Energy Smart Industrial (ESI): Energy Management Offering - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


PPT – Energy Smart Industrial (ESI): Energy Management Offering PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 45afbe-ZTY5Y


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation

Energy Smart Industrial (ESI): Energy Management Offering


0.01 $27,190.00. $27,628.00. $27,628.00. 0.02 $42,520.00. $46,024.00. $46,024.00. $46,024.00. $46,024.00. 0.02 $29,380.00. $30,256.00. $30,256.00. 0.03 $51,280.00. $ ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:76
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 47
Provided by: ljc88
Learn more at:


Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Energy Smart Industrial (ESI): Energy Management Offering

Energy Smart Industrial (ESI) Energy Management
  • RTF
  • August 4 2009
  • BPA, Cascade Energy, Strategic Energy Group

Todays Agenda
  • Energy Management and The 6th Power Plan
  • Overview of Energy Management Offering
  • Including Case Studies
  • Monitoring Targeting Reporting Overview
  • Key Challenges
  • Evaluation Plan and Timeline for Results
  • Next Steps

6th Plan Industrial Overview 5 Year
  • Regional Target
  • 224 aMW
  • BPA Share of 5 Year Target
  • 94 aMW
  • 19 of BPAs
  • total 5 year target

Energy Management
  • 5 Year Target
  • 20 aMW

Energy Management in 6th Plan
Energy Smart Industrial Overview
  • Contract with Program Partners
  • Cascade Energy Engineering
  • Strategic Energy Group
  • Evergreen Consulting
  • Broad program encompassing
  • Field outreach to identify and drive conventional
  • Energy Smart Industrial Partners (ESIPs)
  • Lighting, small industrial, future
    industry-specific offerings.
  • Energy Management
  • One of the biggest new program offerings
  • Two year contract beginning October 1st 2009.
  • 1st year savings goal 12 aMW
  • 2nd year savings goal 15 aMW

ESI Energy Management
  • Each project will be treated as custom
  • Each reviewed and approved by BPA Field Engineers
  • MV protocols derived from the International
    Performance Measurement Verification Protocol
  • Three Program Offers End User can choose any or
  • 1. Energy Project Manager (EPM) Funding
  • This is not an energy efficiency measure, but is
    a catalyst.
  • It is a funding mechanism tied to goals set by
    the End User (cents per kWh of annual savings
    goal subject to minimum and maximum funding
  • 2. Track and Tune (TT)
  • OM Program Offering. This will be a custom EE
  • 3. High Performance Energy Management (HPEM)
  • EM Coaching (One-on-One or Peer Group) to help
    End Users adopt core EM principles. This will be
    a custom EE measure

  • Track Tune Overview

Track Tune
  • What is being offered?
  • Site or sub-system tune-up (aka
  • Normalized efficiency tracking system
  • What is the primary goal?
  • Improve plant energy performance through OM
  • An attractive business opportunity for the End
  • Documentable, low-cost savings for the program
  • Minimum Size Requirements?
  • Sub-System gt 1,000,000 kWh/yr
  • Plant-Wide gt 4,000,000 kWh/yr
  • Funding of services?
  • Tune-up and initial tracking tool funded by BPA
  • Measure funding?
  • CRC/CAA towards the cost of implemented action
  • Repeat payments?
  • Incentives paid annually for documented savings
    seen through ongoing tracking tool

Track Tune MottoDo the little stuff well
  • Industrial Refrigeration
  • Temperature and pressure set-points, algorithms,
    sequencing order, coil cleaning, valve adjustment
    and repair, eliminate non-condensables, etc.
  • Compressed Air
  • Fix leaks, compressor sequencing, operate in
    optimal part-load mode, avoid wasteful end uses,
    shutoff loads when not in use, etc.
  • Hypothesis
  • Many systems of moderate complexity will have a
    similar list.

Track and Tune Steps
  • Step 1 Identify a Plant, Process, or Subsystem
    with potential
  • Step 2 Install a measurement system
    (instrumentation and software) that all parties
    use as a tool to gauge energy use and progress
    funding provided by ESI program
  • Step 3 Identify a specific set of actions to
    improve performance and maintain savings over
    time funding for technical services provided
  • Step 4 Make the changes co-funding for the
    package of upgrades
  • Step 5 Ongoing tracking of performance for 5
    years. Plan to provide incentive in succession
    of five 1-yr measures.

