The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0263-2772.

htm

Renewable energy in US federal buildings

Daniel Castro-Lacouture and Kathy O. Roper
Building Construction Program, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Abstract
Purpose This research seeks to investigate sources of renewable energy into the everyday operation of federally owned facilities. The goal is to present comparisons of existing US federal buildings and analyze the savings and methodologies for acceptance of each project for the use of building and project managers within the US federal government or other researchers interested in similar analysis. Design/methodology/approach Data were analyzed on several case studies where solar, wind, and geothermal sources of renewable energy have already been integrated in federally owned facilities. The analysis focused on cost due to available data and resources, and its scope was to estimate the potential for success or failure and possible outcomes. Findings Current case studies of solar, wind, and geothermal projects within the US federal government suggest that cost savings are not the sole reason for adopting such technologies. Projects move forward based on additional motivations such as reduced environmental impact, government policy, and in an effort to increase leadership, awareness, and image. Research limitations/implications A larger number of case studies are needed to infer trends in federal renewable energy projects. The methodology is aimed at an objective comparison of electricity costs between buildings; however, as the ndings demonstrate, the quantitative normalized ratio implemented needs other soft considerations to fully represent renewable energy scenarios in US federal buildings. Practical implications Key decisions that must be made in order to get a renewable energy-building project completed may be facilitated by using the paper and its implications of the need for soft factors to become part of the analysis. Originality/value The analysis presented here includes ve stages or key decisions that must be made to get a renewable energy project in US federal facilities to award, including criteria beyond economics. Findings support the need for inclusion of soft factors, along with economic considerations for project success. Keywords Renewable energy, Facilities, Cost analysis Paper type Technical paper

Renewable energy

173
Received July 2008 Accepted November 2008

Introduction When opportunities present themselves in facilities to implement alternative sources of energy, use of analysis of prior projects can be used to organize the thought process and discover if a particular case would be a realistic and benecial for integration of renewable energy into daily operation. Projects are analyzed on a case-by-case basis to decide which form of renewable energy is the most realistic t from an efciency and nancial viewpoint. The three primary forms of renewable energy investigated are solar, wind, and geothermal. Each form of energy has differing advantages and disadvantages for any building and specically from a US federal perspective. There are ve primary stages to any alternative energy decision: (1) Project identication. (2) Feasibility.

Facilities Vol. 27 No. 5/6, 2009 pp. 173-186 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0263-2772 DOI 10.1108/02632770910944916

F 27,5/6

(3) Financing. (4) Contract award. (5) Project completion. Each stage presents different considerations that need to be discussed and executed in order for a project to be successful. The analysis attempts to outline several possibilities and outcomes for each stage that can aid a facility or project manager in making key decisions in the acquisition or implementation process. Data were analyzed based on several case studies where solar, wind, and geothermal sources of renewable energy have already been integrated in US federally owned facilities. Each individual case study analysis takes one facility with renewable energy and a traditionally powered facility to compare them in terms of actual costs of electricity by either total costs per month, per year, or normalized (comparing per square foot costs per year). The goal is to identify and compare similar facilities in terms of use, square footage, location, and energy requirements to measure how signicant an impact, if any, implementing renewable energy into everyday operation can have on actual energy costs. Additional benets outside of cost are discussed and must be considered when managers consider any renewable energy project. Advantages and disadvantages of alternative energy sources such as solar, wind and geothermal are summarized in Table I. In the USA, federal programs currently exist for energy efciency and conservation policies, which are issued to federal agencies through executive orders. A major development in renewable energy policy is Executive Order 12902 (Greenberg et al., 1996). This order requires federal agencies to conduct comprehensive facility audits and identify the potential opportunities to partner with private sector rms in an effort to integrate energy efcient practices such as renewable sources of energy. Federal agencies often rely on the General Services Administration (GSA) to procure utilities that are both cost-effective and environmentally responsible. Options are presented by GSA to tenants to make them aware of renewable energy opportunities, costs, and benets.
Energy source Solar Advantages Disadvantages

174

Wind

Table I. Advantages and disadvantages of alternative sources of energy for buildings

