GUIDANCE NOTE

Energy
Benchmarking
Published by the Institute of Workplace
and Facilities Management (IWFM)
March 2019
Guidance Note

Introduction

Like other benchmarking and comparison exercises, energy

benchmarking is a useful tool to compare and contrast energy
performance between facilities using information that is readily
available to Facility Managers. Comparing the energy performance of
facilities is often the first step toward managing energy consumption.

When undertaking energy benchmarking we have to

accept that a large number of variables can affect the
results and therefore generous tolerances may have to
be considered depending on the range of comparable
source data such as building location, type and size,
and the activities and operating hours of equipment
and occupants, plus the configuration of heating and
ventilation systems etc.

When considering energy benchmarking it is also

necessary to distinguish between energy targets
normally derived from designer’s calculations which
are typically prepared for new or refurbished facilities
and actual energy performance of facilities. Evidence
suggests that there are significant variances between
the theoretical and actual energy performance
of buildings 1234.

Footnote
1
The Zero Carbon Hub Closing the gap between design
and as-built performance, Evidence review report
2
Innovate UK’s Building Performance Evaluation Programme.
3
The Carbon Trust‘s Closing the gap, Lessons learned
on realising the potential of low carbon building design
4
Carbon Buzz, Performance gap benchmarking data

2
 Energy Benchmarking

Why undertake
energy benchmarking?

Energy benchmarking can offer a quick and low cost method to review energy
performance for one or more facilities against an organisation’s own comparative
data. Where internal comparative data is limited then other relevant data from
specialist benchmarking ‘clubs’, government departments or other published
sources (including professional bodies such as CIBSE) can also be used.

By undertaking an energy benchmarking process, Different organisations may have different energy
Facility Managers are able to identify trends and assessment metrics. Some may focus on carbon
exceptions in energy consumption and as a result emissions, others in final energy consumption levels,
target improvements and share best practice. or simply overall energy costs. Facility Managers
Used effectively energy benchmarking can: can make comparisons that are relevant to their
organisational objectives by selecting the relevant
• Provide objective, comparable information performance data for their sites and comparing this
on energy use with equivalent benchmark data.
• Identify performance ‘outliers’ where further
investigation and action or detailed audits may The first stage is to understand and define clear
be worthwhile aims of what the benchmarking exercise is trying to
• Help optimise the performance of buildings achieve as this will influence the type of benchmarking
• Increase awareness of energy efficiency among to be performed.
building occupants, and in turn their behaviour
• Identify improved practices that can be replicated,
either within a single building or across an
entire portfolio
• Establish historical reference points from which
measurement can be made
• Underpin an energy management action plan
and business case for capital investments
• Lead to reduced carbon emissions, energy
consumption and lower energy costs

1
Guidance Note

How is energy
benchmarking undertaken?

Energy benchmarking should comprise a continuing improvement loop with the

basic stages illustrated below:

1. Define objectives
As with any management process it is necessary
to define the purpose of the exercise. Common
1 Define reasons to undertake energy benchmarking
objectives have already been indicated in ‘Why undertake
energy benchmarking’ and these may become
the objectives which are relevant to individual
2 Basic building organisations and management teams
6 Improve information
and metrics
2. Basic building information and metrics
Energy benchmarking against similar facilities
by type and function within a portfolio or from
external sources can be useful where this data
can be gathered and is measured on a similar basis.
5 Comparison 3 Collect There are an increasing number of sources for
of energy and process external benchmarking and energy performance
data data
bands. Several of these are described later.

Facility Managers need to take account of several

4 Collect variables which can exist between organisations
benchmarks
and buildings when comparing two or more
buildings for the purpose of energy benchmarking.
Such variables include (but are not limited to):

Function

Office
(Full or partial occupancy,
city centre, rural etc.)

Occupancy
Manufacture
5 days

Type
24/7
Education
(School, college, university) Modern
Modern
Traditional lightweight
Term time lightweight
construction construction
construction
(& MEP) (Gas Htg and
(Air conditioned)
natural vent)
Retail Other

