Prevalence of typical operational problems and energy savings opportunities in U.S. commercial buildings

Abstract

In the United States, as much as 30% of the 19 EJ that commercial buildings consume is considered excess. Much of the excess energy is due to the inability to manage building operations efficiently. Because almost 20% of the total primary energy consumption is associated with commercial buildings, significant energy reductions in this sector are needed to mitigate climate change. Therefore, many cities and states are mandating periodic “tune-ups” of these buildings to eliminate excess energy consumption. Although the benefits of tune-ups and retro-commissioning are clear, focusing these mandates to look for specific opportunities has been a challenge because of the lack of studies that document the prevalence of opportunities. Therefore, we analyzed building automation system data from 151 buildings across the United States to document common operational problems and opportunities to improve building operations. This analysis showed that opportunities to improve building operations exist in almost every building. These opportunities were not strongly correlated with building vintage or size, but were reflective of how the buildings are operated. The prevalence of the top 20 opportunities ranged between 74% and 23%, with 40% of these associated with air-handling units. The rest of the opportunities are associated with schedules, chilled and hot-water distribution, and zone controls. Of the 151 buildings, 69 of them implemented corrective actions of some or all opportunities that were identified. Implementation varied across the Re-tuning categories, with 60% for schedule opportunities, 50% for zone opportunities, over 40% for the air-handling unit and hot-water opportunities, and 35% of the chilled-water opportunities. There was wide variation in whole building energy savings, ranging from 0 to 50% and 0 to 18 $/m2 with median percent annual whole building savings of 12% and median normalized annual cost savings of $1.75/m2. In addition to documenting these key findings, the paper provides a list of opportunities that can be automatically and continuously identified and corrected and offers a list of those opportunities that should be the focus of the mandates.