Track Tune MV Methods UseIPMVP Fundamentals
  • International Performance Measurement and
    Verification Protocol
  • Track Tune MV methods strive to meet the
    requirements, methods, and spirit of the IPMVP
  • Options A, B, and C
  • Use Option A (Retrofit Isolation w/ Key Parameter
  • Use Option B (Retrofit Isolation w/ All Parameter
  • Use Option C (Whole Facility Measurement)

MV Conventional Custom Projects versus Track
  • Conclusions
  • Track Tune savings and methodology are robust
    due to extended MV process.
  • Track Tune methods make OM measures a very firm
    EE resource.

Track Tune Case Studies
Case Study 1 Sysco Corporation
  • 110 Refrigerated Warehouses
  • Facility Tune-Ups
  • Energy Management
  • Some Capital Upgrades
  • Some Efficient New Construction
  • Document savings by tracking kWh/day/weighted
  • Continuing to pursue greater energy savings

SYSCO Identified Savings from Tune-ups
  • Savings never lower than 7 (across 105
  • 12.6 average savings identified.
  • Identified savings are conservative
  • Sites are shown how to find savings on their own.
  • Sites saved significantly more than was

SYSCO Realized Savings(YoY, FY08 versus FY06)
Track Tune Case Study 2 Dairy
  • First Year Savings
  • 2,600,000 kWh
  • 175,000
  • 15
  • Upgrade Cost
  • 70,000
  • Changes made
  • Refrigeration, pumping, chilled water, glycol,
    cooling tower, process, HVAC and lighting
  • Savings Calculated
  • Normalized Energy Use
  • kWh/gallon versus 12-month baseline

Kaizen Blitz June 2008
Dairy Production Normalization
  • Two ways of showing kWh per gallon of milk
  • kWh/gallon versus Month ?
  • removes seasonal influence
  • kWh versus Gallons of Production
  • Clearly demonstrates before and after performance
  • Demonstrates continued Year 2 performance

Kaizen Blitz June 2008
  • High Performance Energy Management (HPEM)

High Performance Energy Management (HPEM)
  • Coaching through a continuous improvement process
    (similar to ISO, Lean, etc)
  • Includes organizational and technical aspects
  • Builds on Energy Project Manager and Track Tune
  • Savings come from
  • More projects that we are already measuring
    (Conventional Custom Projects Track Tune)
  • OM and Behavioral changes that are measured
    through Monitoring Tracking Reporting analysis
    (similar to whole facility Option C in IPMVP).
    Annual savings quantified and incented for this
    category of savings. Plan to provide cents/kWh
    incentive in succession of five 1-year measure

Assisting customers through the High Performance
Energy Management process
Assess Compelling business case? Commit
Establish Sponsor, Champion, Team, Identify
Where, how energy is used set baseline Plan
Vision through action plan is communicated Take
Action Implement and track progress Review
Report and Recognize
High Performance Energy Management is similar in
concept to
BC Hydro
EPA Energy Star
Delivery of HPEM
  • One-on-one coaching
  • Structured Network Group
  • 10 12 industry focus, or non-competitive
  • Monthly facilitated meetings (or webinars)
  • Peer group learning, sharing, and support
  • Individual support as well
  • Management assessment
  • Attend energy team meetings
  • Connection to technical services
  • Monitoring, Targeting, and Reporting

Monitoring Targeting Reporting Relevance toESI
Energy Management
  • Same Model Serves Dual Purposes
  • For the Participating Site
  • Recognize and Seize Opportunities
  • Recognize and Address Backslipping
  • Quantification of Savings Achieved
  • For the Track Tune and High Performance Energy
    Management Measures within the ESI Program
  • Quantification of Savings Achieved
  • Similar Methodology to IPMVP Option C Whole
    Facility Assessment

What is MTR?
Monitoring collecting data and analyzing against
a performance model Targeting setting
performance targets Reporting communicating the
information to improve performance, and
communicating the results. You cant manage
what you dont measure
What does MTR do?
  • Monitors energy consumption over time
  • Relates energy consumption to drivers
  • Helps set targets to track and manage
  • Compares consumption to targets
  • Identifies changes and variances
  • Calculates energy savings

The process of MTR
  • Define the scope
  • Collect data
  • Establish the performance model
  • Create a baseline
  • Establish targets
  • Track performance - CUSUM analysis
  • Quantify energy savings

