Quotes
Why Energy Efficiency?
“The number-one target should be to increase energy efficiency in residential and commercial buildings – the proverbial low-hanging fruit.”
Ernest Moniz, professor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
and director of the MIT Energy Initiative. Interviewed for ABB Review 2/2009
Australian Governments
Energy Efficiency is the fastest and most cost effective way to reduce greenhouse gas pollution.
National Framework for Energy Efficiency (NFEE) research shows there is potential for 30% to 70% energy efficiency throughout the Australian economy.
Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Working Group (2003).
Towards a National Freameork for Energy Efficiency
Issues and Challenges Discussion Paper.
NFEE. www.nfee.gov.au/about_nfee.jsp?xcid=64
Commonwealth White Paper – “energy efficiency has consistently proved the most cost-effective of
Australia’s responses to greenhouse emissions”
Source: Mark Lister (ECS) slide presentation on EPC
http://www.airah.org.au/Melbourne_Forum/AM/ContentManagerNet/ContentDisplay.aspx?Section=Melbourne_Forum&ContentID=3533
$975 million improvement in GDP
More efficient use of energy in Australia could yield a $975 million improvement in GDP each year.
Source: Securing Australia’s Energy Future, Australian Government, published 15 June 2004
All Australian Governments recommend it
“Improving the efficiency with which energy is used is important to Australia’s economic, social and environmental wellbeing. Energy consumption in the manufacturing, commercial and residential sectors can be reduced by 20–30% with the adoption of current commercially available technologies with an average payback of four years.”
"Achieving even a modest proportion of the potential offers considerable economic and environmental benefits”
Energy Efficiency and Greenhouse Working Group
A joint initiative of all 9 Australian Governments
Towards a National Framework for Energy Efficiency— Issues and challenges
Discussion paper, November 2003, Section 2 Why is action needed on energy efficiency?
“In Australia alone, lighting generates almost 25 million tonnes of greenhouse emissions and costs the community over $2 billion in electricity each year"
The Hon Ian Macfarlane MP
Chair, Ministerial Council on Energy
Greenlight Australia Report No. 2004/18
Why should big business pay attention to Climate Change?
The Australian Institute of Company Directors (AICD) found that 94% of company directors agreed or strongly agreed that developing strategies to combat climate change should be on boards agendas. 89% expected to experience increased pressure to disclose their policies on climate change issues and 51% anticipated an increase in the risk of litigation or class actions against directors on climate change issues.
Roger Collison, head of Tyndall's intrinsic Australian value equities team, says the fund manager considers the issue to be so important that it tries to influence the management and boards of companies in which it invests to respond appropriately.
"In the past, we have raised concerns, voted at shareholder meetings and worked directly with the companies in which we invest to ensure that our concerns and opinions are heard, and hopefully we influence company management and boards so that the best outcome for them and thus our investors is achieved," he said.
Source: ‘Sustainability key to economic survival’ Sara Rich | April 22, 2009 Article from: The Australian
“There is a major theme for the next decade, regardless of industry, which is sustainability across supply chains becoming a key issue for finance providers and a growing body of government regulators to consider – not to mention consumer interest in this area.”
- Robert Bryant, IBISWorld General Manager
Reported in BRW, September 17, 2009 page 9
Buildings Tennants and Landlords
“About two thirds indicated that they would pay more for a Green Star building.”
- Ernst and Young survey of five leading property advisory firms
and fourteen fund managers and developers.
"Office buildings with a one or two-star energy rating will find it difficult to get tenants in the future because they have to pay more for electricity and if the building's not efficient it's got both a cost imposition and a branding issue. About 98 per cent of commercial buildings have a one or two-star rating and many will have to be retro-fitted.
"That's a good example of an opportunity but it's also a real issue for investors because perhaps those buildings are overvalued due to their low energy rating."
- VicSuper's chief executive, Bob Welsh
“Green Star buildings are already having a market impact. At the very least, non-Green Star buildings face accelerated value depreciation. …modelling shows that a fall from 3.5% rental growth to 2% rental growth would wipe off almost $13 million from the value of a $100 million property. The potential upsides for Green Star buildings are in increased renewal probabilities, decreased downtimes and lower terminal yields.”
- Green Building Council of Australia “Valuing Green” link
“It used to be all about appearances – the lobby and lift cars. That’s still important but now you have the added issue in terms of how it’s performing from an efficiency point of view and that will involve extra expenditure.”