2

At this point it may also be necessary to consider
to benchmark data that will be available (at stage
4) for comparative purposes so as not to spend
a lot of time at this stage analysing variables and
metrics which cannot be used productively later
on (in stage 5).
It might also be useful at this stage to consider
any relevant trend of customer feedback or
complaints and common problems faced by
the FM team plus also any relevant current
and future plans for individual buildings.
3. Collect and process data
The collection and analysis of data used to
demonstrate the energy performance of the target
facility(s) should be combined with discussions
with the site team(s) to understand why one or
more buildings are managed the way they are.
The simplest method of analysis is to use a ratio of
energy and relevant output per building.
Industrial processes have historically referred to a
Specific Energy Ratio (SER) to measure the energy
(gas/heat, electricity or both) in kWh against the
relevant output units which may be an individual
manufactured item or relate to a batch of products.
SER’s may vary with the quantity in a batch of
product output (normally falling as volume
increases), and are often affected by shifts in the
balance between different product grades. They
may also be affected by the weather (which is not
normally adjusted for).
Thus:
Energy (kWh)
SER =
Unit(s) (i.e. number of items in a batch etc.)
For accommodation buildings energy performance
is usually measured by a ratio referred to as
a Normalised Performance Indicator (NPI).
NPI’s tend to be weather-adjusted kWh per
unit of floor area.
Energy Benchmarking
These can be used to provide comparisons between
buildings, or against published comparison data.
Alternative ‘units’ can also be considered, either ft2
or m2, and can vary for gross internal floor area or
net useable floor area etc. In the education sector
a ‘/student’ measure may also be relevant.
Thus:
Energy (kWh) adjusted for weather
NPI =
Unit (i.e. area, occupants etc.)
Adjustments for weather and locations can be
considered when the comparative data is identified
(as below).
4. Identification and collection of benchmarks
When commencing energy benchmarking it is
necessary to consider the pool of comparable
data that are available to the Facility Manager.
Comparison benchmarks can be broken into
two pools:
• Comparing a single facility from year to year.
This type of historical benchmarking is easy to
define since Facility Managers can control the
data and will know the operational history of
the facility during each time period. Comparing
the energy performance of a single building
over time can help Facility Managers to trend
performance and track energy-efficiency
improvements. However, as the analysis is
restricted to a single building, increasing or
decreasing consumption does not necessarily
demonstrate good or bad performance. A really
poor or well managed building could simply
be returning to the mean. In order to judge this
a building can be compared with its peers.
• Comparing a single facility to other facilities
within a peer group (either within a portfolio or
externally) can provide a powerful quantative
and visual illustration of where energy
investigation and improvements may be targeted.
Additionally, this type of peer group analysis can
be used to develop improved consistency across
all of a group of properties.
3
Guidance Note

Manual adjustment
It is not uncommon for adjustments to be made to
source or benchmark data to normalise variables
which cannot be influenced by the organisation
or Facility Manager, therefore, discount these
from energy management activities.

An example of this is weather compensation.

Adjustments for weather compensation tend to
be made using a calculation based on published
Degree-Days which normalise cold and warm years
onto a common basis for heating energy comparisons.

5. Comparison of energy data

The SERs and NPI’s described previously can be
viewed alongside a number of ‘similar’ facilities
to contrast and compare which perform well
and which do not, from this further analysis can
be targeted to investigate where improvements
can be made amongst the worst performers.

ANNUAL CONSUMPTION

Electricity Gas
1,000,000

800,000

600,000
Annual consumption shows
kWh

all buildings performing

400,000
relatively similarly
200,000

0
1

5
g

g
g
in

in

in

in
in
ld

ld

ld

ld
ld
ui

ui

ui

ui
ui
B

B
B

Typical comparison of ‘similar’ facilities (buildings 1 to 4) - Graphical comparison of energy per year]

ANNUAL CONSUMPTION PER AREA

Electricity Gas
150.0

Looking at consumption per

100.0
kWh/m2

floor area shows clearly the

best (Building 5) and worst
50.0
performer (Building 4)

0.0
1

5
g

g
g
in

in

in

in
in
ld

ld

ld

ld
ld
ui

ui

ui

ui
ui
B

B
B

Typical comparison of ‘similar’ facilities (buildings 1 to 4) - Graphical comparison of energy per year energy/m2

4
 Energy Benchmarking

Information Required - For this exercise only
annual energy consumption (from monthly
energy bills) and a measurement of ‘units’
are required.
SER energy in kWh’s can be easily converted into
energy cost (£s) by substituting the billed cost
for the consumption. It should be noted that cost
comparisons for energy will add a further level
of variance to any energy benchmarking process
because the cost of energy may vary between
organisation and building locations based on their
specific supply contracts and volumes (which
might not always be apparent in a £/m2 analysis).
Greater insight can be gathered into energy
performance by comparing the profile or
shape of energy usage over a chosen period
(for example per day, week or month). By
comparing the changing consumption of energy
in one or more facilities on different days, weeks
and months we can quickly spot consumption
which does not align with normal occupation
or organisational activities. In addition we can
also compare seasonal energy performance.
For this purpose, comparison of daily, weekly
and monthly (seasonal) energy profiles can
be extremely useful.