Geothermal

Pollution free, declining manufacturing Initial high installation costs, costs, low maintenance, zero fuel costs unavailability at night and certain weather conditions, possibility of requiring storage or complementary power sources, large area needed for signicant electricity generation Zero fuel costs, potential of large areas Initial high installation costs, limited availability, uncertain power output of the country where wind energy is plentiful, and the ability to partner with private sector rms now emerging in this market Pollution free, reliability Limited location availability, uncertain power output

Source: Hamakawa (1994); Gong and Kulkarni (2003); Department of Energy (2007)

The GSA currently considers opportunities for solar and other renewable energy in building design and retrots, in accordance with several executive orders. When GSA performs an energy audit of a facility, renewable opportunities are identied and implemented if they are found to be life-cycle cost effective. The GSA has a stated goal of providing an integrated approach that seeks to balance cost, environmental, social, and human benets with the mission and functional needs of the customer agency (Layne and Lee, 2001). Known as the federal government landlord for many agencies, GSA also provides a role as model for other agencies and the commercial sector in the innovative provision of real estate. As a publicly-funded organization GSA records are in the public domain and access to government innovations provide societal and cultural changes that attempt to lead the industry. Energy conservation standards are also issued by the federal government to motivate agencies to set and meet energy conservation goals. Renewable energy ts into the federal government by offering agencies a way to minimize the environmental impact their facilities have on surroundings, in addition to setting an example for the private sector in socially responsible business practices (Wells, 2003). Integrating renewable energy is an option for all federal agencies to meet the conservation goals set for them. Moving into the future, more agencies will consider the use of renewable energy as a realistic and achievable method to reach these goals. In order to provide an organized method for analysis of renewable energy systems in new or existing buildings, the proposed decision model was developed to provide guidance to facility and property professionals to incorporate into their analysis and to help guide decisions on how, when, where and why to incorporate renewable energy. Decision model The Federal Renewable Energy Decision Model was developed and based on the following inputs: project identication, feasibility, nancing, contract award, and project completion. Figure 1 shows the model workow, including each of the ve primary stages, and the two major results of any feasibility study, technology identication and life cycle cost analysis data. Project identication The project identication stage considers two major types of projects. The rst major consideration is whether the project is new construction or a retrot to an existing facility. A new construction design poses fewer challenges because if the decision is made to use a form of renewable energy then it can be included from the initial concept stage (Clarke, 2001). Essentially the new construction of a facility can be centered on tting the design to the renewable energy source. Case studies discussed later will deal more with the complex challenges that are inherent to a retrot situation. Often times, federal facilities can be over 30 years old and were not designed to house or contain any type of renewable energy equipment, thus making it potentially unsuitable for renewable energy retrot. Project identication essentially involves recognizing the current state of the facility before renewable energy is considered. This includes consideration of the value, any long-term plans for major change, and the general status of the actual building shell including infrastructure.

Renewable energy

175

F 27,5/6

176

Figure 1. Federal renewable energy decision model

Feasibility study Once a project is identied as a new construction or retrot case, the next step is to move forward into a feasibility study or energy audit. A feasibility study uses either internal personnel or an outside private rm or contractors to conduct the study of the existing facility and report on whether solar, wind, or geothermal technology is available at the location, whether the building can be supported in whole or as a complementary system with an alternative energy system, and a general estimate on the type of costs that would be associated with integrating a renewal energy project. An energy audit may also be needed and can be conducted in-house or via outsource, to provide a detailed analysis of past, present, and future energy requirements and trends. The current energy consumption of a facility is analyzed to discover actual costs, which are then compared to similar facilities that are set up for both traditional and renewable energy systems. Alternative nancing A major challenge for any renewable energy project is nding a viable method of nance that does not place a large strain on the agency. Budgeting is a key phase of the decision process that must be addressed in an efcient manner for any project to move forward. In an effort to meet an agencys federal renewable energy goal, there are multiple methods of nancing available. The Department of Energy (DOE) offers incentives for agencies to implement a renewable energy project. This involves the requesting agency, in some situations, to enter into an agreement such that the DOE essentially covers the initial installation costs and sets up a payback plan for the agency. This can be an attractive option if the customer agency can make payments over a longer period of time. Commercial

organizations may nd federal, state and local tax exemptions and loan guarantees for similar nancing of renewable energy installations. Financial benets can also be created as the renewable energy system comes online and potentially generates energy savings. Energy contracts are also available through the DOE. These are contracts put in place with qualied vendors and utility providers who could work with federal agencies on renewable energy projects. In certain areas of the USA there exist regulated utility green pricing programs, competitive renewable power, and renewable energy certicate programs (Bird et al., 2004). These types of programs may be available depending on the facility location and involve private sector rms such as solar providers and wind farms offering renewable energy that can be sent to a federal facility at a discounted rate in comparison to traditional sources of energy. In some cases, federal agencies have the ability to purchase this type of renewable energy at discounted rates. Similar contracts are available to commercial and not-for-prot organizations; however, federal government discounts do not apply. Contract award Finding qualied rms to complete renewable energy projects can be challenging in the USA and is an important decision that directly impacts the success or failure of a project. This process can now be aided by the Central Contractor Registrar (CCR). The CCR is a government maintained database of all private sector rms who have done business or desire to do business with the federal government (Morell, 2003). Presently, agencies have access to this resource, which can perform a number of search functions to locate specic rms who offer renewable energy within specic geographic areas. A key issue for federal agencies taking advantages of renewable energy contracts is the ability to have potential contractors accessible through electronic means. An agency that has a renewable energy project now has quick and easy access to experienced contractors in that eld through the CCR. Commercial organizations without access to the CCR will nd green vendors and resources thorough various databases; however, additional efforts to obtain references and validate vendors will require additional effort, so the federal agencies utilizing this resource have an advantage in this process. Federal agencies are beginning to award green power supply contracts to qualied contractors. In February 2006, GSA awarded one such contract to Pepco Energy Services. Under a three-year contract, Pepco Energy Services will supply an estimated 27 million kilowatt-hours (kWh) of wind energy to the Statue of Liberty, Ellis Island, operated by the National Park Service (Holt and Bird, 2005). This stage of the decision model is critical because often times the expertise of outside rms is needed to make a renewable energy project a reality. By having existing renewable energy contracts in place, federal agencies have a dependable source for these types of services. Any successful renewable energy project for a federal facility will identify the project as new construction or a retrot, each presenting different challenges, conduct a feasibility study as a method of forecasting costs, benets, and potential outcomes, consider alternative forms of nancing to cover high installation costs, and also conduct an organized search for competent contractors and partners to help make the project a success.

Renewable energy

177

F 27,5/6

Case studies A total of six buildings were analyzed. Data from each type of renewable source in federal buildings was obtained from the GSA database (General Services Administration, 2007a). Solar case study The Metcalfe Federal Building located in Chicago is a 28-storey building comprising 839,636 square feet. The building was constructed in 1991. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the major tenant within the facility. The building integrated an 84-panel solar rooftop system that supplements the overall electrical requirements of the facility in October 2000. EPA helped install this 10-kW photovoltaic system in an effort to demonstrate self-generated renewable energy systems and educate the public on emerging technologies (Environmental Protection Agency, 2007). Energy costs were normalized for scal year 1999, up to current data available in 2007. The Clark Street Federal Building located in Chicago was used for comparison since it is powered by a non-renewable source of energy. The similarities between these two buildings are location, weather conditions, federal agencies as tenants, and similarity of size. The Clark Street Federal Building is a total of 593,641 square feet on 12 oors. This building is used for comparison in an effort to observe any similarities or trends in electricity costs over the same time period. Identied as a retrot, the results of the feasibility study on the Metcalf Federal Building centered on photovoltaic panels as a realistic technology application. Forecasted minimum cost impact over the next seven years was the primary driver for this technology selection. In October 2000, the 84-panel solar rooftop system became operational at the Metcalfe building. Fiscal year 2001 for the Metcalfe Building was the rst full year of operation with the solar panel system. Over the next six years, the facility would experience uctuations in electricity costs. Analyzing results from the rst full year of using the solar panel system, the energy costs at the facility increased by 9 per cent. The following scal year of 2002 electricity costs were down by 11.6 per cent. Costs would increase again in scal year 2003 by 22.4 per cent. As the facility moved forward in time, energy costs began to gradually decrease after reaching a high point for the time period of this case study. When comparing statistical cost data to the Clark Street Federal Building, operating on non-renewable sources of electricity, a similar trend of increased and decreased costs arises. This similar trend could suggest that factors in that area of the country, such as weather or general utility costs, were the driving force behind cost uctuations, therefore minimizing the solar impact at the Metcalfe facility. Table II reects both sets of data for the Metcalfe Buildings and Clark St. Facility, including electricity cost per year per square foot and the percentage change between each year, respectively. Figure 2 compares normalized electricity costs per year for both buildings. When applying the cost analysis to this case study, cost was not the only indicator on whether to proceed with the project. The source of nancing for the project is unknown and the installation was completed by a qualied vendor registered with the federal government. There were no other partners in this project. The main indicator to proceed with the project and reason behind its completion primarily involves the EPA, which is the facilities major tenant. The agency was looking to promote an image and awareness in the downtown Chicago metropolitan area. The answer was to install one

