Local Government Energy Use:
- Inter Territorial Local Authority Comparisons -
Monitoring and Technical Group
Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority
44 The Terrace, Wellington
June 2004
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Local Government
Overview
Data sources
Energy Use Patterns and Trends
Energy use trend
Energy consumption function
Energy use mix
Energy end-uses
A case study of Christchurch City Council
Energy Intensity Comparison
Energy use per capita (Energy/Population)
Energy expenditure as a percent of operating expenditure
Energy expenditure as a percent of capital expenditure
Energy efficiency investment as a percent of capital expenditure
Building Energy Use
Building energy share in total energy
Building energy function
Building energy intensity function
Energy Savings Potential and Measures
New Zealand energy audits
Benchmark energy savings potential
Energy efficiency measures
Appendices
Executive Summary
In the year ended March 2002, New Zealand’s local government sector spent around $85
million on energy, which approximates to 4 PJ or nearly less than 1% of our national energy
use. The energy use had increased by 11% from around 3.6 PJ in 1997. In money terms,
energy use forms about 2.5% of local government operating expenditure, 9.5% of capital
expenditure and 4.3% of the rates. Energy efficiency investment forms less than one percent
of local government capital expenditure.
Consistent time series energy use data for the local government sector as a whole is not
available to establish trends. However, a case study of Christchurch City Council showed that
its energy consumption decreased by a total of nearly 17.4%, from 416 TJ in 1994 to 343 TJ
in 2002, or at an average rate of around 2.4% per annum. The rate of change in energy
demand has however varied over years. For example, between 1996 and 1997, energy use
saw significant reduction of about 11% to 349 TJ from 389 TJ. This decline was largely due
to the energy efficiency investments ($1.7 million) which occurred during this period.
Between 1999 and 2000, energy use increased slightly before commencing a declining trend.
Amongst the factors affecting local government energy use across TLAs, the population size
is the prime determinant. A 1% increase in TLA population size is accompanied by a 0.5%
increase in its energy use. Similarly, a 1% increase in TLA staff employed is associated with a
0.5% increase in its energy use. Geographical area is inversely related to energy use as a 1%
increase in TLA area is accompanied by a 0.4% decrease in its energy use. There is some
evidence that TLA attitudes towards energy efficiency cause energy use to decline.
Electricity dominates local government energy use, accounting for 77% of total energy
consumption followed by petrol (8%), diesel (7%), natural gas (5%), coal (1%), and other
fuels (2%).
New Zealand Street lighting account for nearly 0.6 PJ (or 155 GWh) electricity annually
valued at $14 million. Nearly two-third of all street lighting is concentrated amongst 17 urban
TLAs at an average of 1400 kW.
A broad list of local government activities competing for its energy use for the March 2002
year was:
 Office building, (56%);
 Construction comprising road and bridge construction (14%);
 Sanitory and cleaning comprising rubbish collection, sewerage and drainage services, pest
control services and waste disposal services, etc (13%);
 Water works and water supply (10%); and

Community services comprising the llibraries, museums, parks and gardens, etc the
remaining (7%).
The local government sector’s energy intensities for the March 2002 year were:
- Per capita, $20.12/annum;
- Energy expenditure as % of operating expenditure, 2.2%;
- Energy expenditure as % of capital expenditure, 4.9%;
- Energy investment as a % of capital expenditure, 0.5%; and
- Office buildings, 152 kWh/m2/annum;
A scoping study for the Wellington City Council showed that about 10% of its total energy
use ($3.64 million) could be saved through cost effective measures, especially in the
following areas:
- water supply, 20%;
- swimming pools, 15%;
- vehicles and roading, 30%;
- workshops, 15%; and
- office buildings, 7%.
By replacing mercury vapour, low pressure, and fluorescent lamps, with high-pressure sodium
or metal halide lamps, street lighting energy use could be cut approximately 17 GWh of its
155 GWh load, or a saving of 11%.
If all of those local governments which consume more energy per capita than their respective
group averages are lifted to their group average levels, then the local government sector would
reduce its current energy use by 15%. If the benchmark was lifted to the level of the next best
local government in each group, then the overall energy use would be cut by 18%.
Measures that would assist the realisation of energy savings potentials include the appointment
of an energy manager (particularly in larger local governments) and the promotion of an energy
management ethos. EECA through its Crown Loan Energy Efficiency Scheme has funds
available for local governments to implement in-house energy efficiency projects. Local
governments can also play a leading role in promoting more energy efficient land-use planning;
public transport and traffic management; building designs; etc.
Local Government Energy Use:
New Zealand’s local government sector (including outside contracts) spends around $85
million (equivalent of 4 PJ) on energy. A wide range of energy savings opportunities exists in
local government operations. For example, in street lighting where the sector consumes
around 155 GWh annually, electricity use could be cut by 8 GWh through the introduction of
dimming ballasts and 16 GWh if tapped ballasts are introduced. The sector is in a unique
position to promote improved energy efficiency by integrating a wide variety of energy
considerations into its functions such as land use control, public service delivery, economic
development, and transportation and housing services.
Despite the fact that local government energy use is growing and energy related issues are
increasingly important, there is little easily accessible, reliable and up-to-date information on
where (end-use level) energy is used and where exactly the energy saving potential is
available. Much less is known about the key factors that have affected or continue to affect
change in level and pattern of energy use in New Zealand’s local government sector.
This report aims at providing energy use data and energy intensity (energy consumption per
unit of service activity) estimates for the New Zealand local government sector. It analyses
local government energy consumption by energy type (electricity, gas, etc.) and by use
(buildings, water supply, street lighting, etc). It is hoped that this approach will provide an
ongoing view of local government energy use and will help identify areas where energy saving
initiatives will be most effective. Note the term “local government sector” as used in this
report covers local government bodies in New Zealand - territorial local authorities (TLAs)
including and regional councils.
The report is organised into four parts:

Part One provides an overview of the local government sector and the data sources used.

Part Two examines local government energy use, including:
 Energy use both in PJ and $ terms and how energy use has changed over the recent
years.
 Energy use by fuel type or the relative share of electricity and non-electricity fuels
used.
 Major end-uses where energy is consumed.

Part Three provides computed values of local government sector’s energy intensities
across TLAs and the factors affecting them.

