Energy Management in the German Universities

1
Energy Management in the German Higher Education
Sector Outcomes of an Empirical Study
Martin Meyer-Renschhausen/FH Darmstadt
2
Central hypothesis of the study

• The traditional way of funding universities does
  not provide any significant
  incentive for universities to focus on energy
  efficiency and to introduce sophisticated energy
  management systems
• This situation will change if universities are
  faced with some degree of financial
  independence

3
Content

• Introduction
• Features of the German Higher Education System
• Figures concerning the universities energy costs
• Financing universities and its impacts on energy
  management theory
• Energy management in practice

4
Features of the German Higher Education System

• 2 major types UNI and FH
• Universitiy education a public matter
• Laender fund universities and are responsible
  for every day operations
• Central Government General principes
  (Hochschulrahmengesetz)
• Laender Bund construction of new establishments

5
Funding and control of universities traditional
way

• Ministry controls the university budget to the
  last detail
• No transfers of funds from one purpose to another
• Unused funds cannot be saved by universities
• Expenses caused by unexpected events are born by
  government

6
Improving efficiency in education and research

• Concidering more administrative an financial
  independence
• General budget (to provide a pre-agreed bundle of
  services)
• Unspent funds can be retained by the universities

7

8

9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
Models of Energy Management impacts on energy
efficiency

• Different options or models are available
• A. Reference model (model A) of decentralized
  energy provision on a university level without
  advanced energy management
• B. Model of advanced energy management on a
  university level (model B).
• C. Pricing of the utilization of resources inside
  the university (incl. energy services) (model
  C)
• D. Model of centralized energy management on a
  state level (model D).

15
Features of Model A (reference model)

• The main target of energy management is to
  provide a sufficient and continuous supply of
  energy service. Energy Efficiency does not play a
  major role.
• Energy costs are born by the university as a
  whole. Energy costs are not allocated to the
  faculties and institutes who create them.
• Provision of energy is realized by different
  departments within the administration working on
  special energy related tasks like purchasing
  energy, maintenance of heating systems etc. There
  is no relevant coordination of the energy related
  tasks. This division of labour is shown in the
  following figure (figure 8).

16
Disadvantages of the Model A (reference model)

• The heating system is operated in a way to
  maximize the availability and to minimize users'
  complaints (about cold rooms). This implies a
  lack of coordination between the utilization of
  rooms and energy provision (heating rooms at the
  weekend). Energy costs are born by the university
  as a whole. Energy costs are not allocated to the
  faculties and institutes who create them.
• Since there is a lack of detailed data about load
  profiles, energy contracts are not optimised and
  often show high load prices.
• Information about energy costs is only available
  on a university level
• Allocation of property rights for space and rooms
  within the university (including related energy
  services) mainly occurs in accordance with
  non-economic aspects

17
The reference model - division of labour in
energy provision
 
18
Features of Model B

• Energy efficiency is a major target of the
  university
• A new department pursuing energy efficiency is
  established
• The energy manager supervises and coordinates
  activities of the other departments
• The given division of labour is not affected
• Different options to locate the energy manager

19
Limitations of Model B

• Energy costs are born by the university
• Faculties dont receive information about the
  scarcity of resotrces they use
• The energy manager has to compensate the lack of
  incentives
• Information, moral suasion

20
Permanent tasks of Energy Management

• Control of energy consumption
• Optimising energy contracts
• Planning and implementing measures to improve
  energy efficiency
• Regulation of heating plants etc.
• Optimising the utilization of rooms
• Consultation of other departments in the case of
  energy related investments
• Training of service personnel, information and
  motivation of users

21
Model B "Advanced Energy Management on the
university level"
22
Features of Model C (Pricing of the utilization
of ressources inside the university)

• Faculties etc. are priced for their energy
  consumption
• Faculties etc. are priced for their utilization
  of space
• Price incentives instead of moral suasion

23
Limitations of Model C

• Practical difficulties in the case of buildings
  used by different faculties
• Limited incentive if the valuable good space is
  not priced
• Pricing of energy implies incentives for the dean
  not for other users (like students, employees)

24
Features of Model D Energy Management on the
state level

• Energy management department on the state level
  is responsible for all universities
• Utilization of economies of scale
• Significant power to enforce changes

25
Limitation of Model D

• Problems in getting access to relevant data
• Difficulties to control the behaviour of
  university members

26
Energy management at German universities
empirical results

• Which of the models are applied at Hessian
  Universities?
• Impacts on energy management due to changing
  patterns of funding universities?

27
Energy management at universities (UNI)

• In the past no considerable incentives to enhance
  energy efficiency
• Energy management Model A is dominating
• 2 Excemptions
• - TU-Darmstadt Energy manager
• - UNI Frankfurt performance contracting

28
Departments of central energy management in Hesse
 
29
Benchmark of space heating and specific energy
costs of FH in Hesse.
30
Control of Energy consumption by universities in
Hesse 2003
31
The major outcomes

• all UNI and some FH have established the position
  of an energy manager mostly integrated in the
  department of planning and construction
• all UNI are preparing to apply more sophisticated
  energy information systems to control energy
  consumption
• performance contracting and outsourcing of energy
  plants (district heating systems) are on the
  agenda, an approach strongly supported by the
  ministry of finance
• pricing of space and energy services within the
  universities is subject to intensive inquiries