Restaurant energy use is concentrated in the kitchen and the systems that support it. U.S. food-service buildings averaged 263.3 thousand Btu per square foot of major-fuel energy in 2018, while cooking alone accounted for 40% of end-use consumption. The figures below provide national benchmarks for restaurant operators, with clear distinctions between measured building data, national medians, and modeled equipment performance.
Contents
- Restaurant energy intensity benchmarks
- Energy use by end use
- Electricity intensity by end use
- Natural-gas intensity and consumption
- Annual energy use of kitchen equipment
- Kitchen ventilation loads and operating benchmarks
Restaurant energy intensity benchmarks
The strongest broad benchmark comes from the U.S. Energy Information Administration’s 2018 Commercial Buildings Energy Consumption Survey (CBECS). The survey category is food-service buildings, which includes restaurants as well as cafeterias, bars, coffee shops, and catering services. It is therefore a useful sector benchmark, but it is not limited to full-service restaurants.
The EIA food-service building summary reports 365 trillion Btu of major-fuel consumption in 2018. The same CBECS estimate counted 286 thousand food-service buildings, with an average building size of 4,800 square feet. Food-service buildings averaged 263.3 thousand Btu per square foot of major-fuel energy use. For context, the average U.S. commercial building used 70 thousand Btu per square foot of major-fuel energy in 2018. These values come from different building categories, so the comparison describes sector intensity rather than the performance of any individual restaurant.
ENERGY STAR provides another way to benchmark a property. Its EUI metrics guidance lists a U.S. national median source EUI of 573.7 kBtu per square foot for the Portfolio Manager Restaurant property type and a median site EUI of 325.6 kBtu per square foot. Source EUI accounts for energy at the source, while site EUI reflects energy used at the property. These are national medians reported on the page accessed in 2026, not a restaurant’s utility bill or a 2018 CBECS average.
Fast-food properties have a separate ENERGY STAR benchmark: the U.S. national median source EUI is 886.4 kBtu per square foot. Because the restaurant and fast-food figures are property-type medians and the EIA figures are food-service building estimates, they should be used as reference points rather than combined into a single average.
Energy use by end use
The EIA’s 2018 end-use results show why restaurant energy management tends to begin in the kitchen. Cooking represented 40% of food-service end-use energy consumption. Refrigeration represented 15%, and space heating represented 12%. Every other individual end-use category represented 7% or less.
The EIA Table E2 end-use intensities reports the following major-fuel intensities for food-service buildings:
| End use | Intensity, thousand Btu per square foot | Measurement period |
|---|---|---|
| Cooking | 109.7 | 2018 |
| Refrigeration | 40.6 | 2018 |
| Space heating | 35.6 | 2018 |
| Other uses | 20.6 | 2018 |
| Water heating | 19.4 | 2018 |
| Cooling | 19.1 | 2018 |
| Ventilation | 16.6 | 2018 |
| Lighting | 10.8 | 2018 |
| Office equipment | 1.2 | 2018 |
| Computing | 0.9 | 2018 |
The total major-fuel intensity was 263.3 thousand Btu per square foot. The table’s cooking intensity of 109.7 thousand Btu per square foot is consistent with cooking being the largest listed end use, while refrigeration and space heating are the next largest listed intensities. “Other uses” is a reported category; it should not be treated as a specific appliance or operating system.
These are sector-level intensities, not a prescription for a particular floor plan. A restaurant’s equipment mix, operating schedule, building envelope, climate, and fuel choices can differ substantially from the food-service building population represented by the 2018 estimate.
Electricity intensity by end use
Electricity is spread across more restaurant systems than the major-fuel end-use percentages alone suggest. EIA Table E6 reports that food-service buildings used 43.8 kWh of electricity per square foot across all listed end uses in 2018.
The largest listed electricity intensities were cooking at 12.4 kWh per square foot and refrigeration at 11.9 kWh per square foot. Cooling used 5.6 kWh per square foot, space heating used 5.5, and water heating used 5.3. Ventilation used 4.9 kWh per square foot, while lighting used 3.2.
| Electricity end use | kWh per square foot | Measurement period |
|---|---|---|
| Cooking | 12.4 | 2018 |
| Refrigeration | 11.9 | 2018 |
| Cooling | 5.6 | 2018 |
| Space heating | 5.5 | 2018 |
| Water heating | 5.3 | 2018 |
| Ventilation | 4.9 | 2018 |
| Lighting | 3.2 | 2018 |
| Office equipment | 0.3 | 2018 |
| Computing | 0.3 | 2018 |
The electricity figures use a different unit from the major-fuel intensities, so the two tables should not be added together. They describe different views of energy use: one reports major-fuel energy in thousand Btu per square foot, while the other reports electricity in kWh per square foot.
