

This article was produced by BuildingGreen, LLC.- www.buildinggreen.com