178

Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Metcalfe Building Electricity Cost/year/SF Percentage Change ($) (%) $1.18 $1.11 $1.21 $1.07 $1.31 $1.23 $1.05 $1.05 $0.82 25.9 9.0 211.6 22.4 26.1 214.6 0.0 221.9

Clark Street facility Electricity Cost/year/SF Percentage Change ($) (%) $1.47 $1.48 $1.29 $1.16 $1.37 $1.15 $1.14 $1.09 $0.84 0.7 212.8 210.1 18.1 216.1 20.9 24.4 222.9

Renewable energy

179
Table II. Solar case study. Electricity cost per year per square foot and percentage change

Figure 2. Comparison of Metcalfe Building and Clark Street facility

of the rst photovoltaic systems in the area and market the project through the media, as well as to create an educational area in the lobby. Possible reasons for uctuations in electricity costs at the facility include the relatively small size and output capability of the panels atop the Metcalfe Building. This system was designed to be a 10-kWh supplemental solar panel system. The building still takes a majority of its electricity from non-renewable power sources, therefore limiting the solar panels overall impact. The fact that a traditional facility experienced closely related increases and decreases in the same time periods minimizes the true impact that the solar panel system had on actual costs. The use of renewable energy has to be considered as one of several contributing factors to cost increases and decreases over the eight year time period. Other potential factors include major changes in building infrastructure, mechanical, and operational systems, adjustments in traditional electricity rates, the overall efciency of the system, and new tenants who require different levels of operational power. Motivations outside of cost for installing

F 27,5/6

180

the system must be considered and include less pollution, reduced strain on the environment, setting an example for the private sector, education, as well as social responsibility. All case study data, both actual monthly electricity costs and total facility gross square foot data, were provided from the General Services Administrations Energy Usage Analysis System. This system allows GSA authorized users to view and print reports showing the latest energy usage and cost data available for GSA operated buildings. Data was downloaded in report form for each facility in June 2007. Wind case study The Binghamton New York Federal Building and Courthouse is a six-story, 75,074 square foot facility. Built in 1935, this facility is federally owned and is primarily occupied by the judiciary branch. Effective August 2002, the Binghamton Federal Building was the rst federal facility in the country to be powered entirely by wind-generated electricity (Bird and Swezey, 2005). Upstate New York wind farms supply the facility with approximately 500,000 kW of electricity per year. Actual energy costs for the Binghamton Federal Building were compared with the US Border Station (USBS) facility in Champlain, New York. The Champlain facility is of similar size at 61,107 gross square feet, located in a similar area of the country, and is federally owned. Electricity costs were normalized for both facilities. Prior to scal year 2003, the rst full year of 100 per cent wind power at the facility, electricity costs for the Binghamton New York Federal Building had been fairly stable with a low percentage of change from year to year. Once the building was switched to a completely powered renewable energy facility the stable trend in electricity costs has continued. Data for scal year 2007 is currently incomplete, but with the addition of upcoming costs for June, July, August, and September 2007, it is estimated the costs will fall in line with the current trend, showing no major changes in total electricity costs. The USBS facility used for comparison experienced an increase in electricity costs from scal year 2002 through 2006. This does not match the stability of costs at the Binghamton Facility. Additionally, the USBS facility, although of smaller size in terms of square footage, has greater electricity demands than the larger Binghamton building. Table III shows normalized electricity costs per year and the percentage change between each scal year for each facility. Fiscal year 2003 for the Binghamton
Binghamton Electricity Cost/year/SF Percentage Change ($) (%) $0.89 $0.80 $0.93 $1.01 $0.85 $0.85 $0.89 $0.84 $0.20 210.1 17.3 8.6 215.8 20.0 4.7 25.6 276.2 USBC Electricity Cost/year/SF Percentage Change ($) (%) 2.33 2.35 2.68 2.53 2.98 3.58 3.84 3.97 2.68 0.9 14.0 25.6 17.8 20.1 7.3 3.4 232.5

