Energy Action helps Australian businesses understand their energy consumption, procurement options and opportunities for better energy management. By combining energy data, procurement expertise and practical energy strategies, Energy Action can help organisations develop a more informed pathway towards lower costs and emissions.
Estimated Reading Time: 10 minutes
For Australian businesses, reducing emissions does not necessarily mean beginning with expensive solar installations, major equipment replacements or complex long-term renewable energy contracts. In many cases, the strongest starting point is low cost emissions reduction: identifying practical measures that reduce wasted energy and associated emissions while requiring little capital.
This approach is particularly valuable because energy consumption and operating costs are closely connected. When a business eliminates unnecessary electricity or fuel use, it can reduce emissions and expenses at the same time.
However, not every emissions initiative offers equal value. Businesses therefore need to identify the measures that provide the greatest reduction for the lowest practical cost.
The following hierarchy provides a useful starting point.
| Priority | Action | Typical cost | Main opportunity |
| 1 | Measure energy and emissions | Low | Find waste and establish priorities |
| 2 | Eliminate unnecessary consumption | Very low | Immediate behavioural and operational savings |
| 3 | Optimise controls and schedules | Low | Reduce avoidable equipment runtime |
| 4 | Upgrade inefficient equipment | Low to moderate | Permanent efficiency improvement |
| 5 | Manage electricity demand | Low to moderate | Improve energy cost efficiency |
| 6 | Procure renewable electricity | Varies | Reduce electricity-related emissions |
| 7 | Consider major capital projects | Higher | Address remaining emissions |
Before deciding what to change, determine where your emissions actually come from.
Electricity bills provide a starting point, but businesses should go further where practical. Smart meters and energy-management systems can reveal when electricity is consumed, where demand peaks occur and whether equipment continues operating when facilities are empty.
The supplied Energy Action material highlights the value of analysing historical bills, using smart meters and understanding peak and off-peak consumption before making energy decisions.
Start by collecting information such as:
This baseline allows managers to ask a much more useful question: where can we eliminate emissions without affecting productivity?
For example, if electricity consumption remains unusually high overnight, the first project may not require new technology. It may simply require finding equipment that has unnecessarily been left running.
Measurement prevents businesses from spending money on highly visible sustainability projects while inexpensive opportunities remain unresolved.
Once a baseline exists, eliminate obvious waste.
This is often the least expensive stage because it focuses on using existing assets more intelligently rather than replacing them.
Common sources of unnecessary consumption can include lighting, computers, production equipment, ventilation, heating, cooling and other systems operating outside required hours.
Simple measures can include automatic shutdown settings, lighting schedules, motion sensors and clearer shutdown responsibilities.
Energy Action's existing commercial electricity guidance similarly identifies lights left operating after hours, unnecessary HVAC operation and computers running overnight as common areas of energy waste.
The individual saving from one device may appear small. However, the effect becomes much larger when unnecessary consumption occurs across hundreds of devices, multiple facilities and thousands of operating hours.
A business may operate from 8 am until 6 pm while its air-conditioning starts at 5 am and continues until 10 pm. Similarly, warehouse lighting or production equipment may remain active during long periods of inactivity.
Adjusting these schedules can provide an immediate reduction without changing the underlying equipment.
Therefore, before purchasing new technology, businesses should ask whether existing technology is simply running for too long.
After eliminating obvious waste, the next priority is improving controls.
Automation can help turn good intentions into consistent results. Employees may forget to switch off lights or equipment, whereas properly configured controls can repeat the desired action every day.
Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning can represent an important electricity load in commercial facilities. Consequently, poorly configured HVAC systems deserve early attention.
Businesses can review operating schedules, temperature settings, simultaneous heating and cooling, maintenance requirements and unnecessary conditioning of vacant areas.
Energy Action's supplied material identifies smart thermostats, scheduled heating and cooling cycles and efficient HVAC equipment as practical approaches to reducing consumption.
Importantly, optimisation does not always require replacing the HVAC system. Adjusting controls and schedules may provide an inexpensive first stage before a larger capital upgrade is considered.
Once operational waste has been addressed, targeted efficiency upgrades become easier to justify.
Energy efficiency is particularly attractive because every unit of electricity that a business no longer requires represents electricity it does not have to purchase.
Potential measures include LED lighting, occupancy sensors, improved HVAC controls, efficient motors, refrigeration optimisation and energy-efficient appliances.
The supplied Energy Action business-energy guidance specifically identifies LED lighting, smart meters and energy-efficient HVAC systems as measures that can contribute to long-term savings and sustainability.
However, businesses should avoid upgrading equipment purely because a newer model is more efficient. Instead, calculate the expected annual energy saving and compare it with the implementation cost.
A simple calculation is:
Simple payback period = Project cost divided by annual cost saving
For example, a $12,000 efficiency project saving $6,000 per year has a simple payback period of two years.
Emissions reductions should also be estimated. This allows businesses to compare financial and environmental performance together.
Payback is useful, but organisations with formal emissions targets should also consider the cost of reducing each tonne of emissions.
This is commonly expressed as an abatement cost.
Abatement cost = Net project cost divided by tonnes of emissions avoided
A project that saves more money than it costs can effectively have a negative abatement cost. In other words, the organisation reduces emissions while generating a net financial benefit.
