Why are most GCHP systems going into institutional projects?

I asked a question at the IGSHPA Conference a couple of years ago in a  room full of people who make their living in the GCHP industry...engineers, mechanical contractors, GHX contractors, etc. The question was "What percentage of the commercial projects you work on are institutional (schools, prisons, government offices, hospitals, etc.) versus work for private developers?" The overwhelming reply was about...

70% to 80% institutional and only about 20% to 30% was for private developers. 

So why isn't the industry doing more work for private developers? I think there are a couple of reasons:

• Many projects built by private developers are leased space in which the tenant pays the utility bills...not the builder. There is little or no motivation for the developer to build something more efficient. It simply doesn't matter to them. Of greater concern is lower construction cost.
• Governments know they will be owning and operating most of their buildings for a long time. Schools are typically built for a 50-75 year life, and some of the more progressive school boards realize that energy costs will be a large part of their ongoing costs. Several U.S. Military bases have converted their homes to geothermal. They have a longer time to recoup a return on their investment than private building owners do. 

I don't know the percentages, but suspect there are many more privately owned buildings...stores, factories, apartment buildings, office buildings, etc. being built than there are institutional buildings. Over the next few days I'll be talking about how the industry might start installing more GCHP systems for private owners and developers.