Henderson Building Solutions provides energy audits as a service offering to clients looking to identify meaningful ways to reduce onsite energy consumption. To the client’s facilities manager, this is a tool that identifies specific project pathways to reduced consumption and lower utility expenditures. To the business owner and/or the chief financial officer, the energy audit is a tool that guides budgetary practices in the near, mid, and long term, aiding the CFO in their fiduciary duties. Whether viewed as a service or a tool, all parties understand that the audit is not an expense, but rather an investment with a conspicuous return.

There are several scenarios that predate an energy audit. The directive for an audit can be passed down as part of a larger initiative on sustainability, whether it be guided by trustees, steering committees, or corporate initiatives. Alternatively, the request for the audit can occur as part of a recurring preventative or cycle maintenance strategy, where the operations team understands not only the value of recurring third-party insight from industry professionals, but also the necessity. That necessity remains in either scenario, but in the latter, it informs us of a commitment to the understanding that energy management is indicative of a mission to optimize operational strategies. This mantra holds true in any scenario and is readily observed during a site visit.

An energy audit is not performed with blinders on. A site visit that yields numerous observations about a lack of preventative maintenance, antiquated HVAC control logic, and deferred capital replacement informs us that energy is managed in a similar fashion. As exemplified, an operations budget can be balanced in part by forgoing maintenance and replacement expenses – but is that the best strategy? The shortcomings of these facilities management strategies lead to an energy audit that delivers numerous opportunities to reduce energy consumption alongside recommendations to address deficiencies associated with deferred maintenance.* Low or no-cost energy conservation measures (ECMs) related to thermostatic setpoints, equipment schedules, and control logic should be prioritized for implementation. Energy cost savings from implementing high-priority low-cost ECMs should be earmarked for future investment in energy capital upgrades. Equipment upgrades and capital replacement projects recommended by the audit will require additional discussion.

On the other hand, a facility with well-maintained mechanical rooms, modern lighting solutions, and a marked reduction in deferred maintenance tell another story – this operation understands the value of proper energy management. As such, an energy audit will compliment a preexisting mission. The operation is well suited to address previously mentioned low or no-cost modifications to reduce energy consumption. Furthermore, this is an operation that understands the importance of capital investment to see payback on equipment upgrades and strategic cycle maintenance often recommended in the energy audit. This is an operation that understands that lifecycle cost analysis (LCA) provides more value than first cost analysis.

Doing our part to perform an energy audit sheds light on how a facility is being managed. Aligning a facility’s energy management practices with guidance from well-qualified professionals will supplement an organization’s goals. The onus is on the consultant to educate as to the necessity of the role energy management plays in optimizing operational strategy. If an operation receives an energy audit, but that knowledge and theory were not shared, then merely a report was the deliverable.

*If those total deficiencies equal 10% or more of the site’s current replacement value, major repair or replacement should be considered – a good metric to discuss in a separate article