Can You Reduce Energy Costs on Fixed Contracts?

Yes, If the Data Is Right and There Is a Genuine Focus**

For most multi-site property portfolios, energy is purchased on fixed tariffs.

That stability is often mistaken for control.

While the unit rate may be fixed, total energy spend is not. Consumption changes over time, and when it increases, costs rise even though the tariff stays the same.

The real question, therefore, is not whether prices move.

It is whether property and facilities managers have the time, visibility, and confidence to understand what they are consuming and why.

Across portfolios, rising energy costs on fixed contracts are rarely caused by price movements. They are almost always driven by consumption drift that goes unnoticed until it becomes a financial issue.

Accurate analysis makes it possible to reduce energy costs on fixed contracts, even when prices are locked in.

Fixed Price Does Not Mean Fixed Outcome

Fixed contracts protect against wholesale market volatility. They do not protect against changes in how buildings operate.

Over time, fixed-price portfolios are affected by:

• Increased operating hours
  • Changes in tenancy and occupancy
  • Refurbishments and layout changes
  • Additional plant and equipment
  • Behavioural drift across sites

Buildings evolve continuously.
The data underpinning energy contracts often does not.

When actual consumption exceeds the volumes assumed at contract signing, spend increases quietly and persistently. This is where many property managers are caught out. Not by price rises, but by usage creep that slowly erodes budgets.

Reducing consumption is how organisations reduce energy costs on fixed contracts, even when prices cannot change.

Why Energy Reduction Rarely Gets Traction

In theory, reducing energy consumption on fixed contracts seems obvious.

In practice, it competes with everything else.

Property and facilities teams are managing:

• Day-to-day operational issues
  • Tenant demands and service delivery
  • Compliance, safety, and statutory obligations
  • Budget control across complex portfolios

Energy reduction rarely fails because of a lack of ambition.

It fails because there is not enough time, visibility, or confidence in the data to act decisively.

Without reliable information, energy reduction feels risky. Decisions become harder to justify, and effort is often deferred in favour of more immediate operational priorities.

Accurate data and collaboration are essential to reduce energy costs on fixed contracts across complex portfolios.

Data Is the Difference Between Control and Guesswork

On fixed tariffs, data does not change the unit rate.
It changes decisions.

Accurate, site-level data allows organisations to:

• Identify which buildings drive portfolio consumption
  • Understand when and why peaks occur
  • Separate structural issues from behavioural ones
  • Challenge assumptions baked into historic contracts

Without this clarity, decisions are made using averages, estimates, and outdated baselines. That almost always results in overbuying energy and overspending against budgets.

Data replaces guesswork with control.

Good data clarity is essential to reduce energy costs on fixed contracts across multi site portfolios.

What Good Data Actually Looks Like

Good energy data does not need to be complex.
It needs to be clear, trusted, and actionable.

At a minimum, it includes:

• Accurate and validated meter information
  • Actual consumption data rather than estimates
  • Visibility at individual site level
  • Clear ownership of data and actions

This level of understanding allows teams to focus effort where it will deliver meaningful impact, rather than spreading time thinly across every building.

Reduction Is Possible, But It Has to Be Practical

Energy reduction on fixed contracts works when it is:

• Targeted rather than blanket
  • Based on operational reality, not aspiration
  • Embedded into existing processes rather than added as another task

In most portfolios, a small number of sites drive a disproportionate share of consumption. Identifying those sites does not require large initiatives or disruptive change. It requires accurate data and clear priorities.

The Real Opportunity

Buying less energy remains the cheapest saving available.

But it only works when:

• The data is accurate
  • Responsibility is clearly defined
  • There is a genuine, practical focus rather than a policy statement

Fixed tariffs do not prevent savings.
Poor information and lack of visibility do.

Preventing Debt on Accounts

Where data quality is poor, debt often accumulates silently.

Sites consume more than expected. Bills rise gradually. Adjustments and reconciliations arrive late. By the time the issue is recognised, budgets have already been breached and site accounts may be in deficit.

This pattern is common across large portfolios because individual site variances are easy to overlook when viewed in aggregate.

Accurate monitoring breaks this cycle.