Natural-gas intensity and consumption
Natural gas remains especially relevant to cooking and water heating in the food-service building category. According to EIA Table E7, food-service buildings consumed 151 trillion Btu of natural gas in 2018. Across buildings using natural gas, natural-gas intensity was 153.2 thousand Btu per square foot.
Cooking accounted for 121.4 thousand Btu per square foot of natural-gas intensity. Space heating accounted for 38.4 thousand Btu per square foot, and water heating accounted for 19.0 thousand Btu per square foot. Food-service buildings consumed 109 trillion Btu of natural gas for space heating in 2018.
The natural-gas intensity figure is explicitly reported across buildings using natural gas, so it should not be interpreted as the average across every food-service building regardless of fuel choice. It also should not be used to estimate an individual restaurant’s bill without information about the building’s area, equipment, operating schedule, and tariff.
Annual energy use of kitchen equipment
The DOE/PNNL Commercial Kitchen Baseline Development for Building Energy Score provides modeled annual equipment-use figures. The report was published in 2019, and its values represent standard operating assumptions in the model rather than a field survey of restaurants.
Several comparisons show how equipment type and efficiency case affect modeled annual use:
| Equipment | Standard MBtu/year | Energy-efficient MBtu/year |
|---|---|---|
| Electric broiler | 53 | 40 |
| Electric fryer | 69 | 48 |
| Gas fryer | 115 | 81 |
| Electric griddle | 84 | 76 |
| Gas griddle | 130 | 117 |
| Electric holding cabinet | 45 | 13 |
| Electric convection oven | 59 | 51 |
| Gas convection oven | 80 | 68 |
| Electric steam kettle | 159 | 143 |
| Gas steam kettle | 209 | 167 |
The same model reports 15 MBtu per year for a standard reach-in freezer and 11 MBtu for the energy-efficient case. A standard undercounter freezer used 10 MBtu compared with 9 MBtu for the energy-efficient case. For refrigeration, a standard prep-table refrigerator used 18 MBtu versus 11 MBtu, a reach-in refrigerator used 42 versus 25, and an undercounter refrigerator used 4 versus 3.
Other modeled equipment values include 45 MBtu per year for a standard ice machine versus 39 for the energy-efficient case, 16 versus 13 for a microwave, and 30 versus 25 for a conveyor oven. These are annual model outputs, not measured consumption guarantees. They are most useful for comparing equipment categories under the report’s stated standard operations.
Kitchen ventilation loads and operating benchmarks
Ventilation affects both direct fan energy and the conditioning burden associated with moving air through a commercial kitchen. The DOE/PNNL report modeled appliance loads at 100 W per square foot in its baseline, while the AEDG quick-service-restaurant model used 170 W per square foot. A California Title 24 reference cited in the report used a 10 W-per-square-foot internal load for the compared kitchen model. These are model reference values for different comparisons, not a single universal restaurant design load.
The commercial-kitchen baseline modeled occupancy peaks around noon and 7 p.m. Those schedule points matter when operators examine ventilation, cooking, and conditioning loads against actual service periods, but the report’s schedule should not be treated as the operating schedule of every restaurant.
The report also cites ASHRAE Standard 154-2016 exhaust categories. Light-duty exhaust requires less than 200 CFM per linear foot of hood for capture and containment. Medium-duty exhaust requires 200 to 300 CFM per linear foot, heavy-duty exhaust requires 300 to 400 CFM per linear foot, and extra-heavy-duty exhaust requires more than 400 CFM per linear foot.
Finally, the report’s cited ASHRAE Research Project 1202 reference says listed commercial hoods are often 30% more efficient than comparable unlisted hoods. That figure is a cited research finding summarized in the 2019 DOE/PNNL report, not an independent measurement of every hood in operation. Together, the ventilation benchmarks show why hood classification, capture requirements, and equipment schedules belong in an energy review alongside appliance nameplate ratings.