The state auditor says he can’t tell if the state has reduced energy consumption at government buildings because agency leaders haven’t submitted adequate information for years.
Auditor Doug Hoffer last week released a performance audit of the implementation the 2005 and 2010 State Agency Energy Plans — aimed at reducing consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in state buildings among other things.
Hoffer said the plans, which are under the oversight of the Agency of Administration’s Department of Buildings and General Services, did not contain enough information or a “systematic” evaluation mechanism to determine whether state buildings are meeting Act 40 goals to reduce energy consumption.
In 2005 and 2012, Hoffer said, relevant state agencies did not prepare implementation plans. And Hoffer said the largest energy consumers in 2012 — the Agency of Transportation, the Department of Corrections and Department of Buildings and General Services — “did not evaluate the results of their efforts to reduce energy consumption compared to state goals.”
The goals were adopted in 2011, when Act 40 directed the state to “increase its use of renewable energy,” and reduce energy consumption by 5 percent in state buildings, and by 5 percent for state employees who drive for work. The law put the responsibility for implementing the plan on the secretary of the Agency of Administration.
The law also fit into the 2011 Comprehensive Energy Plan, which asked the Department of Buildings and General Services to hire an energy engineer, who would be a resource for energy matters within state government. The plan also advised the state to build new buildings in a way that allows for passive heating and cooling and encouraged state employees to ride-share to reduce fuel consumption.
Hoffer said in an interview that the energy job was empty from 2011 until about a year ago because the former energy engineer was relocated following Tropical Storm Irene. But he said that was only one part of a series of agency problems.
“They were not well-organized,” Hoffer said Monday. “It was not well-coordinated. The necessary systems were not in place. And, in my view, they had limited resources, which suggested it wasn’t a priority for successive administrations.”
The employees who did try to track their energy consumption, Hoffer said, only had expenditure data in their internal accounting software, so they had to figure out the price of gasoline and electricity, and divide the expenditure by the price to find consumption.
That, combined with the omission of energy usage for buildings the state rented, left Hoffer with data that his team did not use and could only say “contained data and formula errors and had methodological flaws.”
Additionally, the 5 percent figure set by the Legislature may have also been impossible to meet, and Hoffer said there were different layers of government that could have held the Legislature accountable.
“If you’re in a department that’s growing, for example, then your square footage is increasing,” Hoffer said. “If you’re growing, it’s pretty tough to cut 5 percent. That’s a pretty good example that it wasn’t done right at the outset.
“Everybody says, when asked, ‘What did you do during that time period?’ they just raise their hands and say ‘Irene,’” Hoffer said.
The department’s new energy manager shows promise for improving the concerns Hoffer’s team outlined in the audit. “I think the good news is hopefully we’ll see some improvement next year,” Hoffer said.
Dan Edson, the energy manager at Buildings and General Services, began managing the state’s energy initiative a year ago as part of his job description.
Edson said his department and the Agency of Transportation are reducing energy consumption, but they need more resources.
“My biggest response to the audit is that we, the state, need to dedicate the appropriate resources to looking at running a state energy management program,” Edson said. “If we really want to get serious about doing this, then it’s going to take more people and more money.”
Right now, Edson said his the department and agency are using the Energy Star portfolio manager to track energy use at their buildings. They are also tracking fuel use with a special debit card. (The card’s company website advertises that fleets using the card can save up to 15 percent on consumption.)
“The process has started, and we’re just going to keep going back down the list and getting every state entity that is responsible for paying its utility bills to keep monitoring its energy use,” Edson said. “You can’t reduce what you don’t track.”
Alec Portalupi, technical services engineer at the Agency of Transportation, said Hoffer’s audit was right, and he wants leaders to offer more guidance to agencies as a result.
“We wouldn’t dispute that,” Portalupi said of Hoffer’s assessment of the data. “It was a mish-mash of data, and it’s one of those situations where there’s all this data, but how (do you) get it into a format that you can use? The electric accounts were probably one of the most difficult for us.”
Portalupi said he manages 65 garages, where his team has installed new insulation, lighting, windows and other efficiency measures. But the challenge was providing data that proves consumption went down.
Edson said agency leaders should take into account that a percentage reduction has limitations and focus on finding building-by-building efficiencies.
“So, if you were to lose 5 percent of your body weight every year, would you end up at 50 pounds?” Edson asked. “No. That’s not sustainable.”