Part Four examines:
 Energy savings potentials and major energy efficiency opportunities; and
 Initiatives that local governments could undertake, legislate for, and encourage in the
wider community to increase energy efficiency and reduce the reliance on non-renewable
energy sources.
1.
Local Government Overview and Data Sources
1.1.
Local Government Sector Overview
Energy expenditure forms around 3% of local government’s operating expenditure. The sector
has an annual operating expenditure of $3 billion and an annual capital expenditure of $800
million. Its assets are around $32 billion. It directly provides employment to about 16,700 full
time equivalent employees. Local government sector contributes around 3.5% of gross
domestic product.
The purpose of the local government is to promote the social, economic, environmental, and
cultural well-being of communities, in the present and for the future. To this end, the sector
performs a number of key functions, including the provision of water supply, street lighting,
roading and transport, sewerage and storm water, community well-being and recreation
services, etc.
The local government sector has undergone significant changes in recent years. These include
the amalgamation of TLAs, the establishment of an accountability regime and separation of
the regulatory and non regulatory activities of TLAs. Now, a growing number of services are
contracted out to the private sector and numerous local authority trading enterprises (LATEs)
have been established to undertake commercial activities. As a consequence of these changes,
the in-house activity and employment levels of local government sector have declined in
recent years.
Local government in New Zealand consists of the regional councils and territorial authorities.
Every part of New Zealand (other than the Chatham Islands) that is within the district of a
territorial authority must also be within the region of 1 or more regional councils.
New Zealand’s local government system now comprises 16 regional councils including 4
unitary authorities (which primarily carry out region-wide planning and monitoring functions)
and 74 TLAs (15 city and 59 district councils) with a wide range of service and infrastructure
provision functions.
1.2
Data Sources and Boundaries
Consistent time series energy use data for the local government sector is not available from
the published sources. Time series energy estimates reported here are only indicative
estimates as they are based on limited sample/source information which at times are not
consistent. Using annual average energy prices, the energy quantity estimate information was
converted to energy expenditure ($) and vice versa depending on the survey information
provided.
The energy analysis presented in this report is based on the synthesis of information obtained
from the following sources:
 EECA survey of local government sector undertaken over 2 years period 2002 and 2003. It
may be noted that the response rate was not that encouraging as even those who had
responded could not provide all the requested information. Therefore different sources,
assumptions, etc were used for estimating local government energy end-use information,
and these are explained where such numbers first appear in the report.
 EECA energy end-use database update for the year ended March 2002. This source
provides energy use information by TLA geographical areas.
 Local government energy audits and related information.
 EECA reports including EWMQ June 1998 and Street Lighting Energy Efficiency Study
completed in June 2001.
Note that some minor discrepancies exist between the figures reported in the text, tables and
graphs due to rounding errors and approximations. Unless otherwise stated, annual data refers
to the year ending 31 March. Note, that these energy consumption estimates do not include
energy used by contracted out operations for example public transport, airport operations,
rubbish collection, etc unless it is explicitly stated.
2.
Energy Use Patterns and Trends
2.1
Energy Use
An estimate of New Zealand local government annual energy expenditure1 for the year ended
March 2003 is given in Table 1:
1
This was estimated from the survey responses received from the 31 TLAs (7 city councils, 17 district councils
and 7 regional councils). In all these 31 TLAs spent a total of $23.27 million on energy. In all they employed a
total of 5985 FTE staff. The sample average annual expenditure was thus calculated at $3,888. In the same year,
the local government FTE staffs were 16,650. Therefore a rough estimate of in-house energy expenditure is 3888
times 16650 = $64.74 million.
Table 1:Local government energy expenditure estimates, March 2002 year
In-house activities
Street Lighting*
Contracted out**
Total
* = based on 155 GWh use
** = auumed at 10% of total
$ million
64.74
13.95
6.47
%
76.02
16.38
7.60
85.16
100.00
The above energy expenditure of $85 million approximates to a total of 4 PJ of energy use for
the year ended March 2002. This has increased by 11% from around 3.6 PJ in 1997. During
the same period, in money terms, the energy use increased by 15% to $85 million from $75
million. This estimated annual energy expenditure is about 2.5% of local government
operating expenditure; 9.5% of capital expenditure; or 4.3% of the rates.
The split up of sample local government expenditure across three groups of TLAs was as
follows (Fig 1A):
 City councils accounted for 10.94 million or 47%;
 District councils $8.88 million or 38%; and
 Regional councils the remaining $3.45 million or 15%.
Fig 1A:Sample TLA e ne rgy e xpe nditure
by TLA type , March 2002
City
Councils
47%
District
Councils
38%
Regional
Councils
15%
Fig 1B:Local govenment energy use split,
March 2002 year
Contractedout
7%
In-house
75%
Street
lighting
18%
Based on EECA Energy End-Use Database numbers, New Zealand’s energy use by regional
council was estimated and the results are shown in Table 2.
Table 2 shows that the local government activity overall energy use across regional council
area varied between 43 TJ (Gisborne) and 1224 TJ (Auckland) with a weighted mean of 346
TJ in the North Island. The coefficient of variance, a measure of how spread or consistent a
distribution is, was 106%. A split up of the overage overall TLA energy split was as follows:


47 TJ for construction;
193 TJ for local government building;



45 TJ for sanitary cleaning;
39 TJ for water works and supply; and
22 TJ for other social and community services.
The three largest local government activity energy using regions within North Island are:
Auckland region which accounted for nearly 1 225 TJ or 30.8% of New Zealand local
government energy use followed by Wellington region (568 TJ) or 14.3% of sector’s energy
use; and Waikato region claiming 405 TJ or 10.2% of sector’s energy use.2.
Table 2:Local government energy end-uses (TJ) by regional councila, March 2002 year
Other Social
and Related
Total
Community
Services
82.3
1,224
39.1
568
22.8
405
15.6
261
14.0
238
7.8
149
7.8
122
5.6
103
2.5
43
Regional Council
Construction
Local
Government
Administration
Auckland
Wellington
Waikato
Bay of Plenty
Manawatu-Wanganui
Hawkes Bay
Northland
Taranaki
Gisborne
175.5
65.4
57.7
37.4
29.8
18.8
19.5
14.2
6.5
551.2
349.9
244.4
170.9
147.4
102.1
70.4
73.6
24.2
203.3
70.2
39.9
28.4
25.8
14.6
11.8
7.9
4.4
211.3
43.8
40.4
8.8
20.9
5.9
12.7
1.5
5.9
NI Total
NI Average
NI Standard Deviation
NI Coeff of Variation
424.8
47.2
52.0
110.1
1,734.2
192.7
167.4
86.9
406.0
45.1
62.7
138.9
350.9
39.0
66.4
170.3
197.5
21.9
25.2
115.0
3,113
345.9
367.7
106.3
78.37
8.7
9.3
106.3
Canterbury
Otago
Southland
West Coast
Nelson
Marlborough
Tasman
69.8
30.1
13.2
5.1
6.6
7.0
5.9
256.5
93.0
69.8
24.0
16.1
15.2
14.3
61.7
23.1
10.8
4.7
8.2
4.4
2.9
19.0
27.3
5.9
1.5
0.0
0.0
0.0
34.3
14.4
5.5
1.9
4.3
1.8
1.5
441
188
105
37
35
28
25
11.11
4.73
2.65
0.93
0.88
0.71
0.62
SI Total
SI Average
SI Standard Deviation
SI Coeff of Variation
137.6
19.7
23.8
121.2
488.9
69.8
88.0
126.0
115.8
16.5
21.1
127.4
53.7
7.7
11.1
144.2
63.7
9.1
12.0
131.6
859.5
122.8
152.6
124.2
21.63
3.1
3.8
124.2
NZTotal
NZAverage
NZStandard Deviation
NZCoeff of Variation
562.4
35.15
43.21
122.9
2,223.1
138.94
148.33
106.8
521.8
32.61
49.86
152.9
404.6
25.29
51.55
203.9
261.2
16.32
20.98
128.5
3,973.0
248.31
307.39
123.8
100.0
6.25
7.74
123.8
Sanitary & Water Works
Cleaning
and Supply
% of New
Zealand
Total
30.80
14.31
10.20
6.57
5.99
3.75
3.08
2.59
1.09
Similarly in South Island, local government activity overall energy use across regional council
area varied between 25 TJ (Tasman) and 441 TJ (Canterbury) with a weighted mean of 123
TJ. The coefficient of variance SI TLAS was 124%. A split up of the overage overall TLA energy
use was as follows:
 20 TJ for construction;
2
Note that Wellington and Christchurch City Councils are not the second and third largest on population basis.
They are second and third largest energy using councils as their geographical boundaries also house regional
council office buildings.




