Building up Efficiency

From Great Lakes Wiki

Rising energy costs force state to increase efficiency

By Amanda Peterka and Natalie Newman

At the end of November, Michigan lit a big Christmas tree outside of the Capitol, like usual. But the lights aren’t usual at all.

Instead of lights that typically get shredded with the tree when the Christmas season is over, the LED, or light-emitting diode, lights are re-usable and produce more light per watt than standard incandescent bulbs.

Changing lights is only one of the adjustments that state agencies are making to combat rising energy costs. In state buildings, energy-saving measures like this have helped to avoid spending money the state doesn't have on wasted energy. This is helpful in a state desperate for new revenues and savings wherever it can find them.

“I think that the state of Michigan is a leader in energy conservation and is now green,” said Keith Paasch, director of building operations in the Department of Management and Budget. “As far as conservation and mass undertaking to do all of our buildings, I don't think any other state can match that.”

The state has already reached the goal Gov. Jennifer Granholm set in 2005 to reduce energy use in state buildings by 10 percent compared to 2002 levels; energy usage has gone down by 17.69 percent.

That energy savings is equivalent to 17,500 cars off the road, utilities for 8,500 homes and the entire town of Mount Pleasant, Mich., all for one year, according to Paasch.

That may be the case, but the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) paints a different picture of energy efficiency in Michigan up to the year 2008.

In its annual rankings of states’ energy efficiency, Michigan comes in a lowly 38th place based on a scorecard with criteria that include building codes, transportation, financial incentives and efforts to lead by example.

This is largely because the energy reduction required in state buildings hasn’t yet been required for residential and commercial buildings. While building codes should be updated every three years, according to Max Neubauer of the ACEEE, the last commercial code in Michigan was enacted in 1999, and the residential one goes way back to 1992.

“They ranked poorly on that. Their energy codes are not as stringent,” Neubauer said. “But next year Michigan should get a bump up in the ratings because of its energy standard.”

In September, lawmakers required utility companies to offer energy efficiency programs in commercial and residential buildings.

“The standard is a huge step. It’s opening the floodgates to more efficiency standards. We should see more efficiency at utility level in Michigan now that it’s mandated by the state,” Neubauer said.

This requirement will add to the energy reduction already underway in the state’s own buildings. In 2003, energy audits of state buildings began when Granholm charged the Department of Environmental Quality with auditing four of its buildings and the George W. Romney building. They examined lighting, water, heating and cooling, and steam and ventilation, along with electric and utility bills.

They found that the buildings could reduce their energy costs by $245,000.

The governor appointed the Department of Management and Budget to oversee 40 more audits in buildings throughout the state. Since then, all of downtown Lansing’s buildings have been audited and given recommendations to save money and reduce consumption by 10 percent.

Nonetheless, the state’s energy bill continues to rise.

“The problem coming through is that energy prices have increased. Even though we saved on energy percents, we’re not saving energy dollars,” said Ric Martin, specialist for building operations in the Department of Management and Budget.

The electric consumption of Lansing’s state buildings dropped 11.4 percent from 2002 to 2007, but electricity costs have risen by 10 percent.

Some of the problem is that lights and utilities are turned off at the end of the workday, reducing energy at night rather than during the day, when energy is more costly.

“We had a 16 percent reduction in downtown in off-peak hours. But the issue is dollar savings versus utility consumption,” Paasch said. “When I turn off lights at night I get a reduction, but it’s non-peak power, so savings is less because it’s off-peak. It’s only about a 5 percent cost reduction.”

But with its energy initiatives, the government avoided paying $21 million, Paasch said.

“The state did clearly more in a short time than the goal asked for,” said Steve Kulesia, energy specialist in Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality. “The goal isn’t low at all; a 10 percent reduction is high in two years.”

The state senate outlined a new goal last August, with legislation calling for a 25 percent reduction in energy purchases for state buildings by 2015, compared to 2002. This goal, signed by Gov. Granholm, “supersedes all the other ones,” Martin said.

Gov. Granholm is also requiring that buildings be audited every five years. The first audits included recommendations like changing light bulbs, installing more efficient elevators and water fountains, controlling everything centrally and establishing energy savings committees for buildings.

The 2003 audit done for Constitution Hall, where the environment department is located, recommends that lights be turned off from 5:15 p.m. to 6 a.m. At night, janitors only turn on lights in the areas where they’re working. The audit estimates that this can save around $12,400 annually.

It’s hard to know how much of that has been saved because it’s difficult to pinpoint who’s in charge of making changes. Bob Bierwagon, facilities manager for Constitution Hall, said he had no idea where to find that information.

Martin said, “We followed through on pretty much all the recommendations on the audits.” Next year, a report from the Department of Management and Budget will have updates.

Departments are responsible for upgrading the buildings, and the Department of Management and Budget is merely there to help out.

“They get a final say over everything,” Martin said. “Our responsibility is coming up with a plan, but we don’t have much sanction over buildings not under DMB budget, guidance or instructions.”

Each state agency has an Energy Use Reduction Coordinator (EURC), who oversees all buildings in their department. They report monthly to the Department of Management and Budget.

Last year, the Departments of Corrections and Community Health won awards from the governor for excellence in energy efficiency. Corrections reduced energy use by 20 percent, and community health by 43 percent, since 2002.

The corrections department got there by cutting water and sewer wastes, controlling everything electronically and using bio-fuels in their power plants.

“Certain agencies are better at it than others, with recycling and energy savings,” Martin said. “But it takes the cooperation of agencies. With more cooperation and enthusiasm, the better the results.”

While the state cleans house in Lansing, new technologies are being tested elsewhere. Escanaba, Mich. is home to an LED lighting pilot program that is testing four-foot fluorescent tubes with multiple LED lights. While the cost for the bulbs is high, in 25 years they only diminish by 75 percent.

Back in Lansing, the state has more plans for efficiency. In 2009, Constitution Hall will become the first state building to have solar panels.

“The next two or three years will be interesting. A host of new green technologies will be installed in state facilities,” Paasch said.

But at the end of the day, it may be the simple things like employees turning off lights and computers when they leave that may make the most difference.

“Just common sense. Powering down, turning things off when not needed. We didn’t spend a lot of money getting here,” Paasch said.

Read More:

Greening Without Credit: Michigan goes green without LEED-certification recognition

Finding the Funds for Efficiency: Some agencies see no results for their energy actions

Go back to the State of Michigan's Energy Efficiency