The real power of the tool is that Noesis lets you compare buildings on a weather-normalized, typical year basis rather than just on actual usage, as shown in the demo below. Similar to the EnergyIQ discussed below, it enables you to make comparisons between your facility and a peer group. Comparisons can be made by fuel type and even for water as well. However, the current version does not allow for the kind of fine-grained control of peer group attributes that you see in the EnergyIQ tool.
The tools three main functions are benchmarking, portfolio tracking, and rough analysis of energy savings potential for a set of broadly applicable energy savings measures still a work in progress as of this writing. You can choose your cohort based on a variety of attributes, including vintage, square footage, usage type, and climate region I recommend casting the net very broadly when first generating a cohort, lest you end up with a dataset based on half a dozen buildings.
To benchmark a building, users first select the metric they wish to use for comparison. This could be total facility fuel use, total electric use, or energy use by a given end-use category.
Next, users select attributes of their facility to develop the cohort against which a facility will be compared. Once you have selected a peer group, EnergyIQ generates associated charts to show the range of energy use for your peer group.
The chart below provides a sense of the distribution of energy use within your peer group, showing where the median midpoint energy use and quartiles data ranked divided into quarters are located. It also serves as the national benchmarking tool in Canada. A score of 50 represents median performance.
A higher score is better than average; lower is worse. All you need are your bills and some basic information about your building to get started. How does Portfolio Manager help you save?
To assist smaller companies, EPA offers the Energy Tracking Tool and a complimentary Quick Start Quide , a simple means for tracking energy performance over time and progress toward meeting goals. EPA makes it easy to compare the energy performance of your manufacturing plant or building with similar facilities nationwide.
For specific types of plants and buildings in the U. Use the verification process to promote accurate and transparent reporting. Consider the following when developing a verification process:. Commercial Reference Buildings. Analyzing and interpreting benchmarking results facilitates data-driven decision-making. The level of analysis will depend on the detail of the data collected. A few basic analysis techniques include:. Once the data have been analyzed, it is important to communicate the results in a manner appropriate to the audience.
The information needed by facility managers versus financial decision-makers will likely take different forms. It is important to understand the common language and metrics used for decision-making and implementation by the target audience. Portfolio Manager scores are one commonly used and widely understood metric for communicating results.
It is also helpful to incorporate results into existing reports so data-based decision-making is integrated with current practices. Explore Our Popular Tools and Resources. Top resources for state and local government from the State and Local Solution Center.
Developing A Benchmarking Plan. The following steps provide a framework for designing a benchmarking plan: Establish the goal for benchmarking Secure buy-in from leadership Build a benchmarking team Identify output metrics Identify data inputs Select a benchmarking tool Determine the collection method Consider a data verification process Evaluate analysis techniques Communicate the plan Plan for change.
Resources for Developing a Benchmarking Plan. Benchmarking Tools.
0コメント