70 TJ for local government building;
16.5 TJ for sanitary cleaning;
8 TJ for water works and supply; and
9 TJ for other social and community services.
The three largest local government activity energy using regions within South Island are:
Canterbury region (441 TJ), Otago (188 TJ) and Southland (105 TJ).
2.2
Local Government Energy Consumption Function
A regression analysis establishes whether one set of data has any relationship, or correlation,
to another set of data. The effect of the following four explanatory variables on TLS’s energy
annual total energy use was studied employing multivariate regression model:
 Area in square kilometres (X1);
 Staff employed in FTE equivalent (X2);
 Population served (X3); and
 Management attitude towards energy use (X4) i.e. whether the TLA employed an energy
manager and or is EnergyWise Council member. This was quantified through use of a
dummy variable by giving 1 if the TLAs have the attribute and 0 otherwise).
The regression model (Appendix 1) showed that TLA’s:
 Population size is an important determinant of its energy use. The population variable
carried positive sign with a numerical value of 0.53. The coefficient is statistically highly
significant. It indicates that a 1% increase in TLA population size would be accompanied
by a 0.53% increase in its energy use.
 Employees’ number affects energy use. The numerical value of the coefficient is 0.47
(which was statistically highly significant) indicating that a 1% increase in TLA staff
employed would be accompanied by a 0.47% increase in its energy use.
 Geographical area was inversely related to energy use as its coefficient carried negative
sign. Its numerical value was -0.45 (which was statistically significant) indicating that a
1% increase in TLA area would be accompanied by a 0.45% decrease in its energy use.
 Energy efficiency emphasis i.e. the presence of an energy manager and or E_W Council
membership carried a negative sign, though it was statistically non-significant. There is
thus some evidence that TLA attitudes towards energy efficiency cause energy use to
decline, other things being equal.
The four explanatory variables included accounted for more than four-fifths of the total
variations in energy use across TLAs.
Partial coefficient of correlation between TLA energy use and other operational parameters
were as follows:
 energy use and population
0.91
 energy use and geographical area
- 0.31
 energy use and employee number
0.92
 energy use and energy efficiency attitude
0.51
Thus, population is the key driver of local government energy use across TLA. The energy use
is also influenced by the number of employees which in turn is related to the population
variable.
2.3
Energy Use Mix
The predominant factor determining local government’s energy use mix is the type of services
and functions performed by the local government sector. The street lighting which is a major
function of local government is a significant determinant of electricity demand. Other local
government functions, such as rubbish collection and road repairs and maintenance similarly
determine demand for diesel and petrol as these activities require the use of a vehicle fleet.
Sample TLA energy use mix is given in Table 3 and the same results across TLA type are
illustrated in Figures 2A and 2D:
Table 3:Sample TLA energy expenditure ($) by fuel type, March 2002 year
Energy Type
Electricity
Petrol
Diesel
Coal
Gas
Other
Total
City
Councils
8733265
(79.83)
753213
(6.89)
317472
(2.90)
54200
(0.50)
960738
(8.78)
120273
(1.10)
10939161
(100.00)
District
Councils
7158380
(80.61)
598507
(6.74)
953748
(10.74)
29224
(0.33)
69911
(0.79)
70621
(0.80)
8880392
(100.00)
Regional
Councils
2016902
(58.47)
446669
(12.95)
241527
(7.00)
3367
(0.10)
397
(0.01)
740337
(21.46)
3449198
(100.00)
Total
17908547
(76.96)
1798389
(7.73)
1512747
(6.50)
86791
(0.37)
1031046
(4.43)
931230
(4.00)
23268751
(100.00)
Fig 2B:City Council energy fuel share
(sample), March 2000year
Fig 2A: Overall local government energy fuel
share (sample), March 2000year
Other
4.0%
Other
1.1%
Gas
4.4%
Coal
0.4%
Gas
8.8%
Electricity
77.0%
Coal
0.5%
Diesel
6.5% Petrol
7.7%
Fig 2C:Distric Council energy fuel share
(sample), March 2000year
Gas
0.8%
Coal
0.3%
Electricity
79.8%
Diesel
2.9% Petrol
6.9%
Other
0.8%
Electricity
80.6%
Fig 2D:Regional Council energy fuel share
(sample), March 2000year
Gas
0.01%
Other
21.5%
Coal
0.1%
Electricity
58.5%
Diesel
7.0%
Diesel
10.7%
Petrol
6.7%
Petrol
12.9%
Figures 2A to 2D show that of the total energy expenditure by the local government sector:
 Electricity accounted for about 77% across all sample TLAs, 80% for city councils, 81%
for district councils and 59% for the regional councils.
 Petrol accounted for nearly 8% across all TLAS. Within the sample, regional councils
spend relatively more on petrol (13%) followed by city councils (6.9%) and the district
councils (6.7%).
 Diesel formed 6.5% across all TLAs. Whereas, district councils spend relatively more on
petrol (11%) followed by regional councils (7%) and the city councils (3%).
 Natural gas made around 4.4% of energy expenditure. Within the sample, city councils
spend relatively more on petrol (9%) followed by district councils (6.9%) and the regional
councils (0.01%).
 Coal accounted for nearly 0.4% of total energy expenditure. Coal share was 0.5% for city
councils, 0.3% for district councils and only 0.1% for the regional councils.
Electricity is thus the major fuel used by the local government sector, followed by petrol,
diesel and gas. Street lighting alone consume around 155 GWh of electricity annually.
2.4
Energy End-Uses
EECA’s Street Lighting Energy Efficiency study3 (2003, p. 31) estimates that total New
Zealand street lighting load comprises a total of 37.4 MW of installed capacity or
approximately 155 GWh valued at $14 million if we assume an annual average of 4200 hours
when street lighting is required.
The study also determined that 64% of all street lighting is concentrated amongst 17 urban
TLAs at an average of 1402 kW. The 22 rural/urban TLAs’s accounted for 21% of installed
capacity at an average 352 kW and 34 rural TLAs’ at an average 171 kW. The range among
all TLAs varied between the lowest installed capacities of 51.2 kW to the greatest of 4081
kW. The mean installed capacity is 512 kW and the median 238 kW.
Information obtained from EECA Energy End-Use Database for the March 2002 year gives a
broad list of activities competing for local government energy use (Fig 3 and Table 2).
Fig 3:Local government energy use by activity,
March 2002 year
Construction
14%
Building
56%
Community
Services
7%
Water
Works &
Supply
10%
Sanitary &
Cleaning
13%
It will be seen from Fig 3 and Table 2 that:
 Office building accounted (56%) of sectoral energy use;
 Construction comprising road and bridge construction 14%,
 Sanitory and cleaning (rubbish collection, sewerage and drainage services, pest control
services and waste disposal services) 13%.
 Water works and water supply (10%); and
 Community services comprising the llibraries, museums, parks and gardens, etc the
remaining (7%).
More detailed local government energy end-use data could not be obtained from the current
survey conducted in 2002/03. However, the 1997 survey provided the following detailed
estimates on where energy was used in the New Zealand’s local government sector:
3
Street Lighting Energy Efficiency Study, EECA<, June 2001, p.31
Fig 4A: Local government energy
end-uses (TJ) , 1997
Water
Supply
20%
Street
Lighting
19%
Swimming
Pool
13%
Buildings
11% Others
4%
Sewage
17%
Vehicles
16%
Fig 45B: Local government energy
end-uses ($), 1997
Water
Supply
19%
Street
Lighting
28%
Sewage
16%
Swimmin
g Pool
7%
Vehicles
12%
Buildings
17%
Others
1%
Figures 4A and 4B show that of the total energy used by local government in the year ending
March 1997:
 street lighting accounted for 19% of energy and 28% of energy expenditure;
 water supply claimed 20% of energy and 19% of energy expenditure;
 sewage accounted for 17% of energy and 16% of energy expenditure;
 vehicle fleets used 16% of energy but accounted for only 12% of energy expenditure;
 swimming pools took 13% of energy and 7% of energy expenditure as the larger pools use
coal and gas for heating (and some diesel);
 buildings claimed 11% of energy and 17% of energy expenditure1; and
 others, such as road construction and repairs, parking, traffic signals, parks, etc consumed
4% of energy and only 1% of energy expenditure.
Marlborough District Council energy audit carried out by EECA in June 1996 covered the
library and administration buildings. The total floor area of the buildings was 3,215 m2. All
energy supplied in these buildings was by electricity. A small amount of diesel was used by
the emergency generator which is tested from time to time. The estimated electricity end-uses
in this case study were:
 space heating and space cooling, 35%;
 lighting, 29%;
 computers, 25%;
 water heating, 2%;
 printers, 2%
 photocopiers, 1%;
 refrigeration, 1%, and
 others, 5%.
Looking at local government energy end-use by fuel type, the 1997 survey showed that:
 of the total electricity used by the local government sector, approximately 29% was for
water supply, another 28% for street lighting, 21% for sewage pumping and treatment,
nearly 14% for offices and other buildings, and 6% for swimming pools;
 of the total natural gas used, approximately 80% was for swimming pools while the
remaining 20% was used in offices and other buildings;
 of the total diesel used, approximately 70% was in vehicles, 6% for sewage pumping, 1%
in water supply while the remaining 23% was used for other purposes;
 of the total coal used, 99% was for heating swimming pools, while the remaining 1% was
used for heating buildings; and
 virtually all petrol consumed by the local government sector was for vehicles.
3.
Energy Use Trends: (A Case Study of Christchurch City Council)
Consistent time series energy use data for the local government sector as a whole is not
available to establish trends. Christchurch City Council has, however, collated consistent data
information on a number of energy using characteristics for the period 1994 to 2002. This
information was analysed to provide some indication of the historical pattern of energy use in
the local government sector (Table 1 and Figures 2A and 2B).
Table4: Christchurch City Council energy use, energy efficiency investment and energy saving, March 1994 to 2002 years
Petroleum Coal &
Total
products LPG
Energy
Energy
Number of
Energy Energy
expenditure efficiency
household in
saved (PJ) saved (%)
($million) investment ($)
the city
March End
Electricity
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Total change in 2002
over 1994 (%)
Growth rate pa:1994 to
2002
Growth rate pa:2002
over 2001
0.237
0.223
0.200
0.193
0.198
0.197
0.202
0.208
0.220
0.145
0.143
0.152
0.115
0.105
0.104
0.103
0.101
0.101
0.034
0.034
0.037
0.040
0.037
0.038
0.038
0.036
0.022
0.416
0.400
0.389
0.349
0.341
0.338
0.342
0.345
0.343
7.22
7.03
7.09
7.04
7.04
7.06
7.00
7.01
6.97
80,000
85,000
1,721,000
271,000
386,000
656,000
375,000
416,000
412,000
-7.03
-30.27
-34.74
-17.42
-3.46
415
13.05
-0.91
-4.41
-5.19
-2.36
-0.44
22.74
1.54
5.71
0.36
-38.61
-0.52
-0.57
-0.96
0.49
Source:Christchurch City ouncil
0.025
0.011
0.016
0.011
0.010
0.016
0.008
0.003
6.35
2.73
4.70
3.32
3.09
4.62
2.36
1.01
109,600
112,300
115,000
116,200
117,360
120,000
121,800
123,300
123,900
Fig 5B :Christchuch City Council total energy
use and household number indexed, 1994 to 2002
70
Energy Use
Household Number
60
2002
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
0.0
80
2001
Electricity
2000
0.1
90
1999
0.2
100
1998
Petroleum
products
0.3
110
1997
Coal &
LPG
1996
(PJ/pa)
0.4
120
1995
0.5
1994
Index with base 1994 = 100
Fig 5A :Christchuch City Council e ne rgy
use tre nds, March 1994 to 2002 ye ars
The Christchurch City Council’s energy use decreased by a total of nearly 17.4%, from 416 TJ
in 1994 to 343 TJ in 2002, or at an average rate of around 2.4% per annum. The rate of
change in energy demand has however varied over years. For example, between 1996 and
1997, energy use saw significant reduction of about 11% to 349 TJ from 389 TJ. This decline
was largely due to the energy efficiency investments ($1.7 million) which occurred during this
period. Between 1999 and 2000, energy use increased slightly before commencing a
declining trend.
Between 1994 and 2002, energy use index (with base 1994 = 100) declined to 83 while that of
household number index rose to 113, suggesting a decoupling of energy use growth from
household/population growth.
Christchurch City Council appointed a full time energy manager in 1994 with the main tasks
of coordinating and implementing various programmes to improve energy efficiency and
conservation, while maintaining or improving comforts and service levels. Within a year,
energy management projects with an annual saving potential of more than $500,000 were
identified and implementation commenced. The overall payback for these projects was 4.3
years with some being less than 2 years.
4.
Local Government Energy Intensity Analysis
This section provides snapshot sample data on energy use intensities in New Zealand’s local
government. It also explains the factors affecting energy intensity across the TLA.
4.1
Energy Intensity Comparison
Local government survey data was employed for computing TLAs’ energy intensities. The
following energy intensity indicators were computed:
 Energy use per capita (energy/population)
 Energy expenditure as a percent of operating expenditure
 Energy expenditure as a percent of capital expenditure
 Energy efficiency investment as a percent of capital expenditure


