Green building consultant Jerry Yudelson says the business case for investment in net-zero-energy buildings is about more than energy savings.
Yudelson, who will address the Sheet Metal and Air Conditioning Contractors’ National Association (SMACNA) annual meeting this week in Hawaii, says energy, as a cost of operations, is small compared to the costs associated with employees. Businesses pay as much as 100 times more per square foot for employee expenses compared to energy expenses, he says.
Typically, building owners and developers that aspire to net-zero-energy goals do so for a combination of reasons, including financial gain, public relations and responsiveness to stakeholder concerns. Most net-zero-energy buildings employ on-site or off-site solar power systems together with other energy savings technologies.
Yudelson gave some examples of motivations for going net-zero:
- “Universities live and die on their rankings,” he said. “If you’re a university, attracting the faculty and students you want may mean you need to be more green.”
- “If you’re an non-government organization (NGO), your donors are your drivers. If you have a green mission you need to demonstrate that in your own building.”
- Genzyme, a biotechnology company in Cambridge, Mass., built a LEED Platinum corporate headquarters and documented they had reduced staff turnover by 5 percent. “That value to them of not having to replace key staff on an annual basis was twice their energy cost,” said Yudelson. “In a place like Cambridge, you can change jobs easily if you’re a knowledge worker in certain industries.”
Asked about the struggles of some early net-zero-energy projects, namely The Adam Joseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies on the campus of Oberlin College in Oberlin, Ohio, Yudelson said, “That project was way ahead of its time. For the business case, you have to look at an organization’s goals and objections. A lot of large corporations are doing net-zero to attract and keep key staff of the millennial generation.”