When teams can see consumption trends early, they can intervene before overspend becomes embedded. This prevents debt building on accounts and avoids the need for retrospective corrections.

strategic approach is essential to reduce energy costs on fixed contracts across complex commercial property portfolios.

Case Study

Energy Reduction Across a Mixed Commercial Property Portfolio

£400,000+ Returned to the Service Charge on Fixed-Price Energy Contracts

The Challenge

A mixed commercial property portfolio operating on fixed-price energy contracts was experiencing rising energy spend despite stable tariffs.

With an eight-year contract term in place, traditional cost controls such as re-procurement were not an option. Any savings had to come from reducing consumption, not changing price.

At the same time, the property manager was balancing:

• Multi-site operational complexity
  • Competing facilities management priorities
  • Pressure on service charges
  • Limited time to focus on energy reduction

The Opportunity

This was not just an energy challenge.
It was a leadership and governance opportunity.

Demonstrating control of energy consumption on fixed tariffs would:

• Protect service charges
  • Improve transparency for landlords and occupiers
  • Clearly evidence proactive property management

Inteb’s Role

Inteb was appointed to manage and support the energy reduction programme, providing the structure, data insight, and ongoing oversight required to deliver results.

Inteb’s scope included:

• Energy data setup and validation
  • Portfolio-wide consumption analysis
  • Benchmarking buildings and identifying priority sites
  • Setting realistic, site-level reduction targets
  • Ongoing monitoring, reporting, and performance review

This allowed property management and maintenance teams to remain focused on delivery, supported by accurate and trusted data.

The Approach

1. Portfolio Benchmarking

Inteb benchmarked energy consumption across the portfolio to:

• Identify high-consuming and abnormal sites
  • Highlight inefficiencies masked by portfolio averages
  • Prioritise effort where savings were achievable

2. Target Setting

Using benchmark data, site-specific targets were established based on:

• Building use
  • Operating hours
  • Occupancy patterns
  • Plant and control arrangements

Targets were realistic, measurable, and aligned with operational realities.

3. Data Analysis and Insight

Consumption data was analysed to identify:

• Out-of-hours energy use
  • Persistent base loads
  • Seasonal and operational anomalies
  • Behavioural inefficiencies

This transformed raw data into clear, actionable insight.

4. Practical Energy Reduction Measures

Energy reduction focused on simple, low-disruption actions, including:

• Switching off lighting in unused corridors and low-traffic areas
  • Aligning lighting and plant operation with actual occupancy
  • Optimising plant schedules and control settings
  • Identifying equipment running unnecessarily

All measures were evidence-led rather than assumption-based.

5. Partnership With Maintenance Teams

Inteb worked closely with incumbent maintenance teams, using energy data to:

• Validate operational changes
  • Demonstrate performance improvements
  • Embed energy awareness into routine maintenance activity

This collaborative approach ensured that improvements were sustained.

Monitoring, Reporting, and Control

Ongoing monitoring and reporting provided the property manager with:

• Visibility of performance by site
  • Confirmation that savings were holding
  • Early warning when consumption drifted
  • Clear reporting to landlords and occupiers

Energy reduction shifted from a one-off project to a managed, ongoing process.

The Results

• £400,000+ in energy savings delivered
  • Savings returned directly to the service charge
  • Achieved entirely on fixed-price tariffs
  • No supplier change required
  • No major capital investment
  • Minimal operational disruption

PR and Reputation Impact

The programme delivered more than financial savings.

It gave the property manager a clear, credible success story demonstrating:

• Strong financial stewardship
  • Data-led decision-making
  • Proactive energy management on fixed contracts
  • Effective collaboration with specialist partners

Supported by Inteb’s analysis, monitoring, and reporting, the value delivered was clearly evidenced to landlords and occupiers.

The resulting narrative was simple and powerful.

Energy costs were controlled not by passing on increases, but by managing consumption better.

Have questions about how to reduce energy costs on fixed contracts? Start with the right information.

Final Thoughts

If energy costs are rising on fixed contracts, the issue is rarely price.

It is consumption, and whether anyone can clearly see what is driving it.

That is where control starts.

Buying less energy remains the cheapest saving available.
With the right data and support, it is achievable even on long-term fixed-price contracts.