A clear line used to vividly define assets and liabilities. One was seen as that which contributes positively to an organization's growth, whilst the other was considered a negative draw from its resources. An asset stood as a resource which could help in the growth of a business, and a liability as some sort of an expenditure.

Distinguishing assets from liabilities used to be clearly distinguished. After all, one element was seen as a positive contributor and the other seen as a negative draw on resources. A given asset represented a resource, or purchase, which could add to the growth, whilst a liability on another hand, which is an expense.

It can be assumed in business that when energy is treated as an asset, it could help get the most of its consumption while effectively manage the implications of its use as well. This could be a sudden change in perception, but such will greatly contribute to an organization's improved efficiency and being more competent in the market, as a result. No longer is it acceptable to treat each asset independently and to treat the associated energy use as a "necessary evil."

In recent months, the PEW Center on Global Climate Change surveyed leading businesses to calculate their best energy efficiency practices. Conclusions from the survey involving organizations like Dow Chemical, Toyota and IBM were quite startling. Each of the companies surveyed reported that they had elevated their bottom lines, as a consequence of approaching energy as a core, manageable asset. In their organizations, energy and asset management went hand-in-hand to foster greater visibility.

Principally, organizations surveyed by the PEW Center explained their decisions to treat energy and asset management from the same viewpoint. They reasoned that this would result in a means of not only saving money, but would help to avoid greenhouse gas liability, as well as improving employee morale.

No longer is an approach to energy efficiency seen as being incremental in the new economy. While many organizations have turned to greater energy efficiency solutions, the real savings appear to be in a less piecemeal approach. Instead of just pinpointing to single out sets of equipment, it can be better to apply management of an organization's efficiency in a comprehensive way to be more effective.

Should it be possible to consolidate asset and energy management as a whole, energy calculations in a very broad inventory can be taken into account in the overall analysis of how and when every piece of equipment could be replaced or repaired. This is included in the emerging practice, by which energy use is monitored at the asset level, and a warning ahead of a threatening failure could be attained.

When energy and asset management is combined and energy is viewed as an important asset instead, benefits can extend beyond just bottom-line savings. Productivity can be increased and other resources can be saved, such as water, waste and excess labor.