Cameron Williams
National Director of Office Leasing
Colliers International
Reported in BRW November 19, 2009
"Our consistent message has always been that buildings in Australia represent the single largest source of cost-effective GHG abatement. This is backed up by a wealth of independent evidence such as the IPPC, McKinsey and a range of other research journals.
GBCA Chief Executive Romilly Madew
Mon 15 Sep, 2008 Media Releases
In realeasing the GBCA response to the Fed Gov’t CPRS
http://www.gbca.org.au/media-centre/media-releases/green-building-council-releases-cprs-position-paper/1784.htm
USA – Green building benefits
Workers in green buildings take 3 less sick days a year and are more productive.
Sustainable properties have a 3.5% lower vacancy rate than other buildings and rent for 13% more.
18% of respondents said that they would pay more for green office space.
Research by CB Richard Ellis and the University of San Diego across 10 property markets in the USA.
Reproted in BRW Nov 19-Dec 9 2009 FYI ‘Sustainability stacks up’
Article http://www.building4change.com/page.jsp?id=124
Research paper http://www.sandiego.edu/business/documents/EconofGreenMArch52008.pdf
See graphs in the quotes file.
Government Research
Federal Government
Commonwealth Enterprise Energy Audit Program (EEAP)8
The EEAP operated between 1991 and 1997 and provided subsidised energy audits to business
(50% of the cost up to a maximum of $5000). Approximately 1200 businesses participated in
the scheme. An ABARE9 evaluated various aspects of the program and found that:
• On average each firm received 5.8 recommendations and implemented 4.7; an implementation rate of 81%.
• The total net present value of EEAP to those businesses participating was $189 million, assuming an 8 % discount rate and five year investment life. The costs to the Government of administering the EEAP averaged $165,000, giving a total cost of about $1 million for the 6 years that the program ran. This, combined with the audit costs of $8.7 million, of which the Government funded half, indicates that EEAP was a cost effective program.
• Most businesses (93%) thought that the EEAP audit had been worthwhile. It also increased awareness of energy efficiency and acted as a ‘springboard’ for further actions.
Source; Source; Energy Efficiency Potential in South Australia. Denlay et al
This section taken from IPART Enquiry into the role of demand management and other options in the provision of
energy services, Interim Report, April 2002
The 2004 Commonwealth White Paper on Energy identifies a $9.4b net economic benefit to Australia from investing in energy efficiency by 2020 and the National Framework for Energy Efficiency (NFEE) identified a $1.8b net improvement to GDP from a 50% uptake of 4 year payback energy efficiency opportunities over 12 years.
Source: http://www.aepca.asn.au/documents/BPGtoMeasurementandVerificationofEnergySavings.pdf
Victoria
The study, which builds on earlier work The Nous Group carried out for the State Government, found about 10 million tonnes a year could be cut by each of the following:
1. Improving building and lighting efficiency
“Understanding the Potential to Reduce Victoria’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions”
The Nous Group, December 2007
http://www.climatechange.vic.gov.au/summit/Resources/Wedges%20Report.pdf
Reported in ‘Big Gains in Green Behaviour’ Adam Morton, The Age, 10-11-2008 page 7
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/big-gains-in-greener-behaviour-20081109-5kxf.html
NSW - SEDA
The Sustainable Energy Development Authority of NSW (SEDA) has prepared a range of case
studies, examples include:
• Steam Trap Maintenance Program – Internal Rate of Return: 88%
• Compressed Air System Refurbishment – Internal Rate of Return: 38%
SEDA estimates that most businesses could save 20% on their energy costs by implementing
cost effective energy efficiency measures.
“Although we like to think we are ultra aware of switching off lights as we leave, the careful monitoring set up by ECS has shown that lights were regularly left on at night and weekend times. The monitoring also reveals that our savings are even better than expected.”
- Nicole Workum, The Sustainable Energy Development Authority of NSW (SEDA)
Quoted by ECS RAY RUDKIN M.I.E.S.(Aust. & N.Z.)
Energy Efficient Lighting Strategies Presentation
Government Energy Management Forum (see pdf)
NZ
Locking in energy efficiency and conservation will deliver energy savings worth billions to our economy, billions to our businesses, and hundreds to each of us in our homes. There are over 346,000 businesses that account for about 68% of New Zealand’s total energy use. So there is a lot of scope to see energy, and therefore cost, reductions from more efficiency and conservation in the business sector.
