Comparing the energy efficiency of public buildings
The least energy-efficient public buildings in England and Wales include a leisure centre in Birmingham, Defra's Central Veterinary Laboratory, and a coal mining museum in Yorkshire.
This is according to data just obtained by the BBC from the Department of Communities and Local Government - data which until earlier this month it would have been illegal to provide in this way.
Since last October, larger public buildings with many frequent visitors have needed to have Display Energy Certificates (DECs) setting out their annual carbon dioxide emissions and comparing their energy efficiency to properties of the same kind.
These certificates must be displayed so they are clearly visible to the visiting public. And the information they contain is also stored on the Non-Domestic Energy Performance Certificate Register - if you happen to know a building's 20-digit certificate reference number, you can enter it in the register database and retrieve a copy of the certificate and the advisory report on how the building's efficiency may be improved. To that extent, the data has always been public.
But suppose you wanted to see all the information on the register in one go, perhaps to compile a league table comparing the efficiency and CO2 emissions of the over 28,000 public buildings covered?
The regulations which introduced this scheme prohibited the register operator generally from disclosing data which would identify particular properties, except in response to a reference number.
So, until a few days ago, if you wanted to compare all the buildings on the register, you had two somewhat time-consuming and tedious options: you could visit the 28,000-plus buildings, look for the doubtless prominently displayed certificate, and note down the details; or, if you had a means of finding out their reference numbers, you could enter them, one by one, into the database and retrieve the data.
However, new regulations came into force a fortnight ago which now allow this material to be divulged.
In response to my request under the Environmental Information Regulations, the Department of Communities and Local Government has sent me a large spreadsheet [MS Excel, 8.14Mb] listing all the properties on the register, their energy efficiency rating and their CO2 emissions, so that it is possible to analyse this to compare all the buildings on it.
The buildings with the highest operational energy rating are those judged to be the least energy efficient, compared to similar buildings (the average building of that kind should score 100). They are divided into seven bands from A to G, with A the most efficient and G the least.
The data obtained also specifies the buildings' total CO2 emissions. Most of the public buildings emitting the highest quantities of carbon dioxide are hospitals, which may be linked to their large size.
Image of a Display Energy Certificate from the Non-Domestic Energy Performance Certificate Register. A previous version of this post had a placeholder image of a school mentioned in the spreadsheet.
A 
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~11~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
We have approx 3 million and rising jobless, able bodied people in the UK.
From them we should be able to create 1millions teams of 3. Given that it takes 1-3 days for FULLY insulate a house (caverty walls, loft, draft exclude windows and doors, and lag pipes). This resource could insulatt to the highest standard 2million houses a week and in 3months EVERY house in the UK could be brought up to the highest standard.
Net effect of this would be a fairly cheap (approx 250-500 per house) tax break, would mean that for once the goverment would do something green, would reduce heating and cooling bills
Win Win Win....
Grodan hinted at something like this last year then anounced that he had told the power companies to increase their grants and create a team on perople that would go around citys, old peoples homes and tell them how to claim.
me thinks Brown has lost the plot simples
Complain about this comment
Interesting information, but it appears to be woefully out of date. It refers to organisations which haven't existed for many years, such as "Office of the Deputy Prime Minister". It also excludes buildings in Northern Ireland and Scotland, and not all English buildings seem to be captured either. Where, for example, is HMRC's Custom House in London?
Complain about this comment
Ok. I'l be the first to ask. Why have you got a picture of Littlehampton Community School when it's not mentioned in the text?
Complain about this comment
I work in a public building that's rated as G in terms of efficiency - but these efficiency calculations are based on the total energy consumption per head of people using it. We carry out scientific research, so we use considerable amounts of electricity running heating and cooling systems and experimental equipment - far more than a typical building of 200 would use. Schools, conversely, have large numbers of pupils who are mostly not using large amounts of power.
Of course, the 1970s wing of our building isn't as well-insulated as it might be, but it was built on the cheap. Enhanced insulation can't easily be retrofitted without ripping out all the interior - it's a flat roofed, flat walled building made from concrete panels - there's simply nowhere to put the extra insulation.
