Estimating energy savings from benchmarking policies in New York City

Abstract

A growing number of governments have begun to implement benchmarking or energy disclosure policies. By requiring owners to measure and disclose their energy use, these policies are intended to transform the market for energy-efficient investments in existing buildings. To improve future policy efforts, two critical questions are: first, how much energy do these policies save? and second, what particular aspects of these policies are most effective? To answer these questions, this study explores how different aspects of these policies were phased-in to different groups of buildings over the first four years of the City of New York's benchmarking ordinance. By applying a novel difference-indifferences strategy, we can causally attribute observed declines in energy consumption to specific owner behaviors and policy mechanisms. Our analysis indicates that in comparison with the control group and before the policies were implemented in 2011, total disclosure of both energy use and Energy Star together can be credited with a 6% reduction in building energy use intensity (EUI) three years later and a 14% reduction in EUI four years later. Disclosure of Energy Star scores decreased building EUI by 9% three years later and 13% four years later. These two separate findings are a consequence of the policy design and different control groups.

Estimating energy savings and greenhouse gas emission reductions from energy rating and disclosure policies

“…Our result is different from the one obtained by Meng et al (2017). After applying a novel difference-in-difference strategy, they conclude that in the fourth year of policy implementation, the disclosure of Energy Star Scores to the public decreased the source EUI by 12.9%, when controlling for other key building features.…”

“…However, their study failed to prove actual causality between the policy and the decrease. To date, various other studies have also shown conflicting results as to the effectiveness of benchmarking policies (Meng, Hsu & Han, 2017). Nevertheless, in 2016, New York City expanded their benchmarking and disclosure requirement to include buildings over 25,000 feet with Local Law 133.…”

Factors Affecting Energy Performance of Large-Scale Office Buildings: Analysis of Benchmarking Data from New York City and Chicago

“…Primary energy is the raw fuel that is burned to create heat and electricity, such as natural gas or fuel oil used in on-site generation. Secondary energy is the energy product (heat or electricity) created from a raw fuel, such as electricity purchased from the grid or heat received from a district steam system [35].…”

GHG policy impacts for Seattle’s buildings: targets, timing, and scope

“…Some cities also have requirements for energy audits or building tune-ups. While benchmarking and audits do not inherently require energy-use reductions in and of themselves, the premise is that requiring information disclosure will prompt action by building owners and operators, as evidenced by some studies (Meng et al 2017;Palmer & Walls 2017;Kim & Lim 2018;Gui & Gou 2020). A study of New York City's mandatory audit policy found reductions of 2.5% for multifamily and 4.9% for office buildings, suggesting that audits create an insufficient incentive to invest in energy efficiency at the level needed to meet the city's GHG reduction goals (Kontokosta et al 2020).…”