Mike Underhill, EECA Chief Executive
ECCA news, Issue 1, Summer 2008, page 3
http://www.eeca.govt.nz/eeca-library/newsletter/issue1-eecanews-summer08.pdf
USA
IRRCi and Trucost
An extensive analysis of 497 companies in the S&P 500 (the 500 large-cap common stocks actively traded in the United States), has demonstrated the competitive advantage that companies can gain by reducing their greenhouse gas emissions. The Carbon Risks and Opportunities in the S&P 500 report was commissioned by the Investor Responsibility Research Center Institute (IRRCi) and conducted by environmental data firm Trucost.
Jon Lukomnik, program director of the IRRCi, said under imminent emissions trading schemes "companies will have to reform how they think about carbon emissions and the associated costs, or their bottom line will suffer greatly”.1
“Companies that are more carbon efficient than sector peers across their own operations and supply chains stand to gain a competitive advantage” according to Trucost’s chief executive Simon Thomas.2
Source: “New study calculates carbon exposure of the S&P 500”, June 2 2009, www.trucost.com
McKinsey
The McKinsey Quarterly for March 2008 says we could reduce energy consumption by 25% and save money doing it, and probably cut 50% using off-the-shelf technology, and that if we knew that the price of energy would double, in say five years, we can almost certainly double our energy efficiency.
"The first step in the clean-energy revolution is to dramatically improve energy efficiency. Through a variety of measures ranging from better building efficiency and low-energy lighting to more fuel-efficient vehicles, we have the potential to cut world energy-demand growth by more than 64 million barrels of oil a day - equivalent to one and a half times current annual U.S. energy consumption.
Best of all, improvements in energy efficiency more than pay for themselves. We estimate that dramatically increasing energy efficiency would require annual investments of $170 billion over the next 13 years. But these investments would generate a return of well over $900 billion annually by 2020 through lower energy costs.
"Energy efficiency is the low-hanging fruit of the clean-energy revolution".
Jeremy Oppenheim, Eric Beinhocker, and Diana Farrell, McKinsey Global institute, November 15, 2008
McKinsey report shows that lighting efficiency is one of the easiest efficiencies to access. And it is cost negative, that is it pays the user.
Moreland Energy Foundation Limited comment on McKinsey Report
The role of energy efficiency in achieving cost effective GHG abatement is well documented, most
notably in the Australian context by the McKinsey ‘Australian Cost Curve for Greenhouse Gas
Abatement’ Report* released earlier this year. The McKinsey Report assessed the various options for
reducing Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions and found that “a large share of opportunities represents net savings to the economy… by 2020, almost 80 Mt, or 25 percent of the total reductions potential, can be realised with positive returns [most of which arise from] energy-efficiency measures related to improvements in buildings and appliances”.
Further, the McKinsey Report warns that “each year we delay producing energy-efficient buildings and motor vehicles the greater the volume of negative-cost opportunities we lose”, and recommends the introduction of an “aggressive energy-efficiency program” and strong policy support and private-sector innovation to address “fundamental market barriers” to energy efficiency.
* MEFL_Final_Submission_VEET_RIS2.pdf
“Victorian Energy Efficiency Target Scheme – Regulatory Impact Statement”
Quoting McKinsey and Company (2008) An Australian Cost Curve for Greenhouse Gas Reduction
IEA
“A global revolution is needed in ways that energy is supplied and used. Far greater energy efficiency is a core requirement.”
IEA Energy Technology Perspective 2008, Scenarios and Strategies to 2008, Page 1
http://www.iea.org/Textbase/techno/etp/ETP_2008_Exec_Sum_English.pdf
"We cannot let the financial and economic crisis delay the policy action that is urgently needed to ensure secure energy supplies and to curtail rising emissions of greenhouse gases. We must usher in a global energy revolution by improving energy efficiency and increasing the deployment of low-carbon energy,"
- Nobuo Tanaka, Executive Director of the International Energy Agency (IEA)
at the launch of the World Energy Outlook (WEO) 12 November 2008 London
Source energetics website home page
Over the period from 1973 to 2000, Australia achieved around half the rate of energy efficiency improvement compared with the International Energy Agency survey average.