Complain about this comment
Mr Rosenbaum, I'm disappointed in this article. "The least energy-efficient public buildings in England and Wales include a leisure centre in Birmingham....". However, no more details about this building appear. I had to download the wretchedly formatted spreadsheet. The building with the most total annual CO2 emissions belongs to the University of Manchester (51601). Birmingham doesn't even make it into the top 20 (University of Birmingham, 26095). Please get your facts more straight in future. I expect higher quality from the BBC in return for my licence fee. Thank you.
Complain about this comment
And why have all the spaces after my full stops disappeared from my comment post above?
Complain about this comment
The University of Manchester as the biggest polluting 'building' - although quite efficient, it's size as the largest university in the country would make it obviously near the top.
However, how on earth can it be classed as a 'building'? Admittedly the spreadsheet states 'campus', but this kind of destroys the point of the data. UoM oxford road campus is many, many buildings, including a university hospital, a museum and a large live music/events hall.
That's one hell of a 'building'
Complain about this comment
Another complete waste of money brought on by an authoritarian government whose sole purpose appears to be to distract the electorate from being concerned about real issues that affect them. Instead we spend money on surveying buildings and creating apple-to-oranges spreadsheets for something that should be managed by the locals in charge of those buildings and other facilities.
Complain about this comment
It would be interesting to calculate the total energy used and carbon emissions emitted in creating this pointless and erroneous report. This smacks of jobs for the boys.
Complain about this comment
The great thing about computers is that great swathes of information can be very quickly and cheaply compiled to give a general view of things. Please note this pgablbavy and foulmouthblue before taking the predicatably critical point that this is a waste of money.
I work in one of the buildings listed here and our figures WILL be managed locally by us and reduced by us as the people who run the building. All they've done is stick the figures together, see?
I have one point that the journalist did not make. Our building has only been used for the last year. It takes over a year to get some of the readings to create an efficiency rating so until you have got those figures your building is automatically scored as a G.
Complain about this comment
Elaine (#5): When I referred to certain buildings as being the least energy-efficient, this was based on their operational energy rating, which takes the size of the building into account and is meant to measure their energy efficiency.
You are basing your analysis on the data for total CO2 emissions, which are naturally greater for larger buildings. This is clearly a less fair comparison, as comment #7 helps to explain. I did point out that many of the buildings with very high total emissions are hospitals, which may reflect their size.
So, despite what you say, I have actually got the facts straight and used the data which provides the fairest comparison.
Complain about this comment
Governments often do nothing by doing something. Questionable calculations and other issues stated here. If this is not used for some purpose, making buildings more energy efficient, why have it?
#1 Icewombat:
Your idea is good but would refer you to different BBC blog discussing political contributions. Such a project would be contracted to high level political doner, not hire any currently unemployed and costs more than anyone would consider reasonable. In government, it costs a lot to save money.
Complain about this comment
It is disappointing that such high profile buildings are letting the whole side down. Most of us try, in our own little ways, to do our bit - carefully making energy efficient choices and hopefully reducing our carbon footprint in order to slow climate change. Public institutions should lead from the front and set a good example - as a priority.
Complain about this comment
This information is really interesting. I agree with a number of the posts in that the correlation missing is that of the type of work done at the location. I think Defra's rating is the one that catches the eye. Ultimately though it's very difficult to compare them. I imagine this table had existed somewhere on someone's desk for donkeys years though. Govt have this kind of info at their fingertips - they just don't like to release it.
Complain about this comment
As a climate campaigner, this information is essential. Now at last we can inspire our building owners to put their house in order. To all those respondents who think this is a waste of time and energy, how wrong they are. In Exeter, where I live, there are 33 buildings with a "G" rating. Our building owners and operators can no longer hide behind ignorance. Their inefficiencies are transparent. They will have to get their act together now, and play their part in moving us towards a low carbon society.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This is super information, but why is it available on public buildings only? Why not private buildings eg operated by banks?