Metrics Analysis at Multiple Levels
10,000 foot view 6 Plants Combined Long
Term/Trend Data
1,500 foot view Individual Plants Long
Term/Trend Data
Floor view Individual Projects Short Term
Process B
MTR Reporting
MTR Performance Targets
Important Considerations for Track Tune and
HPEM Savings
  • Count savings only once!
  • Re-Baselining
  • Measurement
  • Identifying and getting the right production
  • Balancing or optimizing collection of
    sub-meter data
  • Cost versus accuracy
  • Changes in key drivers (plant, equipment, feed
    stock, etc.)
  • Monitoring equipment calibration error
  • Identifying and addressing outlier data
  • Investigation bias
  • Equitable investigation to both increases or
    decreases in facility energy use
  • Savings and Opportunity Register should be in

Avoid Double-Counting of Savings
  • Periodic survey of facility processes
  • Determine if major changes were made that impact
    energy use
  • Determining a transition
  • Will change that has occurred be captured through
    existing normalization method?
  • If no, then major change forces a re-baselining.
  • Capturing savings pre and post-transition
  • Quantify savings going into the transition and
  • Assess whether these savings are maintained after
    the transition
  • Re-establish new baseline after transition
  • Add savings achieved after the transition

Program Evaluation Plan
  • Early Evaluation (Cadmus Group)
  • Will kick-off this month
  • Evaluators will be reviewing program documents,
    data collection, recommending real-time
    adjustments to improve program effectiveness and
  • Will develop long-term evaluation approach (late
    2009 or early 2010)
  • Long-term Evaluation (TBD)
  • Expect to evaluate Energy Management measures
    will use EM Data Collection tool developed by
    Cascade (data starts collection Oct 1st 2009)

Next Steps
  • Questions, input and feedback
  • Due to BPA by August 18th
  • Contact
  • Todd Admundson,
  • Danielle Gidding,
  • BPA, Cascade, SEG and Evergreen will review and
    provide unified response to input and feedback
  • October 1st Implementation

More information on IPMVP Concepts relevant to
TT and HPEM Savings
Key Concepts from International Performance
Measurement Verification Protocol (IPMVP
  • Methods of Savings Quantification
  • Retrofit Isolation (Option A or B) relevant to
    subsystem TT
  • Option C, Whole Facility or Sub-Facility Level
    relevant to facility wide TT and to HPEM
  • Adjustments Account for Changes in Static
    Factors (non-routine) Changes for Independent
    Variables (routine).
  • Boundary of Measurement whole facility or
  • Duration of the Baseline and Reporting Periods.
  • Savings Analysis Using Statistical Tools.

Key Concepts (cont.)
  • Long Reporting Period (aka post-installation
    monitoring) equates to higher confidence in
  • Non-routine Adjustments to Savings
  • IPMVP specifically mentions
  • facility size
  • design and operation of installed equipment
  • the number of weekly production shifts would
    tend to be reflected in regression
  • types of occupants usually not an issue for
    industrial projects
  • To which we would add the following when they
    affect the energy use within the Measurement
  • Electrical energy use impacts of fuel switching
    or CHP
  • Processes contracted out or brought inside
  • Capital EE projects. Key concept no double
    counting of savings.

IPMVP Measurement Boundary
  • EPM Funding

Background for EPM
  • Situation Large industrial customers are short
    on staff to spearhead and manage efficiency
  • Target Increase industrial end user staffing and
    expertise devoted to electrical energy efficiency
  • Proposal Direct co-funding of industrial end
    user staffing to deliver custom projects. Link
    delivery of savings to continued funding.

Details of Energy Project Manager (EPM)
  • EPM is not a measure!
  • EPM will serve as ESI program point of contact at
    industrial end user facility
  • EPM is employee of end user
  • ESI program funds some or all of EPM salary
  • EPM is a specific person, not a pool of labor
  • End user determines
  • The individual filling the EPM position
  • EPM compensation level
  • Existing or new employee
  • One EPM may be shared between multiple sites
  • An EPM is also enrolled in HPEM
  • An EPM can act as Resource Conservation Manager
    (RCM), Project Manager, or Energy Efficiency
    Engineer as needed

EPM Goals Funding Mechanism
  • ESIP works with end user to set annual savings
    goal for EPM
  • This process repeated annually
  • EPM funding directly tied to magnitude of goal
  • Minimum annual funding per participating site
  • Maximum annual funding per participating site
  • Minimum of 1,000,000 kWh savings target each year
  • Annual EPM funding expected at 0.025 per kWh
    of target
  • Year 2 and beyond funding is only offered to end
    users that have achieved their previous years
  • Mechanism for under performance