U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Inspector General

Office of Audits and Inspections

Audit Report

The Department of Energy's 

Renewable Energy Efforts

OAS-M-12-04 April 2012
Department of Energy

Washington, DC 20585

April 30, 2012

MEMORANDUM FOR THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND

RENEWABLE ENERGY

FROM: Rickey R. Hass

Deputy Inspector General

for Audits and Inspections

Office of Inspector General

SUBJECT: INFORMATION: Audit Report on "The Department of Energy's 

Renewable Energy Efforts"

BACKGROUND

In an effort to promote generation of renewable energy, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) 

requires that by Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 at least 7.5 percent of a Federal agency's annual 

electricity consumption be from renewable sources. Renewable sources include wind, solar, 

geothermal, hydropower, and various forms of biomass. Agencies can obtain renewable energy 

by producing it on Federal lands, a method encouraged by EPAct, or by procuring it from 

developers or utility companies. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, by 

replacing conventional energy with renewable sources, agencies can reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions by more than one pound of carbon dioxide per kilowatt hour. As required by 

Executive Order 13514, Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic 

Performance, the Department of Energy has also established a goal to reduce its greenhouse gas 

emissions by 28 percent by FY 2020. The Department can use renewable energy sources to 

assist in achieving its greenhouse gas reduction goal. 

The Department has emphasized the need for its actions to set the example for energy and 

greenhouse gas stewardship in the Federal government, the Nation's largest energy consumer. 

The Department's Sustainability Performance Office, created in October 2010, oversees 

Departmental efforts required by Executive Order 13514 and related laws and regulations, such 

as the EPAct. Because of the importance of the Department's commitment to sustainability, we 

initiated this audit to determine whether the Department was effectively meeting the EPAct 

renewable energy requirements.

CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS

In FY 2010, 3 years before it was required to do so, the Department reported that it had met 

EPAct's overall requirement that at least 7.5 percent of its energy consumption be from 

renewable sources. Specifically, the Department acquired approximately 461,000 megawatt
2

hours from renewable sources, representing over 9 percent of its annual electricity consumption 

of 4.8 million megawatt hours. Although the Department's progress exceeded EPAct

requirements, our audit identified opportunities for improvement. Specifically:

• Despite EPAct's preference for producing renewable energy on Federal lands, the 

Department relied almost exclusively on purchases of renewable energy. In fact, in 

FY 2010, on-site renewable energy generation represented less than 1 percent of total 

electricity consumed Department-wide. The lack of large-scale on-site projects 

occurred, at least in part, because of the challenges the Department faced in financing 

renewable energy projects; 

• Sites may not have always purchased renewable energy in the most cost-effective 

manner. In particular, we noted significant variability in the costs sites paid to purchase

renewable energy— ranging from $0.44 to $26.67 per megawatt hour. The cost

variability we noted was often a result of the sites' lack of awareness about available 

purchasing options and was not generally based on a detailed cost analysis of options 

that identified the best value. Additionally, the Department guidance on renewable 

energy purchases did not provide sites with advice regarding how to evaluate the 

different purchase options to ensure procurement at the best value; and,

• The Department had not ensured its sites reported consistent and accurate renewable 

energy data. For example, some sites inaccurately reported either the megawatt hours or 

the cost of renewable energy purchased. We noted that the Department's guidance did 

not provide detailed instructions to site officials concerning data input. However, it is 

important to note that the Department's achievement of EPAct's energy usage goals was 

not affected by the errors. 

As detailed in the remainder of our report, improvements in these areas could enhance the 

Department's efforts to satisfy national priorities related to energy efficiency and could bolster its 

reputation as a leader in the field. 

Reliance on Renewable Energy Purchases

Contrary to EPAct's preference for producing renewable energy on Federal lands, very little of 

the Department's renewable energy has been generated on-site. While Department sites have 

implemented approximately 260 on-site renewable energy projects, most of these projects are 

small and have done little to offset the Department's energy use. In fact, in FY 2010, the 

Department's on-site renewable energy production was less than 1 percent of its total electricity 

consumed. Further, only 2 of 38 sites met individual renewable energy requirements solely 

through projects on Federal lands. 

