- There is "widespread confusion" regarding energy management systems available for commercial real estate, according to recent data analyzed by MACH Energy, a company focused on commercial real estate energy management solutions.
- The majority of companies with multi-site properties identify their energy management systems as building management, a distinction which can have costly results according to MACH.
- In the survey, 26% of respondents identified real-time monitoring as "the most important benefit" of an energy management system. Cost scored a close second, cited by 22% of participants.
Then results of MACH's survey of commercial real estate show just how far the energy industry has to go in enticing customers. It's a strange statistic: of the 800 surveyed, some 44% had installed energy management software but 70% of that figure count it as building management.
"This survey was designed with the goal of getting a more nuanced understanding of challenges faced by building professionals at all levels," said Wei-En Tan, vice president at MACH. "We've found that although [real estate investment trusts] and property owners understand the ROI potential of [energy management systems] across their portfolios very early on, the day-to-day decisions and implementation fall upon the people in the trenches — the property managers and chief engineers — who are clearly overwhelmed in what is still an early-adopter period."
MACH's survey found more than 80% of 200 multi-site companies had installed some form of energy management software. Despite benchmarking mandates and other market forces, MACH found that "reducing costs, not increasing Energy Star scores, was still widely identified as the number one reason for implementing EMS"
In the energy management survey, 21% of respondents cited "automated tenant billing/sub-metering as a must-have," according to MACH. Some 16% complained their EMS was only designed for electricity, not water/gas/steam, and 14% reported expense-reporting as a needed EMS function.