Building energy use per unit of floor area
Building energy share in total energy
The above six energy intensity indicators were calculated by dividing the sample TLAs energy
use by their respective related parameters. It may be noted that not all TLAs provided the
required data, and those who provided did not provide information for computing the above
energy intensity indicators. Therefore TLA identity codes as in the graphs are not comparable.
The energy intensity results in respect of the above indicators are discussed briefly below:
Energy Use per Capita (Energy/Population)
Local government expenditure comprises operating expenditure and capital expenditure.
Operating expenditure is incurred by the Government to meet its daily operational
requirements and to provide services. It includes items like salaries, pensions, debt service
charges, subsidies and grants, etc.
Annual per capita energy expenditure relates to the in-house energy consumed by the TLA. It
does not include the electricity used for street lighting (which is managed by the power
companies) and the energy used for externally contracted operations. Per capita energy
expenditure across TLAs (excluding regional councils) split in to North Island (NI) and South
Island (SI) is illustrated in Fig 6A:
Fig 6A:Local government per capita energy expenditure, March 2002 year
($/population)
60
45
30
15
New
SI
S1
S2
S3
NI
N1
N2
N3
N4
N5
N6
N7
N8
N9
N10
N11
N12
N13
N14
N15
N16
N17
0
Figure 6A shows that average annual energy expenditure per capita for the North Island 17
TLAs varied from a low of $9.47 to a high of $47.98 with a weighted mean of $19.50. The
corresponding range for the 3 South Island TLAs was a low of $14.71 and a high of $43.04
with a weighted mean of $25.01. The New Zealand overall energy use per capita is $20.12.
It will be noted that that energy expenditure per capita was the lower in respect of the SI TLA
group compared to the NI TLA group. One possible explanation for this could be low
population base and the provision of almost similar level of energy using characteristics of the
infrastructure provided by this group of TLAs. It would appear that relatively colder climate
could be another part of the explanation.
Energy Expenditure as a Percent of Operating Expenditure
Fig 6B illustrates energy expenditure as percentage of operating expenditure across TLA
groups.
Fig 6B:Energy expenditure as a percent of operating expenditure, March 2002 year
16
(%)
12
8
4
Ne
SI
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
NI
N1
N2
N3
N4
N5
N6
N7
N8
N9
N10
N11
N12
N13
N14
N15
N16
N17
N18
N19
N20
N21
0
The energy expenditure as a per cent of operating expenditure for the New Zealand wide
sample TLAs varied from a low of 0.31% to a high of 15.07% with an overall average of
2.21%. However, the spread narrows down when the TLAs are split into NI and SI. The
energy expenditure as per cent of operating costs across 21 NI TLAs varied from a low of
0.31% to a high of 4.53% with a weighted average of 2.23%. Similarly, the corresponding
figures across the energy expenditure as per cent of operating costs across 8 SI TLAs varied
from a low of 0.71% to a high of 15.07% with a weighted average of 2.15%.
Energy Expenditure as a Percent of Capital Expenditure
Fig 6C illustrates energy expenditure as percentage of capital expenditure across TLA groups.
Capital expenditure includes funds used by an organization to acquire or upgrade physical
assets such office buildings, or equipment, repairing a roof to building or providing a fire
escape. The energy expenditure as a per cent of capital expenditure for the NI TLAs varied
from a low of 2.38% to a high of 47.08% with an NI overall weighted average of 4.66%. The
corresponding range for the SI TLAs was 3.75% to 39.50% with a weighted average of 7.06.
Overall New Zealand wide, TLAs energy expenditure as a percent of capital expenditure was
4.88%.
Fig 6C:Energy expenditure as a percent of capital expenditure, March 2002 year
50
40
(%)
30
20
10
Ne
SI
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
NI
N1
N2
N3
N4
N5
N6
N7
N8
N9
N10
N11
N12
N13
N14
N15
N16
N17
N18
N19
N20
N21
0
Energy Efficiency Investment as a Percent of Capital Expenditure
Energy efficiency investment refers to funds used by an organization to cut energy use and or
to get better value from energy used. It includes the money spent on insulation, lighting
upgrade, power factor correction and refurbishments, etc. Only 7 TLAs could provided this
information which is illustrated in Fig 6D:
NZAvg
TLA7
TLA6
TLA5
TLA4
TLA3
TLA2
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
TLA1
%
Fig 6D:Energy efficiency as a percent of capital expenditure, March 2002 year
The energy investment as a per cent of capital expenditure for the sample TLAs varied from a
low of 0.1% to a high of 11.5% with an overall average of 0.5%.
Building Energy Use per Unit of Floor Area
A local government building in this section refers to administration offices only. In terms of
their energy using characteristics, local government buildings like community centres,
libraries, etc are significantly different from office buildings.
Nearly half of the local government buildings energy use expenditure is in administration
buildings. A commonly used indicator of energy efficiency comparison in buildings is energy
consumption per unit of floor area. This indicator was employed to examine energy use in the
local government office buildings across TLAs and the results are illustrated in Fig 6E:
New
SI
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
NI
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
N1
N2
N3
N4
N5
N6
N7
N8
N9
N10
N11
N12
N13
N14
N15
N16
N17
(kWh/sqm)
Fig 6E:Local government building energy per m, 2 March 2002
Fig 6E illustrates wide within group and among group variations in the annual energy use per
metre square of floor area (m2) in local government office buildings. New Zealand sample
wide, the average energy use per m2 of floor area was 152 kWh/m2. The average annual
energy use per m2 of floor area across 17 North Island TLAs varied from a low of 95 kWh/m2
to a high of 227 kWh/m2 with a weighted mean of 145 kWh/m2/pa. The corresponding range
for the 4 South Island TLAs was a low of 96 kWh/m2 and a high of 250 kWh/m2 with a mean
of 184 kWh/m2.
The New Zealand overall energy use per metre squared of floor area (m2) in local government
office buildings was 152 kWh/m2. This figure is somewhat higher than the target figure of
140 kWh/m2 suggested by NZS 4220:1980. The comparable figure reported by Marlborough
District Council in 1997 was 170 kWh/m2.
Building Energy Share in Total Energy
Building energy use is a significant component of total energy use for the TLAs. The results
are illustrated in Fig 6F:
Fig 6F:Local government building energy use as % of total energy, March 2002
40
20
10
New
SI
S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
NI
0
N1
N2
N3
N4
N5
N6
N7
N8
N9
N10
N11
N12
N13
N14
N15
N16
N17
(%)
30
New Zealand-wide sample results show that on average administrative building account for
6.90% of the total; energy used by the local government sector. However, a wide range of
variations were observed across TLAs. The building energy use as a percent of total energy
across NI sample TLAs varied from a low of 2.60% to a high of 25.90% with an NI sample
weighted average of 6.18%. The corresponding range for the SI sample TLAs was 7.28% to
31.80% with a weighted SI sample average of 12.48.
4.2
Building Energy Functions
For the convenience of data analysis, the energy use split into total energy use in a year (kWh)
and energy use per square kilometre of floor area were separately examined. The aim in each
case is to identify the factors which explains variations in building energy use and energy
intensity across TLAs.
Building Energy Use Function
Linear and log linear regression models were tried to establish the whether building energy
use was influenced by the following explanatory factors:
 Building age in years (X1);
 Energy efficiency investment made in the year in $ (X2);
 Floor area in square kilometres (X3); and
 Number of people occupying the building in FTE (X4).
The log linear regression model (Appendix 3B) for TLA’s annual building energy use (kWh)
showed that:
 Age of the building affected its energy use. The elasticity coefficient in respect of this
variable carried positive sign with a numerical value of 0.1. It indicates that a 1% increase