IEA paper; http://www.iea.org/Textbase/Papers/2008/Indicators_2008.pdf
Page 75 The IEA has presented a list of high-priority energy efficiency policy recommendations to help governments increase rates of energy efficiency improvement in buildings, appliances, lighting, transport, industry, power utilities and cross-sectoral areas.
Page 26
Between 1990 and 2005, the overall improvement in energy efficiency in all end-use sectors of the
26 WORLDWIDE TRENDS IN ENERGY USE AND EFFICIENCY economy for the IEA16 was 0.9% per year. These improvements led to energy and CO2 savings of 15% and 14% respectively in 2005. This represents an annual energy saving of 16 EJ in 2005 and 1.3 Gt of avoided CO2 emissions. It also translates into fuel and electricity cost savings of at least USD 180 billion in 2005. However, the efficiency gains were much lower than in previous decades; energy efficiency improvements for a group of 11 IEA countries (IEA11) averaged 2% per year between 1973 and 1990. Had the earlier rate of energy efficiency improvement been sustained then there would have been no increase in energy use in the IEA since 1990.
Figure 2.9 shows that over the longer term, the savings from improved energy efficiency are even more significant. Without the energy efficiency improvements that occurred between 1973 and 2005, energy use in the IEA11 would have been 58%, or 59 EJ, higher in 2005 than it actually was. This makes energy savings the most important “fuel” in the IEA11 for this time period — i.e. the amount of energy saved in 2005 was slightly higher than the actual consumption of oil, or of electricity and natural gas combined.
These findings provide an important policy conclusion: that the changes caused by the oil price shocks in the 1970s and the resulting energy policies did considerably more to control growth in energy demand and reduce CO2 emissions than the energy efficiency and climate policies implemented since the 1990s.
Source: http://www.iea.org/Textbase/Papers/2008/Indicators_2008.pdf
Action is happening across the country
“Small and medium businesses have responded to Australians’ concerns about the environment, with 37% already taking action to reduce their impact on the environment,”
David Spratt and Philip Sutton
“Efficiency: The greatest reduction in greenhouse emissions – and the most economically efficient – can be made by comprehensive and visionary efficiency programs for energy and other resources. And the stronger the efficiency goals the higher the net environmental and social benefits - because generally the system-wide synergies (relating to the full suite of sustainability issues) increase with the strength of measures, rather than decrease as is expected under traditional diminishing marginal utility theory. ”
David Spratt and Philip Sutton, Climate code red: The case for a sustainability emergency. page 55.
Overseas
USA McKinsey mid 2009 Energy efficiency report
“Energy efficiency offers a vast, low-cost energy resource for the US economy…” from the Exec summary on page iii
The central conclusion of our work:
“Energy efficiency offers a vast, low-cost energy resource for the US economy – but only if the nation can craft a comprehensive and innovative approach to unlock it. Significant and persistent barriers will need to be addressed at multiple levels to stimulate demand for energy efficiency and manage its delivery across more than 100 million buildings and literally billions of devices. If executed at scale, a holistic approach would yield gross energy savings wroth more than US$1.2 trillion, well above the 520 billion needed through 2020 for upfront investment. In efficiency measures (not including program costs). Such a program is estimated to reduce end-use energy consumption in 2020 by 9.1 quadrillion BTUs, roughly 23 percent of projected demand, potentially abating up to 1.1 gigatons of greenhouse gasses annually.”
From EBA newsletter;
PwC: McKinsey released a new report outlining the virtues of energy efficiency as the cheapest way to keep the lights on and save the planet. McKinsey set out to “re-examine” the case for energy efficiency: What the potential is, what’s standing in the way, and how to make it happen. The upshot: A massive efficiency push over the next decade could save the U.S. economy $700 billion. That is, while efficiency measures would cost about $520 to put in place, they would save $1.2 trillion through 2020. In the process, efficiency could meet 23% of America’s future electricity demand.
USA – Measure and Verify
A review of several hundred million dollars of efficiency investments in buildings in the United States demonstrated that projects with strong M&V result in a substantially higher level of savings than projects that have little or no M&V.
The data indicates that building retrofits that follow strong M&V practices – like those contained in this Guide – typically experience energy savings that are on average about 20 to 30 percent higher than buildings retrofitted with little or no M&V. The added cost of a strong M&V program is typically about five percent of the retrofit cost, but is typically paid back in months, both from substantially higher savings and by lowered operations and maintenance (O&M) costs (Kats and Rosenfeld et al. 1996).