This concept helps businesses establish an emissions-reduction hierarchy.
| Measure | Capital requirement | Cost-saving potential | Priority |
| Shutdown procedures | Very low | Moderate | Very high |
| Equipment scheduling | Very low | Moderate | Very high |
| Controls optimisation | Low | Moderate | High |
| LED upgrades | Low to moderate | Moderate | High |
| Major equipment replacement | Moderate to high | Moderate to high | Assess individually |
| Renewable procurement | Varies | Depends on contract | Strategic |
| Large capital projects | High | Project dependent | Later-stage assessment |
The exact ranking will differ between businesses. Nevertheless, the principle remains useful: implement the cheapest credible reductions before moving towards increasingly expensive measures.
Demand management deserves consideration alongside efficiency.
Energy efficiency focuses primarily on reducing how much energy a business consumes. Demand management also considers when that consumption occurs.
For example, businesses may shift flexible electricity-intensive activities away from periods of high demand. Battery storage, automated controls and operational scheduling may also help manage peak loads.
Energy Action's supplied material identifies off-peak energy use, battery storage, smart controls and demand-response strategies as options for managing business electricity costs.
However, shifting consumption does not automatically mean total emissions will fall. Businesses should therefore evaluate demand-management projects separately for their cost, consumption and emissions effects.
After reducing unnecessary consumption, businesses can consider how to address emissions associated with the electricity they still require.
Options may include onsite solar, renewable electricity contracts and Power Purchase Agreements.
This sequencing matters. If a company first improves efficiency, it may require less renewable electricity to address its remaining load.
For suitable facilities, solar can reduce grid electricity consumption and support longer-term sustainability objectives.
Businesses that do not want to fund a solar installation upfront may also investigate a solar Power Purchase Agreement. Under this structure, a third-party provider can own and operate the system while the business purchases the electricity generated under agreed terms.
However, solar should still be evaluated commercially. Site conditions, consumption patterns, contract terms, expected generation and future business plans all matter.
Larger organisations may investigate renewable PPAs to support longer-term renewable electricity procurement.
These arrangements can offer renewable energy access and greater pricing certainty, although contract duration, pricing structures, flexibility and supplier risk require careful evaluation.
Therefore, a PPA should not simply be treated as an emissions-reduction purchase. It is also a significant energy procurement decision.
The strongest emissions strategies combine multiple measures rather than searching for a single solution.
A practical roadmap could follow five stages.
Stage one: Measure. Establish energy and emissions baselines and identify major sources.
Stage two: Eliminate waste. Stop unnecessary consumption and correct inefficient operating practices.
Stage three: Optimise. Improve schedules, controls, maintenance and equipment settings.
Stage four: Invest. Implement efficiency projects with attractive financial and emissions outcomes.
Stage five: Decarbonise remaining consumption. Assess solar, renewable procurement and longer-term solutions for emissions that efficiency cannot eliminate.
This approach helps preserve capital because expensive interventions are considered after simpler opportunities have been assessed.
Low cost emissions reduction is fundamentally about sequencing. Businesses should understand their energy use first, eliminate obvious waste, optimise existing systems and then invest in targeted efficiency improvements. After these measures, renewable electricity and larger capital projects can address remaining emissions.
Importantly, the least-cost approach can make sustainability commercially stronger. Instead of viewing emissions reduction purely as an expense, businesses can identify opportunities that simultaneously reduce energy consumption, operating costs and environmental impact.
Energy Action helps Australian businesses understand their energy consumption, procurement options and opportunities for better energy management. By combining energy data, procurement expertise and practical energy strategies, Energy Action can help organisations develop a more informed pathway towards lower costs and emissions.
Low cost emissions reduction involves prioritising measures that reduce greenhouse gas emissions at relatively little cost, or that generate financial savings that offset implementation costs. Examples can include reducing unnecessary equipment runtime, optimising HVAC controls and improving energy efficiency. The best opportunities depend on the organisation's facilities, consumption profile and emissions sources.
Businesses should generally start by measuring consumption and identifying unnecessary energy use. Operational changes and optimisation can then be considered before significant capital is committed to new equipment or renewable energy projects. This sequencing helps organisations capture inexpensive opportunities and build a stronger business case for later investments.
It can be, particularly when efficiency measures eliminate energy that was being wasted. However, the economics depend on the facility, equipment, energy tariffs and proposed renewable solution. Businesses should compare projects using implementation cost, annual savings, expected emissions reduction, payback period and operational impact rather than assuming one technology will always be cheaper.
Businesses can track electricity and fuel consumption before and after an initiative, calculate associated emissions changes and compare those results with implementation costs. Financial metrics such as annual savings and simple payback can then be considered alongside tonnes of emissions avoided. For organisations with several potential projects, comparing abatement costs can help identify which opportunities deserve priority.
Renewable electricity can be considered at any stage, but businesses may achieve a more efficient overall strategy by first understanding and reducing unnecessary consumption. Once the remaining electricity requirement is clearer, the organisation can assess onsite solar, renewable electricity products or PPAs against its operational and sustainability objectives. Contract terms, pricing, flexibility and risk should also be reviewed carefully before making a long-term commitment.