in building would be accompanied by a 0.1% increase in its energy use.
 Energy efficiency investment coefficient carried negative sign though its numerical value
was very low (- 0.004). There is thus some evidence that TLA attitudes towards energy
efficiency cause energy use to decline, other things being equal.
 Building floor area was caused energy use to increase as this coefficient in respect of this
variable carried positive sign. Its numerical value was 0.83 (which was statistically
significant) indicating that a 1% increase in building area would be accompanied by a
0.83% increase in its energy use.
 Building occupant number affects energy use. The numerical value of the coefficient is
0.19 (which was statistically highly significant) indicating that a 1% increase in occupant
number would be accompanied by a 0.19% increase in building energy use.
The four explanatory variables included in the function explained 88% of total variations in
building energy use across TLA. Thus, building energy use is significantly affected by the
size of the building and its occupant number which is a good proxy for equipment and other
energy using characteristics of the building.
Per Square Metre of Floor Area Energy Use Function
When examined, on a per floor area energy use basis, it was found that NI TLAs generally
consumed less energy on a per floor area basis. But then this is only one factor. The other
factors affecting such energy intensities would include energy using characteristics of the
building, persons occupying the building, equipment intensity, age of the building and the
refurbishment done. We tried to capture the influence of some of these explanatory factors by
regressing per square metre based energy use on these factors. The results are shown in
Appendices 4A and 4B:
Log linear regression analysis indicated (Appendix 4B) that:
 Generally older building has slightly higher energy use per square metre of floor area. A
1% increase in building age would increase building energy intensity by 0.06% on
average.
 Buildings where some energy efficiency measures have been taken tend to have lower
energy use per square metre of floor area. Though a 1% increase in energy efficiency
investment would be followed by only a 0.06% reduction in the energy intensity, on
average.
 It was also found that building energy intensity energy was positively related to people
occupying the building. A one percent increase in number of people occupying the
building will be followed by only a 0.08% increase in energy use per square of floor area.
The three explanatory variables included accounted for a very low (12%) percent of the total
variations in energy use per square metre of floor area across the TLAs. This clearly means
that variations in building energy use intensity across TLAs are affected by a multitude of
factors. A large part of remaining unexplained variation could well be attributed to the way
the energy using equipment is used and the overall behaviour of the occupant
5.
Energy Savings Potential and Measures
Local government energy savings potential was studied by reviewing the energy audits
findings. In addition, benchmark energy savings potential in New Zealand’ local government
sector was also examined by comparing a wide range of energy intensities across relatively
more homogeneous group of TLAs.
5.1
Energy Saving Potential: New Zealand Energy Audits
Street Lighting Workshop May 2003: A workshop in street lighting held in May 2003 in
Wellington investigated the possibility of coordinated power savings initiatives across road
authorities by implementing a reduction in street light usage on roads. The workshop
recommended the following measures for minimise street lighting energy wastage:
 Checking that Photo Cells are operating at optimal level.
 Managing maintenance turn-ons during daylight hours.
 Advancing the bulk fitting of more energy efficient equipment/lights to reduce load.
 Reviewing necessity for amenity lighting
 Determining what control options are available from line companies.
EECA Street Lighting Energy Efficiency Study (2001): It reported a wide range of practices
in the area of street and pedestrian lighting, with small rural TLAs lacking the street lighting
engineering resources of the larger urban TLAs. By replacing mercury vapour, low pressure,
and fluorescent lamps, with high-pressure sodium or metal halide lamps, street lighting energy
use could be cut approximately 17 GWh of its 155 GWh load, or a saving of 11%. The money
value of electricity saved is around $1.9 million per annum. The study also reported annual
savings of 8.2 GWh through the introduction of dimming ballasts and 16 GWh through the
introduction of tapped ballasts, if suitable controls could be installed. Of course, a remote
switching device is essential for these savings to be achieved
Auckland War Memorial Museum Energy Audit 2003 showed that with proper
housekeeping alone (T1 opportunities met), the site could save 17% of its current electricity
used. This would call for measures like shutting off front of houselights, switching off unused
office equipment, insulating hot water cylinders, and replacing security halogens with
compact fluorescent lamps. The site with a total floor are of 16250 m2/year and electricity as
the only energy source, annually consumed a total of 4.58 GWh or 286 kWh/ m2. About 55%
of annual energy was used by the HVAC. Front-of–house lighting consumed 35%, with backof-house lighting and all other equipment accounting for about 5% each.
The Glenfield Leisure Centre is a multi-purpose fitness centre comprising indoor swimming
pool, squash court, an early childhood centre and public function room. Both electricity and
natural gas are used to run the Centre. As well as this a gas powered co-gen system is used to
generate further electricity. The whole building had an energy use index of 486 kWh/m2/year.
Within the property, swimming pool energy intensity was estimated at 12 GJ or 3330
kWh/m2of pool area.
Two audits of the regional council parks in Auckland (2003) showed that the two sites could
cut their current energy use by 10.5% from 2.221 GWh/year to 1.98 GWh/year at no or a very
little costs. This could be achieved by replacing 38 mm fluorescent tubes with 26 mm tubes,
using shower instead of bath, using cold water wash cycle in washing machine, turning off
unused office equipment, etc.
Manawatu District Council Energy Audit 1995: The energy audit survey carried out by
EECA showed that, with a pay-back of less than 3 years, the Council could save up to 50% of
its electricity used. The saving potential was achievable through measures such as covering
swimming pools at night, resetting ventilation and heating controls, optimising metering
arrangements and tariffs, instituting a monitoring and targeting programme, optimising pump
sizing, carrying out delamping in administrative buildings, and instigating a staff energy
management programme in all buildings.
Hasting District Council Audit 1992 showed that with a small amount of housekeeping the
Council could save at least $60,000 per annum or around 5% of its energy bill. These saving
potentials would typically arise from swimming pools and administration and library
buildings. The Council could save another $35,000 per annum from street lighting by
installing high pressure sodium lamps in place of mercury vapour lamps.
Hutt City Council Scoping Study 1992 conservatively estimated that 15 to 20% of its annual
energy bill of $1.6 million could be saved through cost effective and relatively simple
measures. The chief sources of savings included swimming pools ($70,000 per annum),
sewage and water pumping ($70,000) and administration and library buildings ($20,000). A
similar investigation for Wellington City Council undertaken in 1993 (where the facilities
operated appear relatively new or recently retrofitted) estimated that around 10% of the total
energy used ($3.64 million per annum) could be saved through cost effective measures,
especially in the following end-uses:
 water supply, 19% ($30,000 out of $160,00)0 per annum;
 swimming pools, 16% ($115,000 out of $729,500 per annum);
 workshops, 15% ($30,000 out of $205,000 per annum);
 office accommodation, 7% ($80,000 out of $1,142,000 per annum); and
 others (eg vehicles and roading), 29% ($70,000 out of energy bill of $240,000 per