Source: http://www.aepca.asn.au/documents/BPGtoMeasurementandVerificationofEnergySavings.pdf
California
“Energy Efficiency is the number one resource priority”
“California’s energy efficiency program over 2004-2013 will eliminate the need for 10 power plants.”
Dianne Grueneich, California Public Utility Commission (CPUC) Commissioner, California. Via video link, Energy Efficiency and Demand Management Conference, 20-11-07
California’s Title 24-2005 energy code, for example, requires daylighting control in daylit areas larger than 250 sq.ft., and ASHRAE 90.1-2010 and future versions of IECC will likely contain similar daylighting control provisions.
Source: http://www.aboutlightingcontrols.org/education/papers/2008_spot.shtml
CARB
In February, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) Global Warming Economic and Technology Advancement Advisory Committee (ETAAC) released its recommendations for greenhouse gas (GHG) emission control technologies. While average US GHG emissions were 23.4 tons/person in 2003, CARB’s goal is to lower California emissions currently calculated at 14 tons/person to 10 tons/person by 2020. The report found that the most cost-effective GHG emission reduction opportunities continue to be investments in energy efficiency. Read more. Source: http://www.arb.ca.gov:80/cc/etaac/etaac.htm 12-4-8
California via NSW Gov’t
"Energy efficiency is one of the most cost effective ways to cut greenhouse gas emissions, cut power bills and reduce peak demand for electricity."
"A 25 year program of energy efficiency measures in California has seen energy consumption per person rise by only 11.6% between 1980 and 2006, while the rest of the USA rose by more than 50%."
Energy Future 6 step action plan, page 5
http://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/resources/households/decc20080300energyfuture.pdf
Department of Environment and Climate Change NSW, 59–61 Goulburn Street, Sydney
UK
“A sound policy of energy management can have the same effect on a company’s profit as it would otherwise take a 20% increase in turnover to achieve”
Energy Efficiency Office – UK
From Lemec PowerPoint Presentation (sales material)
UK Energy Review
The UK Government’s Performance and Innovation Unit published a comprehensive ‘Energy Review’ in February 200210. The review concluded that improvements in energy efficiency should be a key contributor to ensuring a sustainable and reliable energy supply for the UK in the long term; targets of a 20% improvement in energy efficiency by 2010 and a further 20% in the following decade are proposed.
The report draws on a number of UK and international studies and concludes that potential cost effective savings in the industrial sector are 24% and the technical potential is 36%11. It is worth noting that this is against a background of higher energy costs and long running energy efficiency best practice programs and industry support – it is thus likely that the potential savings for South Australia could be significantly higher.
Source; Energy Efficiency Potential in South Australia. Denlay et al
10 Performance and Innovation Unit, 2002, The Energy Review, UK Cabinet Office,
http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/innovation/2002/energy/report/, Page 6
11 Performance and Innovation Unit, 2001, Energy Efficiency Strategy, UK Cabinet Office, Consultation Draft
September 2001, http://www.cabinet-office.gov.uk/innovation/2002/energy/report/working%20papers/PIUc.pdf,
page 8.
In 2002 a British Government report found nation-wide potential for cost-effective energy savings of up to 30%
with an eventual benefit to consumers of 12 billion pounds (Cabinet Office’s Performance and Innovation Unit, 2002,
Energy Review).
US Research
There are have been numerous programs and studies of energy efficiency carried out in the US.
These studies have generally shown that cost effective savings are achievable. A report
published by the Electric Power Research Institute (Barakat and Chamberlin, 1990) estimated
that the maximum technical potential ranged from 24% to 44% of projected energy use by the
year 2000, whilst a report prepared by the Rocky Mountain Institute (Fickett et al. 1990) placed
the technical potential for savings at 75% by 2010.
Source; Energy Efficiency Potential in South Australia. Denlay et al
NZ EECA
‘Energy efficiency has a vital role to play in ensuring we meet our future energy needs in a sustainable way’, said Heather Staley, Chief Executive of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority (EECA) today.
‘The recent announcement on the proposed development of the Kupe gas field is good news for security of supply’, said Ms Staley.
‘However, we need to be careful that new generation doesn’t make us complacent. Kupe will take the pressure off the system, but it isn’t the only answer – a balance between supply and demand is needed.
‘If we improved our efficiency by just 2% across the whole economy it would result in savings of 10 petajoules every year. This is equivalent to about half the expected output from the new Kupe gas field.
‘Investment in energy efficiency is often the cheapest solution and should always be considered when looking at future needs. Locking in energy efficiency now means gains into the future,’ said Ms Staley.
‘Many energy efficiency measures are instant. We can realise the benefits right now, including cheaper power bills and reduced environmental impacts.’
http://www.eeca.govt.nz/news/media-releases/future-energy-needs.html
Contact: EECA's Senior Advisor Communications
T: 04 495 8269 • M: 027 222 2943
Occupancy Sensors
The cheapest light to run is the one the one that’s switched off!
Energy saving potential with occupancy sensors
Application Energy Savings
Offices (private) 25-50%
Offices (open spaces) 20-25%
Rest Rooms 30-75%
Corridors 30-40%
Storage Areas 45-65%
Meeting Rooms 45-65%
Conference Rooms 45-65%
Warehouses 50-75%
Other Sources:
From the Green Paper on Emission Trading, chapter 8 included references to energy efficiency;
1 The most commonly cited Australian distributional analysis was undertaken by the National Institute of Economic and Industry Research (NIEIR) for the Brotherhood of St Laurence in May 2007. This found that the impact of carbon prices would also be broadly regressive, but with a wider distribution.
2 See, for example: Sustainable Energy Authority of Victoria, Preliminary Assessment of Demand?Side Energy Efficiency Improvement Potential and Costs, 2003; and also McKinsey & Company, An Australian Cost Curve for Greenhouse Gas Reduction, February 2008.
4 Compiled from a variety of sources including: Australian Government, Department of Climate Change,
Stationary Energy Sector Greenhouse Gas Emissions Projections 2007; National Appliance and Equipment Energy Efficiency Program, When You Keep Measuring It, You Know Even More About It! – projected impacts 2005–2020, Commonwealth of Australia, 2005 (5 per cent discount rate scenario). Note that these estimates predate recent emissions trading considerations which may affect future estimates.
5 Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts.
6 Based on 2006 data, National Inventory by Economic Sector 2006: http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/inventory/2006/economic-sector.html
7 National Emissions Trading Taskforce submission to the Garnaut Climate Change Review, March 2008, Appendix E, pp.277?288. It is worth noting that this list does not include local government measures.
Energy Use
Energy use is increasing, and with it emissions
In the energy sector, emissions grew 30 per cent from 1990 to 2002.
On the subject of transforming Australia’s energy industry;
“The challenges are so great that the global financial crises pales in comparison”
”The need for change is clear because the current system is not up to scratch. It was built for another age when electricity was cheap and climate change was not an issue.”
- Guido Bartels, General Manager, IBM global energy and utilities business
The Australian Financial Review, 22-9-2009, special report, page 2
Ross Garnaut
“The failure of our generation to act today will haunt humanity for the rest of time”
Carbon Trading and Energy in Buildings
While focus has been on big polluters such as energy and transport, an emissions trading scheme will affect all companies.
VicSuper CEO Bob Welsh says property is a good example of a less obvious sector that will be significantly affected by the new system.
"Office buildings with a one or two-star energy rating will find it difficult to get tenants in the future because they have to pay more for electricity and if the building's not efficient it's got both a cost imposition and a branding issue," he says. About 98 per cent of commercial buildings have a one or two-star rating and many will have to be retro-fitted.
"That's a good example of an opportunity but it's also a real issue for investors because perhaps those buildings are overvalued due to their low energy rating."
For owners wanting to renovate, there is the task of dealing with higher expectations from tenants on energy and water efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions. Failure to recognize these trends may mean the building is not fully let and may fall in value.
- Davis Langdon MD Mark Beattie
(construction industry consulting)
Business Review Weekly “Hot Property” July 31 2008 page 82
Increasing Employee Expectations
Two thirds of employees believe their employer should be doing more to help the environment
84% of Australian workers polled in a Newspoll survey believe that it is important to work for a company which has the environment as a top priority, but slightly less than half of those surveyed said they currently worked for an organization which has implemented environmental or sustainability policies.
90% of office workers admit they could be doing more for the environment at work .
Climate change concerns more people than water or drought
91% of Australians think global warming is a serious problem. (AC Nielsen/Age poll, Nov-2006)
History
“ What is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it. Everyone thinks chiefly of his own, hardly at all of the common interest ”
Aristotle, Politics, Book II ch.3 (from Ian Dunlop slide presentation)
|