MONTHLY CONSUMPTION - GAS

Building 4 Building 5
140,000
120,000
Although profile shapes are
100,000
relatively similar there is an
80,000
kWh

obvious issue in the summer

60,000 within Building 4 where
40,000 consumption is significantly
20,000 higher than Building 5
0
n
n

b
ar

pr

ay

l
ug

p
ct
ov

ec
Ju
Ju
Ja
Fe

Se

O
M

A
M

D
N
A

Graphical comparison between buildings of energy (gas) per month annotated for poor seasonal
comparison in one building

MONTHLY CONSUMPTION - ELECTRICITY

MONTHLY CONSUMPTIONBuilding
- ELECTRICITY
4 Building 5
60,000

50,000
Both profiles are relatively
40,000
flat however Building 4
kWh

30,000 is consistently using more

20,000 electricity than Building 5
10,000

0
n
n

b
ar

pr

ay

l
ug

p
ct
ov

ec
Ju
Ju
Ja
Fe

Se

O
M

A
M

D
N
A

Graphical comparison between buildings of energy (electricity) per month annotated for poor seasonal
comparison in one building

5
Guidance Note

In the past, energy data was often collected manually
from meters on a weekly or monthly basis, however
this manual process can be inaccurate and does not
provide useful data for energy consumption between
meter readings. With advances in controls, meters and
telemetry, Facility Mangers should be able to gather
energy data in a digital half-hourly format, from energy
suppliers. If this is not available then Facility Managers
should consider procuring an automatic meter reading
service (AMR) so that this data can be gathered
and analysed. Customer installed AMR can also be
applied to sub-metering to provide improved energy
consumption data downstream of the suppliers ‘fiscal’
meter. A plotted ‘half-hour’ energy profile can often
show the Facility Manager where energy consumption
is occurring outside of the expected pattern. This can
be the result of control settings which are energising
plant and equipment at peculiar times however this
can also be caused by human error. With the additional
information available any faults can be quickly
identified and corrected.
Once the energy profile has been plotted, ask yourself:
• Does the energy profile tie in with building
occupancy or known operation?
• If you look after an estate or portfolio of buildings,
is it possible to find a commonality between
buildings to compare and contrast – looking for
anomalies both good and bad?
• Do you require more information to develop energy
efficiency strategies?
• When do you use energy and how do you pay for it?
• Do you pay peak demand charges, if so could these
be partially offset by over heating or cooling areas
prior to entering peak charging times?
• Could on-site generation be utilised in a
smarter way?
• Is energy storage or demand response viable
for your portfolio?

CASE STUDY - ‘A NIGHT AT THE MUSEUM’

In a group of similar buildings, meter readings

were taken manually each month. After
several years a pattern of seasonal profiles was
established and the buildings were believed to
be performing well.

Following the installation of half-hour automatic

meters, significant spikes in power consumption
were detected at midnight (00:00) for one hour
every night, even though the buildings were
empty. On investigation it was discovered that
several ovens and other equipment which had
integrated timeclocks had been set to come ‘on’
at 00:00. The equipment then shut down and was
cool before normal operating hours.

This situation may have persisted for many more

months or years if the half-hour meter had not
provided the detailed consumption data required
to identify this wastage.

6
 Energy Benchmarking

DAILY CONSUMPTION – GAS

Building 4 Building 5
1,800
1,500
1,400
1,200 There is a clear difference in
gas consumption between
kWh

800
Buildings 4 and 5 within the
600
month of July
400
200
0
th

th
t

th

th

st
1s

5t

9t

21
13

17

25

29

July

Graphical comparison of energy (gas) per day in a week for a single building annotated for over consumption
at times of day

DAILY CONSUMPTION - ELECTRICITY

Building 4 Building 5
2,000
For Building 5 you can see
a significant drop off in
1,500
consumption over the weekend
when there is less occupancy
kWh

1,000
Although there is a drop off
500
in Building 4 it almost uses as
much electricity at the weekend
as a Building 5 weekday
0
t

th

th

th

th

nd

th

th

st
1s

4t

7t

31
13

16

25

28
10

19

22

July

Graphical comparison of energy (electricity) per day in a week for a single building annotated for over
consumption at times of day

7
Guidance Note

HOURLY PROFILE - GAS

Gas consumption is not
Building 4 Building 5
80 only much higher during
occupied hours in Building
60 4 but consumption can
also be seen 24 hours a day
kWh

40
which should not happen
20 during July

0 Boilers could have been

found overridden
0

0
:0

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0
2:

4:

6:

8:

14

16
12

22
0

10

20
18
0

0
0
0
0

July 1st

HOURLY PROFILE - GAS

Occupancy Building 4 Building 5

80 1

60
kWh

40

20

0 0
0

0
:0

:0

:0

:0

:0
3:

6:

9:

15
12
0

18

21
0

0
0

July 1st

Graphical comparison of energy (gas) per hour in a day for a single building annotated for over consumption
at times of day

HOURLY PROFILE - ELECTRICITY

Building 4 Building 5
80

60
kWh

40

20

0
0

0
:0

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0

:0
2:

4:

6:

8:

14

16
12

22
0

10

20
18
0

0
0
0
0

July 1st

HOURLY PROFILE - ELECTRICITY

It can be seen by overlaying
Occupancy Building 4 Building 5 occupancy data that consumption
80 1 within occupied times is similar
60
Building 4 has an issue through
unoccupied times which will need
kWh

40 to be investigated

20
For example a lighting control system
0 0 could have become faulty with lights
not switching off at night
0

0
:0

:0

:0

:0

:0
3:

6:

9:

15
12
0

18

21
0

0
0

July 1st

Graphical comparison of energy (electricity) per hour in a day for a single building annotated for over
consumption at times of day

8
 Energy Benchmarking

6. Improve
The comparison and analysis
of energy data provides clues
for Facility Managers to where
energy improvements can be
investigated and made. This will
also provide an insight as to the
scale of energy improvements,
which can be used to prioritise
corrective actions and economic
analysis of a business case for
investing in improvements.

Where energy data continues to

be collected then the benefit of
individual improvements can be
verified and measured using the
historic data.

9
Guidance Note

Sources of energy
benchmark data

Governments in the EU and UK are using energy benchmarking as an important tool

in their fight to reduce carbon emissions from the built environment. For example,
there has been a requirement for Display Energy Certificate (DEC) in all public
buildings above 1,000m2 since 2008 and this was extended to include buildings
above 250m2 metres from 2013. DECs can be used to identify individual building
energy performance and compare this to similar types of facility. DECs (plus Energy
Performance Certificates and Recommendation Reports can be viewed using Post
Codes at https://www.ndepcregister.com/reportSearchAddressByPostcode.html.

Energy benchmarks for a wide variety of premises are

also published by CIBSE in Guide F ‘Energy Efficiency
in Buildings’, Part B, Section 19 ‘Benchmarking,
Monitoring and Targeting’, and Part C, Section 20,
‘Energy Benchmarks’.

Building energy
• CIBSE TM46
• CIBSE Guide F
• ASHRAE 90.1, Energy Star, CBECS
• Sector or type specific e.g. ITP, ECON19
• BEES - www.gov.uk/government/publications/
building-energy-efficiency-survey-bees
• Internal

Building CO2
• CarbonBuzz
• Carbon Trust

Corporate
• CRC
• GRESB

Financial performance

Past performance

10
 Energy Benchmarking

Limitations of
energy benchmarking

It is important to remember that individual facilities are affected differently by their

unique locations, local weather patterns and occupancy patterns, therefore these
will always introduce some range of tolerance which can mask underlying areas
for energy improvement. Once Facility Managers have exhausted the available
comparisons and explained, or corrected variances between benchmarks, then
there remains no substitute for detailed individual building energy audits
undertaken by a specialist and qualified energy manager.

It is also worth remembering;

• Comparison and analysis will only be as good as
the data available
• Benchmark data will get better over time when more
cumulative data is gathered
• The majority of published benchmarks only provide
high level data (therefore internal benchmarking can
offer greater detail where comparative buildings are
available in a portfolio)
• Published benchmarks generally don’t include specifics
about the buildings you are comparing against

Common benchmarking mistakes include

• Bad or insufficient data
• Where ‘normalisation’ adjustments or conclusions
are influenced by bias
• Not taking sufficient account of the basic
building information
• Selection of ‘poor-fitting’ benchmarking
comparisons or not enough knowledge about
the benchmarking source

11
The Institute of Workplace and Facilities Management (IWFM) is the body
for workplace and facilities professionals.

We exist to promote excellence among a worldwide community of over

17,000 and to demonstrate the value and contribution of workplace and
facilities management more widely.

Our Mission: We empower professionals to upskill and reach their potential

for a rewarding, impactful career. We do this by advancing professional
standards, offering guidance and training, developing new insights and
sharing best practice.

Our Vision: As the pioneering workplace and facilities management body,

our vision is to drive change for the future. To be the trusted voice of a
specialist profession recognised, beyond the built environment, for its
ability to enable people to transform organisations and their performance.

The IWFM was established in 2018. It builds on the proud heritage

of 25 years as the British Institute of Facilities Management.

Author
Reid Cunningham, Strategic Development Director,
BAM FM & BAM Energy

Peer reviewer
Sunil Shah, Director, Acclaro Advisory

While all due care is taken in writing and producing this guidance note.
IWFM does not accept any liability for the accuracy of the contents or
any opinions expressed herein.

IWFM
Charringtons House
1st Floor South
The Causeway
Bishop’s Stortford
Hertfordshire CM23 2ER

T +44 (0)1279 712 675

E membership@iwfm.org.uk
www.iwfm.org.uk