Your reply will be of great value to my thesis research!
Angela Lewis
PhD Candiate, University of Reading
Visiting Scholar, Penn State
Thank you to everyone who replied to my post! It was exciting to see such a lively discussion.
I received a total of 56 responses (I posted to an AFE, BOMA and an IFMA group, as well as 2 FM groups on LinkedIn and one post to MyFacilities.net).
I intentionally asked a vague question because I wanted to better understand if maintenance management projects “should” be implemented before energy management projects.
At first, I saw that if you maintain your equipment, it will likely run efficiently -- so you should implement a maintenance program first, then an energy program. However, what all your responses helped me to see is that when starting a new project it is also critical to account for the values and culture of the organization -- a general statement that maintenance should be performed first, before energy cannot be made.
As a simple example, if an organization is really excited about energy efficiency, but finds reactive maintenance to be acceptable, giving a recommendation to only establish a preventive or predictive maintenance program will likely not be well received. It may be best to work with the team to implement an energy efficient project. As the project is in progress, help the team understand the interdependencies between energy and maintenance and then encourage the development of a proactive maintenance program.
I am using this conclusion as part of my research scope, to develop a building operations decision analysis tool. The main goal is to develop a question-driven tool to help make energy and maintenance decisions. If you would like to learn more, please see my project website: www.improvebuildingperformance.com.
Thank you again for participating in the poll!
Angela
-- Angela Lewis, LEED AP PhD Candidate
University of Reading
Your question is vague (on purpose) - so my answer will be likewise. Spend the money on the maintenance project.
Why? Beause we're being vague, "maintenance management project" could be interpreted several ways.
It all depends on the specific issues facing your facility.
Older facilities often feature older technology which can be terribly inefficient in terms of energy use and utility costs. If this is the case, there may be 'low hanging fruit' in the form of low cost energy projects with a quick Return on Investment. Lighting retorfits frequently offer payback periods of less than 3 years. If the $50K - $100k can reduce operating costs by $15,000 or much more you maybe able to create on-going energy savings. These funds can then be funneled into Maintenannce Management projects or services that improve the upkeep and perfromance of the facility.
If the facility is large and there is a need for technology driven maintenance management tools or services such as CMMS software, it may indeed be prudent to enhance existing maintence programs. Preventive or predictive maintenance properly performed enhance building performance and save energy or utility costs as well as prevent collateral facility or equipment damage. Statistics suggest that effective PM programs can reduce utility costs by as much as 15% or more over the costs of a facility which is poorly maintained.
Final Answer - Energy or maintenance project? YES
Why? Research needed - the devil is in the details.
Angela,
A worthwhile discussion. And yes, you are correct that interpersonal issues (egos) and non-monetary issues (community goodwill, for instance) may influence the decision between two, or more, alternatives.
I'd still say that the economics need to be defined/presented between competing choices. Then the decision-makers will add the other ingredients to make the call. Being professional in your approach to quantifying and presenting your case will build your credibility within the organization leading to longer term success.
(I wouldn't hurt to negotiate getting a percentage of the savings to reinvest in your maintenance program either!)
Best regards,
Tom
Tom,
I comletely agree.
The economics are also part of my framework I am developing. -- Economics are an important part of both energy and maintenance decisions.
Thanks!
I would use the fund for maintenance. What a lot of facility manager fail to realize is that maintaining the existing equipment is just as important as looking to find cost saving in projects such as the changing of lighting fixtures under the energy saving project. What usually happens is that the excitement in investing in new technology overshadows the daily equipment services. As managers move to fund new projects the existing facilities equipment systems start loosing performance based on continues use. The only time a facility system is addressed is when a HVAC unit or motors fail. I would check with the Operations & Maintenance group at your facility and find out what equipment well need to be upgraded now or in the near future before supporting energy projects. You are also investing in "Energy" by optimizing the existing system equipment for the facility eliminating equipment down time and impact on tenants confront in the work place.
Very interesting guestion. The place I am currently the facilities manager for is an excellent case study in this. When I came on board the entire maintenance program was reactive. The things they considered preventative were few and weren't done on a routine. The building was 28 years old and still had it's original HVAC operating system. Seeing as we were no longer able to buy parts to repair the existing HVAC system I presented the case for a new one. Mainly that we didn't want to be in a situation where a part of the facilities goes down and we have to rush to get a new controls system up and running. They agreed this was a situation we wanted to avoid and agreed to invest $50,000 in a new controls system. That controls system realized us a 20% energy savings in its first year of operation. The money that we were able to save from that one energy project is now being used to fund smaller energy projects as well getting a better maintance program in place.
Hello Angela,I recommend that the facility executive invest the money in energy efficiency programs. Although it may seem like a big investment at first, the savings you will accrue by increasing the energy efficiency of your building far outweigh the initial costs of the upgrades. Such retrofits can reduce a building’s energy consumption and save you thousands of dollars on your electrical bill. In addition, state and federal governments and energy providers are offering rebates and tax incentives that can significantly lower the initial costs of building upgrades.. Using more efficient products (lighting, HVAC systems) will help you keep your maintenance costs low and help you save money on your electrical bills. Furthermore, payback periods for these types of investments are relatively short because the savings are so significant. The company I work for, Lumiversal, manufactures retrofit kits that allow T5 bulbs to be used with existing T12/T8 fixtures. If you visit us at www.lumiversal.com, you can use our calculator to get a better idea of how upgrading lighting systems can significantly increase energy cost savings . I hope you find this response helpful.Hooman
Lighting is usually 20-30% of a building energy cost - depending on what your company does for a living.
Here is a calculator we put together to estimate your Return On Investment:
http://www.aoturoaled.com/BulbCalcs/Fluoro.asp
Also - what about taking advantage of Federal Tax Deductions - http://www.dsireusa.org/Index.cfm?RE=0&EE=1