For the most part, sites met EPAct requirements either through purchasing renewable energy 

credits (RECs) or paying a premium for "green power." In FY 2010, purchases of RECs and 

green power accounted for 441,000 megawatt hours. RECs are claims to the environmental 

benefits associated with renewable energy generation. When procuring RECs, the purchaser
3

receives certificates that represent the generation of one megawatt hour of electricity from an 

eligible source of renewable energy. RECs are not tied to the physical delivery of electricity, and

thus, can be purchased from suppliers other than a site's local electricity provider. Green power 

purchases, on the other hand, are offered by many electricity providers as an optional service in 

which a premium is paid in exchange for electricity generated from renewable power sources. 

Attachment 3 describes the process for purchasing RECs and green power.

Continued reliance on RECs and green power purchases not only affects the Department's ability 

to achieve EPAct's preference regarding production of renewable energy on Federal lands, but 

also subjects the Department to future price uncertainty. While renewable energy purchases of 

RECs and green power usually require no up-front capital and are relatively easy to procure, the 

benefits delivered are only for the purchased year. Therefore, unexpected price increases could 

negatively impact the Department's ability to meet its renewable energy requirements in the 

future. For example, in the report Defense Infrastructure: DOD Needs to Take Actions to 

Address Challenges in Meeting Federal Renewable Energy Goals (GAO-10-104, December 

2009), the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that the Department of Defense had 

missed meeting its renewable energy goals in FY 2008 because of a significant increase in RECs

prices over the prior year. Future price increases could be the result of any number of factors, 

including new state regulatory mandates for electricity suppliers, the introduction of national 

renewable standards, and any additional Federal policies on renewable energy, greenhouse gases, 

or climate change. New standards could result in an increased demand for RECs. Also, as with 

other commodities, higher demand for limited resources could result in higher prices. 

While the Department's progress in meeting EPAct goals is laudable, the lack of large-scale onsite projects, in our opinion, calls into question the Department's leadership in promoting the 

development of renewable energy. A number of Department sites are located in areas with 

abundant renewable energy resources, including solar in New Mexico; wind in Texas and Idaho; 

and, biomass in South Carolina. The Department has recognized the need to demonstrate 

leadership in this area and plans to implement more on-site projects in the future. In its FY 2011 

Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan, the Department set a goal of increasing renewable 

energy used, with emphasis on developing renewable energy generation on Department sites.

Financing Renewable Energy Projects on Federal Lands

The Department faces significant challenges in financing large-scale on-site renewable energy 

projects. In our previous report, The Department of Energy's Energy Conservation Efforts

(OAS-L-11-02, February 2011), we noted that the appropriations needed for on-site energyrelated projects is in direct competition with mission critical needs for increasingly scarce 

Federal resources. Since many renewable energy projects require high upfront capital 

investment, the Department is often faced with difficult funding dilemmas. In addition, 

alternative financing mechanisms, such as a power purchase agreement (PPA), have not been 

feasible for large-scale renewable energy projects due to legislative limits on the Department's 

contracting authority. PPAs are agreements in which a private entity installs, owns and operates 

a renewable project on a Federal site, and the site purchases the energy generated by the project

through a long-term utility contract. Under Title 40 U.S. Code Section 501, the term of the
4

Department's utility contracts, including PPAs, cannot exceed 10 years, whereas, renewable 

energy developers typically need 20 years or more to recoup costs. 

To its credit, the Department is aware of the barriers to the implementation of PPAs and is 

working to develop strategies to overcome them. To that end, in March 2011, the Department's 

Federal Energy Management Program issued a Request for Information (RFI) on Federal 

government PPA issues, requesting industry input for the Department's consideration in order to 

improve potential future PPA procurements. The RFI included various options for comment. 

Unfortunately, the Department's analysis of industry feedback found that "none of the options 

presented were compelling as financiers would consider them to be high risk." In the continued 

absence of a comprehensive solution, the Department is considering expanding the use of 

broader contracting authority available to the Western Area Power Administration (Western) to 

execute PPAs for Department sites located in Western's region. Western is authorized, within its 

region, to execute PPA contracts with terms up to 40 years, and can enter into intra-agency 

agreements to purchase and sell renewable energy on a site's behalf. Western has executed four 

PPAs at the Department's National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado, 

including two rooftop photovoltaic (PV) systems and two ground-mounted PV systems.

Renewable Energy Purchases – Cost Variability

Department sites may not have always purchased renewable energy in the most cost-effective 

manner. We observed wide variability in the cost of renewable energy purchases within the 

Department. In particular, we noted that renewable energy costs for the 10 sites we reviewed 

varied from $0.44 to $26.67 per megawatt hour during FY 2010.

In FY 2010, 29 Department sites spent approximately $1 million on renewable energy purchases. 

The 10 sites included in our review represented 52 percent of the Department's renewable energy 

purchases and, at $665,071, accounted for nearly 70 percent of the cost. Our analysis focused 

only on the costs specifically associated with the purchase of electricity from renewable sources, 

including the costs for purchasing RECs and the additional premium paid for purchasing green 

power. 

We found the Department incurred lower costs when it purchased RECs through experienced 

third party intermediaries, including private sector energy brokers or Federal contracting 

agencies such as Western, the Defense Logistics Agency Energy (DLA Energy) and General 

Services Administration (GSA). These intermediaries solicited bids on behalf of the sites and 

arranged for the purchase of RECs. Intermediaries do not own RECs, but connect buyers and 

sellers. Six sites we reviewed purchased RECs using intermediaries. The cost for those RECs 

ranged from $0.44 to $5.00 per megawatt hour. 

Four of the 10 sites we reviewed purchased green power directly from utility providers and paid 

more per unit than those sites purchasing RECs through third party intermediaries. For example, 

the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) purchased green power from the Tennessee Valley 

Authority at a cost of $26.67 per megawatt hour. ORNL officials noted their green power
5

purchase was small and made in the interest of supporting a 10-year partnership with the

Tennessee Valley Authority's Green Power Switch program. Additionally, the Hanford Site, 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and National Energy Technology Laboratory

(NETL) purchased green power from Bonneville Power Administration at a cost of $10.50 per 

megawatt hour. To their credit, when PNNL officials became aware of additional procurement 

options, they decided to purchase RECs through DLA Energy and realized a $9.00 per megawatt 

hour savings.

The chart below shows the types and prices of renewable energy purchased for the sites we 

reviewed:

FY 2010 RENEWABLE ELECTRIC ENERGY PURCHASES

AT SELECTED DEPARTMENT SITES

Site Type Purchase

Source

Energy

Source

MWh

Purchased

Total 

Cost1

Cost per 

MWh

Ames Laboratory RECs Utility Wind 570 $1,995 $3.50

Brookhaven National 

Laboratory

RECs Broker Mix 10,000 $19,600 $1.96

RECs Broker Mix 25,000 $24,750 $0.99

Hanford Site Green Power Utility Wind 20,040 $210,420 $10.50

Headquarters

RECs GSA Wind 23,000 $57,960 $2.52

RECs GSA Wind 12,000 $33,000 $2.75

Kansas City Plant RECs Western Wind 4,500 $7,515 $1.67

Los Alamos National 

Laboratory

RECs Western Wind 6,750 $11,273 $1.67

RECs Western Biomass 24,000 $120,000 $5.00

RECs Western Biomass 1,500 $660 $0.44

National Energy Technology 

Laboratory Green Power Utility Wind 176 $1,848 $10.50

National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory RECs Western Wind 43,000 $71,810 $1.67

Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory Green Power Utility Mix 675 $18,000 $26.67

Pacific Northwest National 

Laboratory

RECs DLA Energy Biomass 48,750 $50,700 $1.04

RECs DLA Energy Biomass 2,500 $2,725 $1.09

RECs DLA Energy Biomass 3,750 $4,088 $1.09

Green Power Utility Wind 2,736 $28,727 $10.50

Sample Totals 228,947 $665,071 1 Costs reported for Hanford, PNNL and NETL are the premiums paid for green power purchases. These costs were not adjusted for conservation 

rate credits received from the provider utility that were applied toward those purchases. As of September 2011, these credits are no longer 

available.

Through discussions with site personnel, we found the disparity in costs was often a result of the 

lack of awareness about available purchasing options rather than a detailed cost analysis of 

options that identified the best value. The Department's Federal Energy Management Program
6

has made guidance available to sites, including the Guide to Purchasing Green Power and the 

Renewable Energy Requirement Guidance for EPAct 2005 and Executive Order 13423; 

however, sites have not always used this guidance effectively in identifying alternatives for 

purchasing renewable energy. Additionally, while these documents identify the various 

procurement sources of renewable energy, no direction is contained therein on how to evaluate 

the different options to ensure that sites procure the best value.

The Department's renewable energy purchases may significantly impact the overall renewable 

energy market and the environment. By cost-effectively purchasing domestically produced 

renewable energy, the Department contributes to the Nation's energy security, furthers national 

goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promotes growth in the renewable energy 

market.

Renewable Energy Data

During our review of 10 site's Consolidated Energy Data Reports (CEDR), we noted numerous 

inconsistencies and errors in the reported renewable energy data. Specifically, we found that 

four of the sites did not have the correct megawatt hours in the CEDR, and four sites did not 

report a location for purchases. However, these errors in reported megawatt hours did not 

materially affect the Department's calculation of its percentage of electricity produced from 

renewable sources. Additionally, we found inconsistencies in the reporting of the cost to 

purchase RECs and green power that we corrected in our cost analysis. Four sites recorded the 

cost of purchase, while the other six included the cost of utility power in addition to the cost of 

renewable energy purchases. For example, one site reported its purchase of RECs at a total of 

$4.3 million, when it had actually spent only $90,960 on RECs. CEDR, provided to the 

Sustainability Performance Office for reporting purposes, are a collection of sites' current and 

proposed sustainability efforts including renewable purchases. We noted that the Department 

had not provided detailed instructions on data input. Therefore, with 38 Department sites 

reporting sustainability information, minor errors and different site approaches for data collection 

and entry could eventually impact the accuracy of Department reports. 

RECOMMENDATIONS

Given the importance of clean energy consumption and the Department's leadership role, we 

recommend that the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy ensure that 

the Director of the Sustainability Performance Office:

1. Work with the Federal Energy Management Program to resolve issues regarding the 

implementation of PPAs, including potential legislative changes, if necessary, to make 

them viable;

2. Develop guidance on the different purchasing options available to the Department sites 

and the factors for best-value purchases; and,

3. Clarify the guidance for CEDR, including reporting information and cost for 

purchased renewable energy, to ensure accuracy and consistency. 
7

We appreciated the cooperation of various Department elements that provided information or 

assistance. 

MANAGEMENT REACTION AND AUDITOR COMMENTS

Management concurred with our recommendations and identified actions it has taken or plans to 

take to address the issues identified. Specifically, management will continue to raise the PPA 

term limit issue when appropriate, increase efforts to make sites more aware of guidance on 

purchasing renewable energy, and continue its efforts to improve reporting. Management also 

stated that it was not clear sites had used guidance ineffectively and noted the decision to 

purchase green power through a local utility may cost slightly more than to purchase a REC, but 

provide more value in terms of contributing to local renewable resources. We agree that, in 

some circumstances, higher cost green power purchases, or location-specific RECs may provide 

more value to a site. However, based on our discussions with site personnel, we found the 

disparity in costs was often a result of the lack of awareness of available purchasing options, 

rather than a best value analysis of options. As it strives to make sites more aware of purchase 

guidance, we would encourage management to ensure that sites are aware of best value factors to 

consider, including location, cost, source and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

Management's comments and actions are responsive to our recommendations. Management's 

written comments are included in Attachment 4.

Attachments

cc: Deputy Secretary

Associate Deputy Secretary

Acting Under Secretary of Energy

Acting Under Secretary for Science

Under Secretary for Nuclear Security

Chief of Staff
8

Attachment 1

OBJECTIVE, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our audit was to determine whether the Department of Energy (Department) 

was effectively meeting the renewable energy requirements of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.

SCOPE

The audit was performed from January 2011 through April 2012. We conducted work at 

Department Headquarters in Washington, DC, and obtained information from Ames Laboratory

in Ames, Iowa; Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, New York; Hanford Site in Richland, 

Washington; Kansas City Plant in Kansas City, Missouri; Los Alamos National Laboratory in 

Los Alamos, New Mexico; National Energy Technology Laboratory in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden, Colorado; Oak Ridge National Laboratory in 

Oak Ridge, Tennessee; and, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Richland, Washington. 

The scope of the audit primarily focused on the Department's activities for purchasing renewable

energy.

METHODOLOGY

To accomplish the audit objective, we:

• Reviewed the Department's renewable energy purchasing strategy;

• Interviewed key personnel at Department Headquarters and each of the sampled sites; 

• Analyzed Site Sustainability Plans, Consolidated Energy Data Reports, Renewable 

Energy Credits and Green Power Purchases; and,

• Reviewed prior reports related to the audit objective.

We conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted Government 

auditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions 

based on our audit objective. We believe the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for 

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objective. Accordingly, we assessed significant 

internal controls and compliance with laws and regulations necessary to satisfy the audit 

objective. In particular, we assessed the Department's implementation of the GPRA 

Modernization Act of 2010 and found the Department had not established performance measures 

related to the renewable energy requirement. Because our review was limited, it would not 

necessarily have disclosed all internal control deficiencies that may have existed at the time of 

our audit. We did not rely on computer-processed data to accomplish our audit objective.

We held an exit conference with Department officials on April 17, 2012.
9

Attachment 2

RELATED REPORTS

Office of Inspector General Reports

• Audit Report on The Department of Energy's Energy Conservation Efforts (OAS-L-11-

02, February 2011). The audit revealed that the Department of Energy (Department) did 

not have a sufficient approach to achieve the future 30 percent energy conservation 

requirement in the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. At the time of the 

review, the Department sites had cumulatively planned enough energy conservation

measures to reduce the Department's energy intensity by only 22 percent by Fiscal Year 

(FY) 2015. It was noted that not all the Department's sites could successfully manage or 

pursue Energy Savings Performance Contracts to meet the energy conservation 

requirement and the Department lacked a systematic approach to funding energy 

conservation measures.

• Audit Report on The Department of Energy's Opportunity for Energy Savings Through 

Improved Management of Facility Lighting (DOE/IG-0835, June 2010). The audit 

revealed that the Department sites in the review had not always taken advantage of 

lighting technology opportunities to reduce energy consumption. Specifically, it was 

noted during the audit that the sites had not always used the most efficient lighting 

available in the market, fully adopted innovative lighting technologies, and ensured 

optimal use of automated lighting control systems. In addition, the Department lacked a 

systematic approach to upgrading lighting systems and an adequately funded energy 

conservation program to improve lighting efficiency at the sites.

U.S. Government Accountability Office Report

• Report on Defense Infrastructure: DOD Needs to Take Actions to Address Challenges in 

Meeting Federal Renewable Energy Goals (GAO-10-104, December 2009). The 

Government Accountability Office found that the Department of Defense (DOD) missed 

meeting the Energy Policy Act of 2005 renewable energy requirement in FY 2008 

because the price of renewable energy certificates increased significantly from FY 2007 

to FY 2008. In FY 2007, DOD relied on unbundled renewable energy certificates. In 

FY 2008, the price of the certificates increased causing DOD to purchase fewer 

certificates. As a result, DOD missed the renewable energy requirement in FY 2008.
10

Attachment 3

GREEN POWER MARKET

The figure below shows the typical transaction paths in a green power market for green power 

purchases and renewable energy credits (RECs). This figure does not intend to represent a 

comprehensive view of all the possible ways to purchase green power and RECs. 

(Figure from the Guide to Purchasing Green Power)
11

Attachment 4

MANAGEMENT COMMENTS
12

Attachment 4 (continued)
IG Report No. OAS-M-12-04

CUSTOMER RESPONSE FORM

The Office of Inspector General has a continuing interest in improving the usefulness of its 

products. We wish to make our reports as responsive as possible to our customers' requirements, 

and, therefore, ask that you consider sharing your thoughts with us. On the back of this form, 

you may suggest improvements to enhance the effectiveness of future reports. Please include 

answers to the following questions if they are applicable to you:

1. What additional background information about the selection, scheduling, scope, or 

procedures of the audit or inspection would have been helpful to the reader in 

understanding this report?

2. What additional information related to findings and recommendations could have been 

included in the report to assist management in implementing corrective actions?

3. What format, stylistic, or organizational changes might have made this report's overall 

message more clear to the reader?

4. What additional actions could the Office of Inspector General have taken on the issues 

discussed in this report which would have been helpful?

5. Please include your name and telephone number so that we may contact you should we 

have any questions about your comments.

Name Date 

Telephone Organization 

When you have completed this form, you may telefax it to the Office of Inspector General at 

(202) 586-0948, or you may mail it to:

Office of Inspector General (IG-1)

Department of Energy

Washington, DC 20585

ATTN: Customer Relations

If you wish to discuss this report or your comments with a staff member of the Office of 

Inspector General, please contact our office at (202) 253-2162.
This page intentionally left blank.
The Office of Inspector General wants to make the distribution of its reports as customer friendly 

and cost effective as possible. Therefore, this report will be available electronically through the 

Internet at the following address:

U.S. Department of Energy Office of Inspector General Home Page

http://energy.gov/ig

Your comments would be appreciated and can be provided on the Customer Response Form.