annum).
Auckland Regional Council 1989: A report2 prepared by EECA showed that in 1989, the
Auckland Regional Council was able to save around $1 million annually for the first two
years after they had appointed an energy manager to attend to the energy savings opportunities
available to the Council. These savings were from total energy costs of about $4 million per
year. Of the total energy expenditure saved, nearly 40% was achieved through electricity
exports and self generation; about 16% was in relation to plant operation and electricity tariff
changes; and around 33% from changes made in sewage plant operation.
5.2
Benchmark Energy Savings Potential
The wide range of energy consumption per unit of activity (for example, per capita for the
overall operation and per square metre of floor area for the building energy use) within a
given group of TLAs and lack of obvious causal factors indicate sizeable benchmark energy
saving opportunities in New Zealand’s local government sector. The following two scenarios
were built to quantify the local government benchmark energy savings potential:
 TLA Group Average Benchmark: To strike homogeneity among the TLAs, they were
classified into three groups; (a) city councils, (b) district councils, and (c) regional
councils. The sample TLS were stratified into these groups and a given energy intensity
indicator was calculated for each group. We also computed the energy intensity indicator
for each of the group sample TLA. The TLAs with energy intensity higher than the group
average were lifted to the group average and on that basis their notional energy use was
computed and compared to the current energy use. The difference between the current and
“notional” energy use pointed to the savings potential.
 Within Group Next Best Benchmark: Here instead of taking the group average as a
benchmark we took the next best energy intensity as a bench mark. Let us say there are 3
TLAs. We arranged then in an ascending order of their energy intensities. For the second
lowest the first lowest served as a benchmark, and for third lowest the second lowest
became the benchmark. This approach appears more realistic as we were comparing TLAs
like for like basis.
Benchmark Sector Wide Energy Savings Potential
Energy use per capita (TLA total energy use (kWh)/population) was used for computing the
overall benchmark energy efficiency savings potential, and the results are given in Tables 5A
and 5B.
It will be seen from Table 5A shows that if all of those TLAs within a group, which consume
more energy per capita than their respective group averages, are lifted to their group average
levels, then the city council and district council TLAs could reduce their current energy use by
around 15% and 14% respectively. The combined benchmark energy savings potential in this
case is estimated at 15%.
Table 5B shows that if the benchmark is lifted to the level of the next best TLA in each group,
then the overall savings would amount to 20% for the city council group and 11% for the
district councils. The combined benchmark energy savings potential in this case comes to
18%.
Table 5A:TLA group average (kWh/population) benchmark energy saving estimates, March 2002 year
TLAs
City Councils (N = 5)
District Councils (N = 10)
Group Average
Group Average
Benchmark
Current Use (kWh) Benchmark Energy
Notional savings
Use (kWh)
(kWh)
96,925,852
66,973,092
29,952,761
56,125,380
48,507,965
7,617,415
Group Average
Benchmark
Notional savings
(%)
30.90
13.57
North Island (N = 15)
153,051,232
115,481,057
37,570,176
24.55
City Councils (N = 2)
District Councils (N = 3)
107,551,854
11,422,111
105,407,061
9,797,568
2,144,793
1,624,543
1.99
14.22
South Island (N = 5)
118,973,965
115,204,629
3,769,336
3.17
New Zealand CC (N = 7)
New Zealand DC (N = 13)
New Zealand (N = 20)
204,477,706
67,547,491
272,025,197
172,380,152
58,305,533
230,685,686
32,097,554
9,241,958
41,339,511
15.70
13.68
15.20
Table 5B:Within group next best TLA (kWh/m2) benchmark energy saving estimates, March 2002 year
City Councils (N = 5)
District Councils (N = 10)
96,925,852
56,125,380
71,704,542
52,654,178
Within Group
Next Best
Benchmark
Energy Use
(kWh)
25,221,310
3,471,202
North Island (N = 15)
153,051,232
124,358,720
28,692,512
18.75
City Councils (N = 2)
District Councils (N = 3)
107,551,854
11,422,111
91,553,533
7,112,662
15,998,321
4,309,449
14.87
37.73
South Island (N = 5)
118,973,965
98,666,195
20,307,770
17.07
New Zealand CC (N = 7)
New Zealand DC (N = 13)
New Zealand (N = 20)
204,477,706
67,547,491
272,025,197
163,258,075
59,766,841
223,024,915
41,219,631
7,780,650
49,000,282
20.16
11.52
18.01
TLAs
Within Group Next
Current Use (kWh) Best Benchmark
Energy Use (kWh)
Within Group Next
Best Benchmark
Energy Use (%)
26.02
6.18
Building Benchmark Energy Use Savings Potential
Energy use per per floor area (energy used in an office building (kWh)/square metre of floor
area/per annum) was used for computing the overall benchmark energy efficiency savings
potential, and the results are given in Tables 6A and 6B:
Table 6A:TLA group average (kWh/m2) benchmark energy saving estimates, March 2002 year
City Councils (N= 5)
District Councils (N = 10)
Regional Councils (N = 2)
5,165,927
3,804,454
905,561
Group Average
Benchmark
Energy Use
(kWh)
4,645,819
3,494,736
899,585
North Island (N = 17)
9,875,942
9,040,141
835,800
8.46
South Island (N = 5)
2,578,663
2,213,431
365,232
14.16
New Zealand (N = 22)
12,454,605
11,253,572
1,201,033
9.64
TLAs
Current Use (kWh)
Group Average
Benchmark
Notional savings
(kWh)
520,108
309,717
5,976
Group Average
Benchmark
Notional savings
(%)
10.07
8.14
0.66
Table 6B:Within group next best TLA (kWh/m2) benchmark energy saving estimates, March 2002 year
City Councils (N= 5)
District Councils (N = 10)
Regional Councils (N = 2)
5,165,927
3,804,454
905,561
Within Group
Next Best
Benchmark
Energy Use
(kWh)
4,295,024
3,419,757
896,000
North Island (N = 17)
9,875,942
8,610,781
1,265,161
12.81
South Island (N = 5)
2,578,663
2,119,174
459,489
17.82
New Zealand (N = 22)
12,454,605
10,729,955
1,724,650
13.85
TLAs
Current Use (kWh)
Within Group
Next Best
Benchmark
Energy Use
(kWh)
870,903
384,697
9,561
Within Group
Next Best
Benchmark
Energy Use (%)
16.86
10.11
1.06
It will be seen from Table 6A that if all of those TLAs within a group, which used more
energy per square metre of floor area than their respective group averages, are lifted to their
group average levels, then the New Zealand’s local government sector could reduce its office
building current energy use by around 15%... Based on the north island sample, it appears that
the scope for cutting such energy use is more in the city council group (30%) compared to the
district councils (14%). Also this appears more in the north island TLS than in the south
island.
Table 6B shows that if the benchmark was lifted to the level of the next best TLA in each
group, then the office building overall savings would amount to 18%.
5.3
Energy Efficiency Measures
Energy efficiency in local government operations can be increased by paying attention to
activity design (including construction, commissioning and retrofitting), use of new
technologies and the practice of sound energy management and building services
maintenance. Averaged across all operations, 10 to 15% of current annual energy use in the
local government sector could be saved through implementing cost-effective energy efficiency
investments.
The following is an indicative list of the initiatives that local governments could undertake,
legislate for, and encourage in the wider community to increase energy efficiency and reduce the
reliance on non-renewable energy sources3:
 Establishing energy management programmes within local government administrations and
appointing energy managers, particularly in larger TLAs. Such energy managers should be
responsible for carrying out detailed energy audits, exploring specific energy saving
opportunities, providing and implementing energy monitoring and targeting systems,
negotiating electricity tariffs in the new deregulated energy market, and evaluating and
implementing future energy efficiency projects. The energy manager should be responsible
to an energy management committee which should consist of various other staff members, in
particular from the environmental division, the building design and management division,
works departments, and parks and recreation division.