Complain about this comment
Excellent article Martin. It is refreshing to see that the hypocrisy of the public funded organisations is alive and thriving!, the poor benighted citizens are penalised if their homes are not enviromentally friendly, whilst the unelected quangos and government departments can continue to build such enviromentally unfriendly buildings!!.
I especially liked the justification by some of the posters why they should not have their places of work highlighted, as always with the 'Green' lobby they always have some excuse to explain away their outrageous hypocrisy.
Complain about this comment
Hansard, 9 Sep 2009 : Column 2008W
Government Departments: Carbon Emissions
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what estimate she has made of the annual emissions savings which would be realised if all Government department headquarters buildings were fully to implement the recommendations made in respect of their assessments for energy performance certificates; and if she will make a statement. [290901]
John Healey: We have not made such an estimate. Energy performance certificates (EPCs) are required on sale, rent or construction of all non-domestic properties from October 2008. Prior to this, EPCs were required on sale, rent or construction of non-domestic properties over 10,000 m(2) from April 2008 and over 2,500 m(2) from July 2008. Few Government department headquarter buildings would have required an EPC since their introduction.
Complain about this comment
Guess who's paying for these Certificates? The people carrying out the assessments had to go on expensive training courses & the legislation is enforced by local authorities, the staff of which had to go on expensive training courses to learn the ins & outs of the law. Being local authority, it'll be the taxpayer picking up the tab.
And if the public building is classed as inefficient, who'll end up paying for the refurbishment costs??
Welcome to 'Climate Change' - the new stealth tax. Dig deep into those wallets, taxpayers, dig deep.
They'll be telling us there's a hole in the ozone layer next, & that Saddam Hussein had WMDs...
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I am DEC Assessor and have spent the last 20 or so months visiting 250 schools, civic offices and hospitals producing the DEC certificates and advisory reports that contain energy saving suggestions.
It is probably fair to state that most of the public sector don't actually care about energy efficiency - after all it is not their money they are spending.
It is important to remember that a schools priority is to teach and energy efficiency is rightly a lower priority. However.....
One school I visited in the North had both sets of double doors open at each end of the building with red hot radiators trying to heat the space. When I mentioned this to the site manager he agreed that it was not a good idea and then promptly walked past the doors without closing them!!
With the Copenhagen conference in full swing it is somewhat galling that politicians are clutching their green flags and claiming that the public sector are leading the way.....
One London borough has around 10 schools that should have had a DEC and AR before 1st October 2008, despite polite reminders to them and the borough, no one is enforcing the regulations.
I have yet to find a school in that borough with cavity wall insulation either. The Energy Manager at the borough said money was a bit tight - I know why! It is because the school has been spending all its money on paying the bills. With a payback of around 3 or 4 years this should have been carried out 25 years ago when the technology of cavity filling was proven.
Some schools are indeed doing what they can to reduce energy consumption but they are in a tiny minority.
The government also made £50m of interest free loans available to fund improvements in public buidings. I identified 18 schools that I had surveyed previously where I knew savings could be made and wrote to each of them setting out how I could guide them.
The resonse was zero!!
Time to lean on the public sector I think! Fancy running a story on this Martin?
Complain about this comment
We are pursuing energy efficiency in many areas, from toughening and expanding appliance standards to investing in smart grid, but improving the efficiency of buildings, which account for 40% of US energy use, is truly low hanging fruit.
Complain about this comment
Martin,
Thank you for putting your weight behind this and getting hold of what is certailnly a very useful spreadsheet. I would like to clarify one thing, is the information contained in the spreadsheet about DECs or EPCs, the file is called EPC, but your article shows a picture of a DEC. Also the sheet gives scores for 'Operational Energy Rating Band','Operational Energy Rating' and 'Total Annual CO2 Emissions (tonnes)' all of which i believe are recorded on DEC rather than an EPC.... are you able to put me straight on this?
Thanks,
Sara
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS