Chapter 30Energy, Water, and Waste

Energy, Water, and Waste cost is $48,600 below budget. Electricity down 7%, water down 9%. The owner congratulates the hotel on a successful sustainability program.

Mateo opens the meter files. Electricity consumption didn't actually fall 7% — the tariff dropped mid-billing-cycle, two invoices were estimated, and the laundry outsourced part of its volume. Water cost fell partly because the municipality billed one meter late. Meanwhile diesel-generator use rose during outages and landfill waste actually increased after a resort promotion, though that invoice hadn't arrived yet. The favorable variance and the environmental story are not the same thing.

“Do not call EWW efficient because cost fell. Prove the physical units, price, operating demand, amenity load, meter coverage and environmental outcome.”

Questions this chapter helps answer

• How should a hotel separate energy, water, and waste cost variance from real resource-efficiency improvement?
• How should tariff, billing period, estimated readings, physical consumption, activity, and amenity load be reconciled?
• How should resource benchmarks be normalized for climate, guest nights, laundry, floor area, pools, kitchens, gardens, and other operating drivers?

What this chapter gives you

• How USALI 12's new EWW schedule changes utility and waste reporting — and what moved out of POM
• Why cost, consumption, and environmental performance are related but never interchangeable
• A framework for normalizing utility benchmarks across occupancy, weather, and amenity load

Key concepts

• energy
• water
• waste
• physical consumption
• tariff
• billing timing
• meter scope
• amenity normalization
• resource efficiency

A favorable utility cost variance driven by tariff timing and estimated billing tells you almost nothing about whether the hotel actually used less energy, water, or generated less waste.

Hotel Financial Reporting in Practice · Manish Gupta, CA