Preparing and adopting a planning scheme that incorporates energy efficiency criteria such
as designing a hierarchy of land-use activities and centres to facilitate access and minimise
energy consumption, arranging land use activities to minimise travel distance, consolidating
existing urban settlements by containing outward low density sprawl, and encouraging the
development of vacant or under-utilised land and discouraging isolated commercial
developments.

Becoming more actively and purposefully involved in public transport and traffic
management. This would include planning and developing cost effective expansion of
public transport networks, providing community bus services, promoting ‘park-and-ride’
facilities at outer suburban public transport terminals, encouraging local goods delivery
services operated by retailers and facilitating car pooling for work travel trips.

Promoting and encouraging energy conservation design criteria in the siting, construction,
alteration and operation of buildings, to the buildings industry and community locally.

Undertaking a survey of the recycling potential within the region to ascertain if the present
recycling being undertaken could be improved, and considering the utilisation of the organic
component in the waste stream via composing or biogas production.

Providing energy information services to key groups in the community who can be
encouraged to manage energy more efficiently.

Investigating the economic potential of alternative energy sources within the region, eg.
solar, hydro, wind, biogas and, wood.
EECA is central Government’s foremost proponent of energy efficiency. It assists the local
government sector to identify, and make the most of, available energy efficiency
opportunities. In fact, EECA has designed a number of programmes eg Energy-Wise
Company Campaign, Energy-Wise Councils Partnership, Crown Energy Efficiency Loan
Scheme, and other initiatives in the local government sector. These programmes aim at
obtaining this sector’s commitment to improving both in-house and their community's use of
energy.
Under the Crown Energy Efficiency Loan Scheme, EECA offers loan finance to government
departments including local governments to fulfil their energy management goals. Up to June
2004, a total of loan advances of almost $18.4 million had been made with local governments
accounting for nearly $4 million. Preliminary analysis suggests that the above total loan
advances ($18.4 million) have resulted in cumulative energy savings valued around $29
million.
By joining this partnership, each EnergyWise Council agrees to promote energy efficiency
through a number of actions, including:
 implementing the EnergyWise Companies Campaign's Charter of Key Principles in their
own internal energy management systems, including energy efficiency objectives and
performance measures in their Annual Plans;
 ensuring that improved energy efficiency and enhanced, appropriate renewable energy
supply and use are explicitly considered in Council policy development and planning
activities, particularly as part of decision making processes relating to transport, water
supply, waste management;
 developing an urban form which contributes significantly to energy conservation, energy
efficiency and sustainability.
EECA provides assistance and support to Councils by facilitating information transfer,
providing technical information and support. EECA's Energy-Wise Councils (EW-Councils)
account for a significant amount of New Zealand's population and energy use. 20 of New
Zealand's 73 Territorial Authorities are EW-Councils (22%) but they account for more than
half of the population of New Zealand, and energy used by local governments.
1
The difference between the two shares is due to the fact that buildings predominantly use electricity (nearly 90%) which
is an expensive source of energy compared to other fuels. In commercial buildings (which includes offices, hospitals,
schools, etc) nearly half of the electricity is used for activities (e.g. lighting, refrigeration, electronic equipment) which
are electricity use specific. In the local government buildings this ratio is likely to be even higher. Also, most of the
electricity load is during day time which tends to be subject to higher tariffs.
2
Appointment of an Energy Manager at the Auckland Regional Council, Report prepared by Ted Jamieson, Energy
Efficiency and Conservation Authority, July 1992, File No: EM 62-10-64
3
For details, See Manawatu District and Palmerston North City Regional Energy Profile, prepared by Tom R Robertson
and Bing D Soo for Energy Management, Ministry of Commerce, Project 89-13, July 1992.
Appendix 1 :Local government energy use function: regression results
Coefficients Standard Error
t Stat
P-value
Constant
Area (sqk)
FTE
Population
Energy efficiency
R Square
Constant
Area (sqk)
FTE
Population
Energy efficiency
R Square
Multiple Regression: Non-Log Function
-3862
7317.85
-0.528
-0.452
1.28
-0.354
132.96
28.16
4.723
0.488
0.15
3.318
-4635
11588.27
-0.400
0.599
0.725
0.000
0.001
0.690
87%
Multiple Regression:Log Function
1.195
0.521
2.294
-0.041
0.047
-0.864
0.468
0.151
3.090
0.530
0.166
3.200
0.004
0.007
0.652
0.025
0.391
0.003
0.002
0.517
86%
Appendix 2:Local government variable correlation matrix
TCE
Skm
FTE
Population
TCE
1
Skm
-0.307
1
FTE
0.920
-0.298
1
Population
0.908
-0.327
0.925
1
EWC
0.507
-0.277
0.524
0.581
EWC
1
Appendix 3A:Building energy use function: Non-Log Regression results
Multiple R
0.9432
R Square
0.8897
Adjusted R Square
0.8637
Observations
22
Coefficients
Intercept
9079
Building age (yrs)
253.26
Energy efficiency investments ($)
-0.38
Floor area (SQM)
128.75
Occupant (FTE)
594.45
Standard Error
96260
1449.37
0.33
27.35
316.12
t Stat
0.09
0.17
-1.15
4.71
1.88
Appendix 3BBuilding energy use function: Log Regression results
Multiple R
0.9408
R Square
0.8852
Adjusted R Square
0.8582
Observations
22
Coefficients
Intercept
2.246
Building age (yrs)
0.082
Energy efficiency investments ($)
-0.004
Floor area (SQM)
0.830
Occupant (FTE)
0.192
Standard Error
0.489
0.123
0.008
0.212
0.156
t Stat
4.596
0.666
-0.524
3.919
1.231
Regression Statist
2
Appendix 4A:Building per square energy use function (kWh/m ): Non-Log Regression results
0.3444
Multiple R
0.1186
R Square
-0.0283
Adjusted R Square
22
Observations
Intercept
Building age (yrs)
Energy efficiency investment
Occupant (FTE)
Coefficients
132
0.373
0.000
0.069
Standard Error
22
0.406
0.000
0.059
t Stat
6
0.919
-0.962
1.181
2
Appendix 4B:Building per square energy use function (kWh/m ): Log Regression results
Multiple R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Observations
Intercept
Building age (yrs)
Energy efficiency investment
Occupant (FTE)
0.3444
0.1186
-0.0283
22
Coefficients
1.911
0.055
-0.006
0.083
Standard Error
0.249
0.117
0.008
0.076
t Stat
7.663
0.465
-0.759
1.093
Regression