Biden administration bizarrely spins empty office epidemic as a way to SAVE energy...but taxpayers footing a $5 billion per year bill aren't fooled

The Biden administration is being ridiculed for hypocrisy as it touts 'energy savings' at federal buildings that are nearly empty of workers - and wasting billions of taxpayer dollars. 

Energy Sec. Jennifer Granholm recently celebrated the Biden administration's efforts to reach net-zero emissions from federal buildings by establishing a rule outlawing the use of fossil fuels on-site. 

'The Biden-Harris Administration is practicing what we preach,' Granholm said in a statement about the rule. 'Just as we are helping households and businesses across the nation save money by saving energy, we are doing the same in our own federal buildings.'

But Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, is calling out Granholm for not sharing the whole truth.

She says that federal buildings are still hemorrhaging energy and cash as many government employees continue working from home while the lights remain on.

'If the administration is serious about practicing what it preaches on energy conservation, instead of spending more money, you could instead stop paying to heat, cool, light, and operate the ghost town of vacant buildings all around Washington, D.C.,' Ernst wrote in a Monday letter to Granholm exclusively obtained by DailyMail.com. 

Ernst argued in her letter that the new rule would cost taxpayers money to refit federal buildings reliant on fossil-fuel energy sources while hardly any government employees actually work from those locations.

'This sounds more like another excuse to spend taxpayer dollars on a Green New Deal jobs program, since the Biden administration is wasting money and energy operating empty office buildings all over Washington, D.C. as bureaucrats continue working from home,' she wrote.

The Iowan has long been advocating for federal workers to return to in-office work after it was revealed in December that all government agency offices have not been over 50 percent capacity in months. 

In fact, many agencies like Housing and Urban Development, the Social Security Administration and the Small Business Administration all had 10 percent utilization or less.

Federal agencies spend about $2 billion annually to operate and maintain federal office buildings and over $5 billion yearly in leases. 

'Not a single department or agency is currently utilizing even half of the available office space in their headquarters buildings, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO),' Ernst wrote, adding, 'Your department is using only 25 percent of its building.'

She also notes how the Public Building Reform Board (PBRB) - an independent federal agency established to reduce government property inventory and therefore costs - found that just eight people per day go into the Department of Energy's D.C. headquarters. 

'Recognizing this number appears flawed, the [PBRB] contacted the department for clarification,' Ernst wrote to Granholm. 'They are still awaiting a response from DOE—perhaps because nobody is home!'

The letter also mentions another analysis from PBRB that found occupancy in Washington, D.C., government buildings is at 26 percent capacity or less. 

According to the letter, the PBRB claims the 'amount of money being spent per person per year' to maintain these federal office buildings 'is at absurdly high levels.'

'The per person carbon emissions from heating and cooling nearly empty buildings, not to mention energy costs, are indefensible,' an PBRB analysis concluded. 

Ernst requested that Granholm send PBRB updated data on how many Department of Energy employees are arriving at the office each day. 

'Camouflaging new government spending in green doesn’t save money or energy,' Ernst wrote.

'You can go green without going in the red by reducing the size of unused and unnecessary government buildings.'

'Now that’s the real green new deal for taxpayers,' she added.