Year 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Table III. Wind case study. Electricity cost per year per square foot and percentage change

Federal Building was the rst full year for which wind power was operational. Figure 3 compares the normalized electricity costs per year between both facilities. This was a retrot project due to the age of the facility. The technology identied for the project through the feasibility study was wind due to the proximity of an emerging wind farm in Fenner, New York. Cost analysis led to the idea that the government would be able to negotiate an advantageous electricity rate from the wind farm. The GSA has been able to lock in a reasonable utility rate for this facility for an extended period of time. Additionally, an indicator to proceed with the project is the environmental impact, meaning knowing that the facility is fully powered by renewable energy. Cost, therefore is not the only deciding factor to proceed with this project in terms of the decision model. The stability of electricity costs has continued at the Binghamton Federal Building both before and after the switch to wind power. The facility has now been using wind for four years and has experienced no signicant cost savings nor increases. Costs are strongly related to the negotiated contracts with private sector wind farms located in Fenner. Justication for the project is through the lessened impact on the environment and lower levels of pollution. Federal facilities in the same area of the country have experienced electricity cost increases which the Binghamton Facility has been able to avoid through the use of wind power. This is related to structuring long term contracts with the Fenner wind farm, locking in utility rates that are then subject to little change. Geothermal case study The US Custom House located in Portland, Maine is a 25,269 square foot facility. The three-story building houses the Department of Homeland Security. A geothermal project was completed in October 2001 that integrated three 1,500 feet vertical geothermal wells (General Services Administration, 2007b). Energy is converted through the geothermal system using natural heat from the ground. This facility is currently the only federally owned facility in the nation that uses a geothermal system. Many agencies have entered leases with private sector companies to occupy other

Renewable energy

181

Figure 3. Comparison of Binghamton and USBC

F 27,5/6

182

geothermal facilities. Actual energy costs for the Portland Maine U.S. Custom House were compared with the Laconia, New Hampshire Federal Building. Both facilities are located in similar areas of the country, have experienced closely related weather patterns, both house and are owned by federal agencies, and are of similar size and age. Electricity costs were normalized for both facilities. A major indicator to proceed with this project, based on the decision model, is accomplishing the rst federally owned facility with an integrated geothermal system. The age of this facility led to the project being identied as a retrot. Due to natural resources in the area, geothermal was identied as a realistic choice in technology. The feasibility study resulted in questionable or unconrmed cost estimation since accuracy was difcult as this was the rst project of this kind. Energy costs at the US Custom House have remained relatively stable up until scal year 2002 which was the rst full year of the geothermal system use. From that point, total energy costs for the facility have been characterized by various percentage increases and decreases from year to year. Costs decreased by 3.4% for the rst full year of geothermal use, but began to increase the following year by almost 60 per cent. Electricity costs have been unstable since the system was brought online in October 2001. The Laconia Federal Building has experienced similar uctuations in electricity costs as shown in Table IV. The integration of a geothermal system at the US Custom House has overall had a negative impact on electricity costs and total costs are now signicantly higher than those paid out prior to project completion. Table IV contains data of normalized electricity costs per year for the US Custom House and the Laconia Federal Building. Fiscal year 2002 was the rst full year for which the geothermal system was used in the US Custom House. Figure 4 compares normalized electricity costs per year between both buildings. Results from this case study are that the geothermal system is primarily a complementary source of energy in addition to non-renewable sources. Cost increases could be attributable to several factors such as the cost to efciently manage and maintain the geothermal system, new tenants with higher energy demand, and overall mechanical system changes. The potential benets outside of the non-existent energy savings are reduced pollution and impact on the surrounding environment. Through
US Customs House Electricity Cost/year/SF Percentage Change ($) (%) 1.04 1.01 0.96 1.03 1.02 0.87 0.84 1.34 1.23 1.23 1.57 1.35 22.9 25.0 7.3 21.0 214.7 23.4 59.5 28.2 0.0 27.6 214.0 Laconia FB Electricity Cost/year/SF Percentage Change ($) (%) 0.85 0.87 0.75 0.78 0.66 0.63 0.56 0.63 0.64 0.81 0.81 0.45 2.4 213.8 4.0 215.4 24.5 211.1 12.5 1.6 26.6 20.0 244.4

