Detailed information about the costs and benefits of potential green investments can help organizations effectively evaluate which initiatives will best achieve their environmental and corporate goals.
Based on its overall business objectives, each organization will have different values and strategies for going green. For instance, one organization may target investments that dramatically improve the quality of the indoor workplace environment, while another may focus on cutting operational costs or significantly reducing carbon emissions.The many potential greening initiatives an organization can undertake compete with a myriad of other capital and operational investments, such as systems renewal, building renovations and new construction. While organizations may single out opportunities to improve building sustainability for further analysis, ultimately those investments need to be assessed in the context of other building requirements.
A variety of approaches to sustainability may be undertaken, including targeted initiatives motivated by a business goal of increasing energy efficiency, certifying a building as meeting LEED, Energy Star or other green building standards, or meeting local, state or federal governmental mandates.
Financial metrics must also be taken into account. For example, what is the cost of a sustainable alternative as opposed to materials or technologies similar to what is already in place? How long is the lifecycle of each option? What’s the payback of the sustainable option?
The next step is establishing performance metrics as a baseline to identify relevant green opportunities and measure progress. It’s important to look at five key areas of building sustainability based on current industry standards: energy efficiency, water conservation, indoor air quality, site impact and materials employed. Once performance metrics have been established, the organization can identify green opportunities while looking at overall facility conditions and operations.
Common green opportunities include: high-efficiency lighting controls and sensors; water-conserving bathroom fixtures; automated building management systems; indigenous landscape maintenance; and materials with recycled content or bio-based materials. Once opportunities have been identified, the next step is evaluating them in the context of the overall capital plan. That includes taking into account cost factors, such as differences between the costs of using sustainable alternatives and conventional improvements, as well as savings over time. Initial investments in resource-sustaining alternatives may have either a rapid payback period or a more extended return on investment.
The best way to evaluate all the options is to set guidelines based on the organization’s priorities, such as cost, energy and water savings or the impact on overall facility condition. Using these parameters, the organization can make an informed, data-driven decision regarding the alternatives.
The facilities group at a major Massachusetts college recently integrated sustainability into its ongoing capital planning by assessing green building options and facility conditions on all four of the college’s campuses.
The project included determining which projects to target, which maintenance programs to defer and which opportunities to upgrade.
By combining sustainability assessments with its normal maintenance and operations, and ranking buildings by goal, the college was able to prioritize its capital spending plan for each asset. Most importantly, the unified effort is helping the college achieve its primary goal of reducing its carbon footprint, as part of the University Presidents’ Climate Commitment.
Similarly, the facilities department at a leading government-sponsored research center in California used a comprehensive approach in gathering critical facilities data to meet President Obama’s executive order setting sustainability goals for federal agencies.
In addition, the center established water and energy baselines, and used alternative green renewal choices to create integrated capital budgets.
With the right framework and tools in place, organizations can evaluate the sustainability of their existing facilities, reduce their environmental impact, increase their energy and water efficiency, cut costs and promote a healthier environment. Whether an organization already has a sophisticated sustainability program or is newly engaged in this effort, it’s important to evaluate and prioritize green options while remaining aligned with the overall corporate mission.
Susan Buchanan is project director in the Boston office of VFA, which provides green building assessment and portfoio management services.