Year 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Table IV. Geothermal case study. Electricity cost per year per square foot and percentage change

Renewable energy

183

Figure 4. Comparison of US custom house and Laconia F.B

the use of natural heat from the ground, the facility is able to supplement its power intake with a percentage of renewable energy. This project has the distinction of being the rst federally owned facility to incorporate a geothermal well and heat pump system. It serves as a valuable case study for future Federal projects. Additional motivations The results from each case study suggest that additional motivations outside of reduced cost for completing federal renewable energy projects exist; the rst being government policy in the form of executive orders and the national energy policy. These directives are handed down from the president and issue renewable energy goals as requirements to all federal agencies. While certain orders do not require absolute compliance, they serve as a primary motivation to comply with targeted renewable energy goals. A secondary motivation for completing federal renewable energy projects which must be considered as a primary driver is the governments desire to provide leadership to both the public and private sector, promote an environmentally friendly image, and to create awareness of renewable energy. By the government completing these projects they are able to communicate their determination to decrease our nations reliance on fossil fuels and other sources of non-renewable energy. As this type of research is disseminated and private sector rms take note of these accomplishments, it increases awareness and the likelihood of similar private ventures. A key difference in federal renewable energy projects and those taken on by private rms is found in the decision making process. Private sector projects are more often driven by price, where federal projects consider price, but also deal with these additional motivations such as policy, social responsibility, leadership, image,

F 27,5/6

awareness, and politics. Projects completed outside of the federal realm are not immune to some of these issues, but they do not carry as much inuence in the decision making process. Cultural change and social responsibility Promoting social responsibility for environmental pollution should be a concern for the federal government in an effort to set an example for the private sector. Social responsibility relates to the current environmental movement within the United States to reduce the dependence on non-renewable sources of energy such as oil. The federal government has the opportunity to lead facilities into the era of common use of renewable energy to power buildings. Setting an example for the private sector must also be a consideration. By completing renewable energy projects within federal facilities, they will serve as a demonstration and educational tool that can be used in the private sector. Cultural change relates to a way of thinking when it comes to designing and selecting methods of power for facilities. Different viewpoints on facility design will need to become widespread in order to consider renewable energy as a rst option. Cultural change is also facilitated through the government completing renewable energy projects in its facilities, and these benets and positive environmental results will begin to provide alternatives for other facilities to consider. The federal government is the best source to promote the successful completion of renewable energy projects for awareness. Information and training programs should be cultivated and available for private sector rms who are interested in pursuing renewable energy. Role of facility management Widespread use of renewable energy within the federal government will require cultural change from an architectural, engineering and facility management viewpoint. This can be accomplished by enforcing requirements to incorporate renewable energy into federal building design and providing training to facility managers on how these systems operate and are best maintained. Cost is only one of many factors for completing a renewable energy project and must be analyzed in addition to other factors during the decision making process. The government should look to increase general knowledge through renewable energy programs, training, marketing, and other awareness strategies. Providing incentives for private sector rms to pursue partnerships with the government to complete renewable energy projects will help increase the future success of renewable energy integration. Technically gifted rms should be identied and contacted to help develop strategies to make renewable energy projects successes when they get the green light. Asset management must also be considered when promoting future renewable energy projects meaning the government should identify key facility assets in order to know which buildings are the best candidates based on location, size, value, tenant occupation, energy requirements, and political image. For commercial and private sector organizations, similar analysis can help to expand the renewable energy options, see reduced costs as competition drives down costs and building the sustainable options for many organizations.

184

Future trends Future trends in federal renewable energy projects will lean more towards new construction as opposed to retrotting older facilities. New construction projects are easily designed to operate in a highly efcient manner containing an original renewable energy system. Retrots can have a high cost and somewhat unpredictable result since many of the older federal facilities were designed and built prior to renewable energys recent expansion. Moving into the future, cost savings will catch up with renewable energy technology as manufacturing costs decline through economies of scale and as other technological breakthroughs occur with materials. Presently, cost savings just do not exist such that they can be the sole reason for a federal agency to complete a renewable energy project. Decisions will be made based on the leadership required from the government to impact pollution levels and improve the environment. Federal buildings of the highest value will be the main candidates for renewable energy projects to serve as an example and source of education to the public. Renewable energy can be considered a major step in reversing the publics current thoughts on global warming. Conclusions Solar, wind, and geothermal are currently the three most realistic technologies for any federal renewable energy project. The decision model presented in this paper proposes ve stages or ve key decisions that must be made to get a project to award. Project identication involves the realization of an opportunity and the potential of integrating renewable energy into a federal facility. Feasibility studies provide a more detailed analysis of which technology could potentially work and also at least general estimate of the nancial side to a project. Finding alternative ways to nance these high cost projects is important for project and building managers to consider, often times relying on other agencies such as the DOE for options. Qualied contractors as partners in renewable energy projects are essential to successful implementation. Current case studies of solar, wind, and geothermal projects within the federal government have shown that cost savings are not the sole reason or result of any project. Often, projects move forward based on additional motivations such as reduced environmental impact, government policy, and in an effort to increase leadership, awareness, and image. Moving into the future, the total number of federal renewable energy projects will increase due to legislative mandates and expanding attention to global climate change, and the government will rely more heavily on private sector rms to provide quality technology, consulting, and cost effective strategies. The importance of thorough analysis of project identication through contract award and implementation can be aided through the use of a model similar to the Federal Renewable Energy Decision Model.
References Bird, L. and Swezey, B. (2005), Green power marketing in the United States: a status report, 7th ed., Technical Report NREL/TP-620-36823, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO.

Renewable energy

185

F 27,5/6

186

Bird, L., Swezey, B. and Aabakken, J. (2004), Utility green pricing programs: design, implementation, and consumer response, Technical Report NREL/TP-620-35618, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO. Clarke, J. (2001), Energy Simulation in Building Design, Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington, MA. Department of Energy (2007), Direct use of geothermal energy, Ofce of Geothermal Technologies, available at: www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/pdfs/directuse.pdf (accessed 19 June 2007). Environmental Protection Agency (2007), Region 5 Ofce, Greening EPA, available at: www. epa.gov/greeningepa/facilities/chicago-hq.htm (accessed 17 July 2007). General Services Administration (2007a), Energy usage analysis system, available at: http:// euas.gsa.gov General Services Administration (2007b), US custom house: interactive map of alternative and renewable energy sites, available at: http://gsanara.rem-systems.com/ (accessed 15 June 2007). Gong, X. and Kulkarni, M. (2003), Design optimization of a large-scale rooftop photovoltaic system, Science Direct, Vol. 78, pp. 362-74. Greenberg, S., Mills, E., Lockhart, D., Sartor, D. and Lintner, W. (1996), US Department of Energys in-house energy management program: meeting the challenges of federal energy management, Energy Engineering, Vol. 93 No. 2, pp. 55-75. Hamakawa, Y. (1994), Thin-lm Solar Cells: Next Generation Photovoltaics and its Applications, Springer, Berlin. Holt, E. and Bird, L. (2005), Emerging markets for renewable energy certicates: opportunities and challenges, Technical Report NREL/TP-620-37388, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO. Layne, K. and Lee, J. (2001), Developing fully functional e-government: a four stage model, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 18 No. 2, pp. 122-36. Morell, J.A. (2003), Evaluating the impact of an electronic business system in a complex organizational setting: the case of Central Contractor Registration, Evaluation and Program Planning, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 429-40. Wells, J. (2003), Solutions for Energy Security and Facility Management Challenges, The Fairmont Press, Lilburn, GA. Corresponding author Kathy O. Roper can be contacted at: kathy.roper@ gatech.edu

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints