U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

Advanced Manufacturing Office

Summer 2009


Issue Focus: Working Toward Superior Energy Performance in Industry

Energy Matters was a quarterly newsletter for DOE's Advanced Manufacturing Program (AMO). It provided in-depth technical articles to help industry professionals save energy, reduce costs, and increase productivity. These archived issues may contain broken links or information that is no longer accessible. Some of the following documents are available as Adobe Acrobat PDFs.

This issue of Energy Matters focuses on the Superior Energy Performance initiative that provides a roadmap for achieving continuous improvement in industrial energy efficiency. Learn about energy management and system assessment standards in development to support this initiative. Read about the experiences of five manufacturing facilities in Texas who are testing the elements of the program. Another article describes a new international motor efficiency standard that will help to promote energy-efficient motor systems worldwide. Finally, find out how a leading enterprise software company is saving $262,000 in annual energy costs.

In This Issue

Fostering Superior Energy Performance in U.S. Industry

Armed with a robust framework of standards for energy management and system assessments, and a measurement and verification protocol, developers of the Superior Energy Performance initiative are creating a voluntary plant-level energy efficiency certification program for U.S. industry.

The U.S. Council for Energy‐Efficient Manufacturing guides the development of Superior Energy Performance. The partnership is a cooperative effort that brings together the respective strengths of industry, standards-making bodies, several federal agencies, national laboratories, universities, and technical experts to initiate the program. Members include:

The Superior Energy Performance plant certification program, currently being tested through a pilot project in Texas, will provide U.S. manufacturing facilities with a roadmap for achieving greater energy efficiency while maintaining competitiveness. Initiated in 2007, this standardized approach to identifying, developing, measuring, and reporting on energy efficiency improvements will contribute toward reducing the energy intensity of U.S. manufacturing plants by 25% in 10 years.

Laying the Groundwork for National Industrial Energy Efficiency

Superior Energy Performance is a voluntary, industry-designed certification program that will provide companies with a coordinated package of energy management and system assessment standards with which to better manage their energy use and improve their energy performance. The program also offers companies a method for measuring and validating energy efficiency improvements in their facilities. Current plans are for the first plants to be certified in 2010 and the national voluntary program to be launched in 2011.

To find out how the Superior Energy Performance program works in a real plant environment, five manufacturing companies are testing the program within their facilities in Texas. To learn about the companies' experiences and lessons they learned in the pilot project, read the related Energy Matters article.

The U.S. Council for Energy-Efficient Manufacturing—a cooperative committee of energy management and technical experts from industry, federal agencies, universities, and national laboratories—is leading the development of the Superior Energy Performance initiative. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) is providing guidance on standards development and the certification process.

A Comprehensive Efficiency Package

The original idea for a plant energy efficiency certification program came from energy managers at several industrial plants in Texas. They wanted to achieve energy savings, identify a more effective way to manage energy performance, and foster a culture of energy efficiency at their plants, similar to the success they had experienced in their safety programs. At the same time, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) was seeing sizeable energy savings materialize through its Save Energy Now program. The Superior Energy Performance program was born from this recognition that a more comprehensive and disciplined approach was needed to maximize industrial energy performance.

Benefits of a Plant Certification Program

How can the Superior Energy Performance plant certification program benefit your company? By using the program's systematic approach, you can more effectively manage your overall energy use, implement best practices for lowering demand, and improve efficiency. The program provides:

  • A framework to reduce energy use by following ANSI Management System for Energy (MSE) 2000-2008 and eventually International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 50001 energy management, and American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) system assessment standards
  • Measurement and verification (M&V) tools and resources that help to validate energy savings
  • A flexible program that recognizes that plants will have varying levels of energy program maturity as well as need for outside verification of savings
  • A method for communicating to stakeholders about energy management progress
  • National recognition of a company's leadership in energy management
  • Increased opportunities for utility and state financial incentives for energy efficiency as a result of using recognized industrial system assessment and M&V practices.

A plant certification program can also benefit utility and energy service companies by encouraging a plant-wide systems approach to energy efficiency and helping to justify industrial efficiency program investments.

Building Blocks for Energy-Efficient Companies

Improving industrial energy efficiency by using energy management best practices and system assessments can strengthen our nation's economy, reduce emissions, and ensure greater energy independence. The elements of the Superior Energy Performance program are designed to help you more effectively manage energy use, identify and implement energy efficiency opportunities, and measure resulting energy savings.

The Plant Certification Framework

This diagram shows the structure and components of the proposed Superior Energy Performance program framework. The top box is labelled "Standards & Protocols," and contains three boxes side-by-side: the box on the left is labeled "Energy Management Standard," which includes logos for the American National Standards Institute and International Organization for Standardization (ISO); the box in the middle is labeled "System Assessment Standards (optional)," which includes logos for ISO and American Society of Mechanical Engineers; and the last box on the right is labeled "Measurement & Verification Protocol." Below this box are two boxes. The one on the left is labeled "Certifying Organizations for Professionals (TBD)", and lists three components: Energy Management Practitioners; System Assessment Practitioners; and Certified Program Validators. The box to the right of this is labeled "Superior Energy Performance Administrator (TBD)" and lists one component labeled "ANSI-accredited Certifying Bodies (TBD)."

Energy Management Standard: By integrating an energy management system into your corporate plan, you can improve efficiency, reduce costs, and increase productivity. What's more, corporate level energy management can provide you with a competitive advantage in the global marketplace, enhance your corporate identity, and improve environmental performance.

The energy management standard offered by Superior Energy Performance provides a framework for plants to manage energy, including all aspects of procurement and use, and integrate energy efficiency into existing industrial management systems. Companies must conform to the ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 standard, which will transition to ISO 50001 once the international standard is launched. ISO 50001 will establish an international framework for sites or entire companies to manage energy, and will be compatible with the widely used ISO 9001 quality and ISO 14001 environmental management standards. Read the Ask An Energy Expert column in this issue for details about ISO 50001.

System Assessment Standards: Evaluations of industrial energy systems can help you uncover important opportunities to reduce energy use and improve reliability of energy systems. Evaluating your plant's energy efficiency opportunities is part of your energy management system.

The system assessment standards developed in conjunction with the Superior Energy Performance program provide guidance in conducting energy efficiency assessments for four types of energy systems: compressed air, process heating, pumps, and steam. The standards, which are being developed through ASME, will establish the requirements for conducting assessments at industrial plants, analyzing data, and reporting results. The program does not require that a plant use these standards when identifying energy-saving opportunities. However, having assessment standards in place allows plant personnel to specify that energy system assessments be conducted using the applicable standard.

Measurement and Verification Protocol: In line with the adage, "You are not managing what you don't measure," a M&V process helps you to develop a baseline for energy use and quantify energy-saving projects.

The M&V best practice methodology under development by Superior Energy Performance helps to verify the results and impact of energy efficiency projects, measure the energy efficiency of a facility, and track how energy intensity changes over time for the overall plant or because of a specific measure or project.

Certified Practitioners: Certified Practitioners are industry professionals who will be trained to help companies properly apply the energy management and system assessment standards, and assist applicants in assessing efficiency opportunities in energy systems and conforming to the requirements of the ISO 50001 energy management system. Candidates will undergo a rigorous qualification exam and will be required to take periodic refresher courses.

End-User Awareness Training: Training modules will be offered to partners to create awareness of the overall program requirements, ISO 50001, system assessment standards, and the M&V protocol.

Qualifying for Superior Energy Performance

To encourage participation across the entire U.S. industrial sector, Superior Energy Performance offers three levels of involvement, depending on the degree of data validation desired by a plant. You can choose to become a Participant, Partner, or Certified Partner.

Superior Energy Performance Tiers and Requirements

This diagram shows three boxes increasing in height from left to right. The first box on the left is labeled "Participant" and shows one star after this heading. Beneath this heading is the following text: Criteria, which includes two bullets. The first bullet reads "Conformance with energy management standards." The second bullet reads "Measure and audit energy performance improvement." Beneath this is another heading that reads "Performance Levels," which includes a bullet that reads "Energy intensity improvement required." Beneath this is a third heading that reads "Method of Verifying Results," with one bullet that reads "Self-declaration." The box to the right of this one is taller and is labeled "Partner" and shows two stars after this heading. Beneath this heading is the following text: Criteria, which includes two bullets. The first bullet reads "Conformance with energy management standards." The second bullet reads "Measure and audit energy performance improvement." Beneath this is another heading that reads "Performance Levels," which includes a bullet that reads "Energy intensity improvement required, minimum requirements set by program." Another bullet reads "Two pathways available: Energy Intensity or Mature Energy." Beneath this is another heading that reads "Method of Verifying Results," which includes a bullet that reads "Third-part verification via remote review." The last box on the right is taller than the previous and labeled "Certified Partner," with three stars following this label. The first heading in this box is labeled "Criteria" and lists two bullets. The first bullet reads "Conformance with energy management standards." The second bullet reads "Measure and audit energy performance improvement." Beneath this is another heading that reads "Performance Levels," which includes a bullet that reads "Energy intensity improvement required, minimum requirements set by program." Another bullet reads "Two pathways available: Energy Intensity or Mature Energy." Beneath this is another heading that reads "Method of Verifying Results," which includes a bullet that reads "ANSI-accredited certification with onsite visit."

To qualify for the program, plants must conform to the ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 (until development of ISO 50001) energy management standard and meet the program's energy intensity targets.

To encourage plants to greatly reduce their energy intensity, the program offers silver, gold, and platinum designations based on higher performance levels at the Partner and Certified Partner levels.

Plants will need to re-certify every 3 years, based on their energy intensity performance and management system conformance.

What's Next?

The U.S. Council for Energy-Efficient Manufacturing continues to guide the development of the Superior Energy Performance program. Here is a list of upcoming activities:

  • Testing M&V protocol in pilot plants
  • Selecting Program Administrator to manage operations
  • Identifying qualified certifying organizations
  • Identifying ANSI-accredited certification bodies to provide oversight and certification for each type of Certified Practitioner
  • Training Certified Practitioners in energy management and system assessment standards.

It is expected that the first plants will be certified in 2010 and the national voluntary program will be launched in 2011.

Learn more about Superior Energy Performance, and watch for program updates on the DOE Industrial Technologies Program Web site.

The Texas Pilot Project Tests for Success

This photo shows an industrial chilled water system, which appears as several vertical pipes, motors, and valves.

Freescale Semiconductor staff used the pumping system assessment standard to evaluate the energy efficiency of the chilled water system at the company's Oak Hill plant.

There is no substitute for experience. With that in mind, five manufacturing plants in Texas volunteered to test the elements of the proposed Superior Energy Performance program to help pave the way for its success across the nation. This article chronicles the progress of the pilot project and describes individual plant experiences, lessons learned, and next steps.

The Superior Energy Performance voluntary plant certification program seeks to improve U.S. industrial energy efficiency by making energy management an essential part of a company's standard operating procedure. To help companies focus on energy efficiency goals, the program offers a framework of energy management system implementation and documented energy intensity improvements. Other tools being tested to support this framework include four energy system assessment standards and a measurement and verification (M&V) protocol.

Testing the elements of the program in operating manufacturing plants provides invaluable experience to gauge how effective this program will be for other plants. And so, the Texas pilot project was launched in 2008 to assess the practical application of Superior Energy Performance, a program that could have Texas-sized energy-saving potential for the nation.

Texas Industries of the Future is coordinating the pilot plant project, with support from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Industrial Technologies Program and the Texas State Energy Conservation Office. The Georgia Institute of Technology conducted training on implementation of the energy management standard while Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Oak Ridge National Laboratory assisted with development of the M&V protocol and system assessment standards. The U.S. Council for Energy-Efficient Manufacturing, an industry-led initiative, provides oversight and guidance of the program.

Testing for Real-World Results

The goal of the pilot project is to verify that the processes, standards, and performance criteria of the Superior Energy Performance program are practical and achievable, benefit the participating plants, and reliably identify plants that meet the proposed certification criteria.

Testing the criteria with plants of various sizes and energy management experience ensures that the program offers value and flexibility to a variety of companies. The test plants represent a variety of industries—food processing, insulation, semiconductors, and chemicals—and characterize small, medium, and large industrial plants ranging in sizes from 50 to 2,700 employees. They include:

Kathey Ferland, Project Lead for Texas Industries of the Future, knows the importance of the pilot project in testing the processes and standards of the Superior Energy Performance program.

"Launching a program like this requires resources from both the public and private sector. We needed a real-world test of the value and resources necessary to apply the energy management and system assessment standards and evaluate the plants' energy performance and program criteria," explains Ferland. "The pilot plant project is providing good data on the costs and benefits of the program, as well as honest feedback from participants about what works or needs revision."

The pilot program will continue until spring 2010 to maximize the value from the testing. These plants could become the first in the nation to become certified in energy efficiency.

Diverse Plants Working Toward a Common Cause

To provide a thorough test of the program elements, developers selected plants from a variety of industry types, sizes, and levels of energy management experience. The criteria for plant selection included:

  • Company management committed to energy efficiency and implementing an energy management system
  • At least two energy systems (compressed air, process heating, pumps, or steam) to evaluate for energy-saving opportunities
  • A metering system in place to provide an energy-use baseline by which to measure savings.

In general, each of the selected plants uses a significant amount of energy. Four of five plants have International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001 and/or ISO 14001 management systems in place, and some plants have created internal systems incorporating health, safety, and environmental requirements. All but one of the plants has been implementing energy efficiency projects and planning for many years. Two of the facilities' parent companies have been recognized as EPA ENERGY STAR® Partners of the Year.

Based on unique organizational structures, philosophies, and management system expertise, each plant has developed its own distinct implementation strategy, which provides an invaluable contribution to the development of the Superior Energy Performance program.

Cook Composite & Polymers logo

Cook Composites and Polymers Co. (CCP): CCP, a synthetic resin manufacturing plant in Houston, began participating in the Texas pilot plant project in 2008 with high expectations. The plant's energy costs had increased dramatically since 1998, amounting to 20% of the plant's operating budget by 2008. Company management was very convinced of the value of taking a management system approach to energy because of the improvements they had seen in their safety record and property losses after management system implementation in those areas. DOE Energy Experts tested the proposed system assessment standards for steam and process heating systems, and identified opportunities that could save 30% of those systems' natural gas use.

CCP already had a robust, integrated health, safety, quality, and environmental management system in place, and is in the process of incorporating the energy management components into this existing structure. The CCP pilot project team is working to implement a management system for energy throughout the company.

"The initial CCP energy management team consists of a small, cross-functional group of employees working remotely from four different sites (Virginia, Missouri, Michigan, and Houston) with the common goal of achieving MSE certification first at the Houston location. CCP considers the ANSI/MSE standard to be an essential energy management component to its existing integrated management system in order to achieve additional economic, environmental, and societal benefits. Participation in the Texas Pilot Program has enabled us to gain valuable experience by sharing information and ideas with other companies who have managed energy for varying lengths of time and on a much larger scale."

Deborah Magoon, Director, Integrated Management Systems
Freestyle Semiconductor logo

Freescale Semiconductor, Inc.: Freescale is a global leader in the design and manufacture of embedded semiconductors for the automotive, consumer, industrial, and networking markets. The company's Oak Hill plant consumes 210 million kWh of electricity and 0.22 trillion Btu of natural gas annually.

The Freescale pilot project is a good example of how a company can leverage plant-level activities into a corporate-wide energy management program. When Freescale began the pilot program, the company already had ISO 9001 and 14001 certification in place; they elected to add their energy management system to the existing environmental management system. Furthermore, Freescale is implementing the energy management program at a sister facility also located in Austin.

As a result of applying the assessment standards to the compressed air and pumping systems, the DOE Energy Experts worked with plant staff to identify energy-saving opportunities of 0.4 million kWh and 1.1 million kWh, respectively, and found ways to enhance reliability of the compressed air system. M&V of energy performance will be conducted in early 2010.

"The pilot program provided an opportunity to integrate our energy conservation efforts into a comprehensive energy management system. It led us to review the plant operating procedures, which we modified to emphasize energy efficiency. We have developed key performance indicators and control charts at the system level to understand how various factors impact our energy use. These tools are now used to drive continuous improvement in energy efficiency by evaluating the effectiveness of energy conservation projects and monitoring to ensure that improvements are sustainable."

Mark Krawczyk, Plant Services Engineer
Frito Lay logo

Frito-Lay: Frito-Lay's mission to make the best snacks on earth while protecting the planet includes using energy-efficient practices in its manufacturing plants and setting long-term corporate energy-reduction goals. The Frito-Lay plant in San Antonio produces more than 50 million pounds of snack food annually, and employs approximately 250 workers.

During the field test, Frito-Lay implemented the requirements of ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 into its existing management program, and plans to share best practices identified in the test project with other Frito-Lay plants. Plant managers volunteered the site for compressed air and process heating system assessments, which identified energy-saving opportunities of 51% and 5% respectively. Energy intensity improvements will be measured and verified in early 2010.

"The Texas Pilot Program has provided an avenue to verify the benefits and opportunities of our current energy management system. Having a third party assess our plant enabled us to identify areas of possible improvement to our current system and provided ideas for implementation of new technology that may be a potential fit with our system. The pilot program also allowed us to share energy management systems best practices with other industry partners."

Matt Taylor, Project Engineer
Owens Corning logo

Owens Corning: Although Owens Corning insulation products are designed to save energy, manufacturing them is an energy-intensive process. The Owens Corning plant in Waxahachie has three manufacturing lines to produce building and loosefill insulation, which costs the company approximately $20 million in annual energy use.

Owens Corning has a very proactive energy management program and is incorporating the requirements of ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 into their existing Operations Management System at the Waxahachie plant. The company plans to roll out the program to other facilities within the division and eventually throughout the company. Managers at the Waxahachie plant developed a list of energy efficiency opportunities to meet corporate goals of reducing energy use 25% over a 10-year period. The site participated in testing the compressed air and process heating system assessment standards, trained staff engineers in the process and confirmed the opportunities previously identified. The plant will kick off the M&V phase of the pilot project in fall 2009.

"The Texas Pilot Program has connected us with other manufacturers and allowed us to compare energy management best practices. Our involvement with this program has caused us to formalize or create procedures that will help us sustain our energy management results. An important part of this program helps us develop an energy management system that becomes part of our standard work, instead of relying on one or two key people who drive energy awareness. We have chosen to tie this into our existing Operations Management System. In our case, this becomes part of our ISO processes."

Glenn Haley, Plant Leader
Dow logo

Union Carbide Corporation: A subsidiary of Dow Chemical Company, the Union Carbide Texas City manufacturing operations consist of 10 production plants that produce approximately 2.5 billion pounds of alcohols, carboxylic acids, esters, aldehydes, vinyl acetate, and vinyl resins each year. Production of these chemicals demands approximately 7,250,000 MMBtu per year of steam, fuel, and electricity.

The company boasts a strong energy efficiency and management program, and actively participates in DOE's Save Energy Now initiative and the EPA ENERGY STAR for Industry program. Dow welcomed this pilot program opportunity as another vehicle by which to improve the energy efficiency of its operations. In testing the proposed steam system assessment standard, the company identified opportunities to recover heat from condensate and potentially purchase steam at a higher temperature, in addition to validating the current energy efficiency project list. In all, more than $6 million in energy cost-saving opportunities have been identified.

"Dow has a strong energy efficiency improvement program that is driven from the CEO down through each business and subsidiary. The program has been very effective at driving improvements as measured by Dow Sustainability commitments. The challenge has been to drive the program down to the individual operating units. We believe that full implementation of the energy management standard will enhance our results in this regard. The management standard dovetails into the existing corporate and business energy improvement program and fits comfortably with the existing management systems in the operating units. The result has been enhanced operating discipline for energy efficiency without creating a great deal of additional work."

Dave Hake, Site Integration Leader

What Works?

As a result of this pilot project, six key activities have been identified that contribute to a timely, successful implementation of the Superior Energy Performance program:

  1. Leverage existing environmental or quality management systems and staff.
  2. Cross-train your energy and management system staff.
  3. Create cross-functional teams.
  4. Establish management commitment upfront and keep communicating to management on project status.
  5. Hold regular team meetings during the implementation phase.
  6. Take a structured look at data using statistical methods to realize immediate benefits.

In spite of several challenges during the pilot program—complexity of coordinating efforts between team members in different locations, time and resource constraints, unplanned weather events (Hurricane Ike), and the effects of the economic downturn on production, resources, and capital—the Texas pilot program is proving successful in helping to refine the program for manufacturers.

Next Steps

The Texas pilot project will continue through spring 2010 during which time the plants will continue to implement energy efficiency projects, put the management system in place, and participate in monitoring and verification of energy intensity progress. As a result of the pilot project, the initial Superior Energy Performance program criteria have been revised for greater flexibility and usability for all industry participants.

Learn more about Superior Energy Performance, and watch for updates on the Texas pilot plant project.

Lessons from the Texas Pilot Project: Interview with Glenn Haley of Owens Corning

This photo shows three men seated at a conference table. They are both looking to the left of the photo and the man in the center is pointing toward something to the left outside of the frame. The man on the right has a lap top computer open in front of him on the table.

The Owens Corning Waxahachie plant Energy Team members, James Otto (left) and Gary Chastain (right), discuss energy trends on a regular basis with Glenn Haley, Plant Leader (center).

As Owens Corning tests the elements of the Superior Energy Performance framework in its Waxahachie, Texas, manufacturing plant, the company is finding that the program complements its existing plant Operations Management System and supports long-term energy reduction goals. In this interview, Glenn Haley, Plant Leader, fields questions about his facility's experience in testing the program, and shares lessons learned in the process of developing a sustainable energy management program at Owens Corning.

Tell us about your plant's energy management program.

First of all, we have incorporated the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) MSE 2000-2008 energy management standard into our Operations Management System (OMS). We are already an International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001 plant and we chose to build our OMS as part of that process because it is effective in other areas. This creates clearly defined roles and responsibilities around energy and how we manage it within our facility.

A fundamental part of managing our energy is that we measure our usage of gas and electricity through meters installed at various locations throughout the plant. We create data trends from the energy that is being used, and review those trends to see where they are taking us. When we do this on a regular basis, it drives action and accountability. The data will tell us certain things, such as energy has gone up in an area, and we use the data to find out why it has gone up. If it is something we could have controlled, we use that information to drive the energy use down. If there is an area where we have driven energy down and we want to be able to sustain that, we look at how we did that and what it takes to make sure we keep doing it that way.

What are Owens Corning's energy improvement goals?

Owens Corning has set a long-term goal of reducing our energy intensity by 25% over 10 years. This is also in line with the U.S. Department of Energy's Save Energy Now goal.

How important is energy efficiency to Owens Corning?

Owens Corning is all about energy efficiency. The company's three key tenants of sustainability are greening our products, greening our operations and advancing energy efficiency in the built environment. The bottom line is that insulation saves energy and it is good sense and good business to be energy efficient in our operations on a daily basis.

How does energy relate to quality, lean, and safety programs at your plant?

Using data to track energy usage helps us to understand and reduce variability within our process. When our processes become more stable, the numbers of upsets are reduced, which helps us enhance safety, reduce quality complaints, and improve our cost structure. The opportunity to identify and fix energy savings is also included in our continuous improvement events. We run Kaizen events on a regular basis, and as part of those events we challenge our teams to find energy-saving opportunities, so we get more and more people involved that way.

How has this affected your plant's implementation efforts?

There have really been no negative impacts to our implementation efforts at all. This has married very well with our daily operations and the direction we feel we need to go in the long term.

What initially motivated your plant to apply to the Superior Energy Performance Texas pilot project?

When we first heard about the Texas pilot project we felt that this program could be for energy what the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Voluntary Protection Program (VPP) is for safety. We really wanted to be part of developing the standards and programs that can help us and others be more energy efficient. We can see how different manufacturers can work together to help each other, like VPP does for safety. In that case, if you call the staff at another plant with questions about safety and they are a VPP plant, the doors are open and people are willing to help you, even if it is a totally different industry and manufacturer. We see how this could be done for energy efficiency and it excited us. It sounds like it would be good for everybody to be involved.

What changes have you noticed in your plant's energy program through participation in the Texas pilot program?

We had a good process in place to start with, but we were pretty reliant on one or two key people for a long time. This whole process has helped us to increase our documentation and has made our process a lot more robust and defined.

Through this experience, we have improved our communication around data and the regular review of data. It has also driven us to broaden our base of people taking ownership and action on the energy issues that we do uncover through our normal operations. We already see a definite improvement in the amount of energy that we are using and that this level of improvement is sustainable. So, it all just makes a whole lot of sense.

How will the Superior Energy Performance program and becoming an ANSI-accredited certified plant help you reach your plant's energy goals?

We have reduced our energy use so we know this is a good thing and there is certainly room to improve. The work that we have done to improve the process in the OMS is actually going to help us to sustain these gains. With operations personnel changing on an ongoing basis, the sustainability piece of this is very important to us.

As far as the ANSI certification is concerned, we would like people outside of the plant to know about our plant's commitment to being as energy efficient as possible and open the doors to help other manufacturers.

If we equate the continual improvement in energy efficiency to a journey, how would you describe where your plant has been and where you would like your plant to be in the long term with regard to energy performance?

For us, this journey started a long time ago, and we have had some stops along the way for various reasons. Our involvement in this process has helped us to develop a much clearer roadmap and we are making progress faster than we did in the past. There will always be room to improve even more as people, technology, and processes change. I am not sure this is a journey that you ever complete; what is important is how far you get from the starting point.

What would you tell other plant leaders about the value of implementing a management system for energy and receiving outside validation of your plant's program and performance improvement?

The first thing I would say is that it is a lot of work in the beginning. We didn't understand when we signed up for this how much work it was going to be. So, I think it is important that people understand that level of commitment. But, it is worth it. Second, measurement, data trending, and regular data review are absolutely essential. You always have to understand where you are and what things need to be done. Third, you can tailor it to fit inside systems you might already be using. In our case, we incorporated our OMS into our existing ISO system. An important part of implementing an energy management system is that it creates a structure within our operation and a process that is sustainable. Again, as people turn over or equipment changes, that sustainability piece is really important.

During this process there was also outside validation that took place, including audits, and this held our feet to the fire. It made sure that we were being honest with ourselves and doing the things we said that we were doing and were as good in some areas as we thought we were. All of those tests were quite good for us.

Editor's note: The Owens Corning Waxahachie plant has volunteered to be the first site to participate in the official Superior Energy Performance audit in order to become an ANSI-accredited certified plant. This is scheduled to take place in November 2009.

View the video excerpt from the Owens Corning interview.

Raising Energy Efficiency Standards for Industry

This image shows two logos. One is for the American National Standards Institute, and shows the letters "ANSI" with a half-circle swooping up and around the letters. The other logo is for the International Organization for Standardization, and shows a box with the letters "ISO" in front of a world globe.

Excerpted with permission from the Alliance to Save Energy™ Web site

The U.S. industrial sector is responsible for one-third of the energy consumed in the U.S. annually, and accounts for 30% of greenhouse gas emissions. The potential for efficiency improvement is significant, yet the savings opportunities are not being pursued for a variety of reasons, which are more institutional rather than technological.

But all that is changing. U.S. manufacturers will soon have several new and interesting voluntary standards to aid them in the pursuit of facility energy savings. These standards will be valuable tools for organizations looking to control energy costs, address carbon emissions, or demonstrate corporate social responsibility. This article profiles the new industry standards slated for release and use in the coming years.

System Assessment Standards

Developing System Assessment Standards

In August 2008, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) issued four Draft Standards for Trial Use involving the assessment of energy efficiency in process heating, pumping, steam, and compressed air systems. ASME accepted comments on these standards until January 2009.

"Based on the feedback that we received, the drafts have been revised," said Ryan Crane of ASME. "We are now approaching the final stage to approve the standards, and I am anticipating that they will be ANSI-approved by October 2009 and published by November 2009."

Read ASME's article on the standards to learn more.

To aid industry in identifying opportunities for saving energy, industry and government have teamed up to develop a set of voluntary standards for the assessment of specific industrial energy-consuming systems. Known as Superior Energy Performance, the partnership includes U.S. industry; the U.S. Department of Energy Industrial Technologies Program's Save Energy Now Initiative; the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ENERGY STAR® for Industry program; the U.S. Department of Commerce's Manufacturing Extension Partnership; American National Standards Institute (ANSI); and Texas Industries of the Future.

The system assessment standards will help provide a framework that industrial organizations can use for conducting assessments of their primary energy-consuming systems. The idea is that this can be accomplished through the establishment of minimum requirements and guidance on organizing and conducting the assessment, collecting data, and reporting results.

Four standards have been developed and are currently being pilot-tested; the final standards will be accredited by the ANSI, the U.S. accreditor of voluntary consensus standards. These standards are set to be released for use in late 2009 by the ASME, and relate to the energy assessment of industrial compressed air systems, process heating systems, pumping systems, and steam systems.

By relying on specific areas for energy assessment, these standards will allow organizations to more easily identify and quantify targeted opportunities for economical energy efficiency improvements.

ANSI/MSE 2000-2008—A Management System for Energy

Developed by Georgia Institute of Technology's Enterprise Innovation Institute in 2000, A Management System for Energy (ANSI/MSE 2000-2008) is an accepted American National Standard. The current version is now ANSI/MSE 2000-2008, which was approved by ANSI in February 2009.

This standard offers a framework that can be used by any organization to bring energy management into the corporate organizational structure and culture. It is a relatively easy process because this standard is designed to be compatible with current management system standards such as International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001 (quality management) and ISO 14001 (environmental management). Moreover, implementation of ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 will alleviate some of the typical issues that prevent energy projects from being realized, such as energy audit findings and recommendations that sit on the shelf and are never considered by management.

ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 is not a prescriptive approach to identifying or implementing energy savings projects, nor does it require the use of specific technologies. It does, however, provide a good complement to the system assessment standards discussed in this article, which are useful tools for identifying opportunities in specific systems, such as steam systems. These are more likely to be effective when paired with a management system such as ANSI/MSE 2000-2008, which advances best management practices—most closely identified with the Plan-Do-Check-Act model—to result in continual improvement and sustained energy savings.

Implementation of ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 allows organizations to proactively manage their energy resources, providing the ability for long-term control of energy consumption and costs. For example, ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 has been implemented at C&A Floorcoverings, a manufacturer of carpets and floorcoverings with several plants in Georgia. Through the implementation of the standard, the company's management established a formal energy policy, set energy goals and targets, and now holds regular management reviews to assess the energy performance of their facilities. Also, the company is finding measurable decreases in environmental impacts and actively considering sustainable energy sources.

ISO Management System Standard for Energy

Is there an energy management system that is both applicable to any industry and effective in any country? Not quite yet, but one is in the works and it's called the ISO Management System Standard for Energy (ISO 50001). The standard is being developed through a project committee consisting of 35 participating countries and five observing countries. The United States (through ANSI) and Brazil are Secretariats for the committee, which had its first meeting in September 2008, and is targeting 2011 for a published standard.

ISO 50001 is intended to provide organizations and companies with a recognized framework for integrating energy efficiency into their management practices. This is accomplished by bringing the management of energy into the corporate organizational structure and culture of an organization, which is why ISO 50001 is being written to be compatible with current management system standards such as ISO 9001 (quality management) and ISO 14001 (environmental management)—standards that are widely used throughout the world.

The United States has a large and active Technical Advisory Group working with ANSI to ensure that the final product will be of true value to U.S.-based organizations. The existing ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 provides an excellent model for the ISO standard, and the United States would like to see most aspects of MSE 2000-2008 carried forward into ISO 50001.

The ISO project committee has a challenging task, however, since several of the other participating countries (Denmark, Ireland, Sweden, Thailand and Korea) also have existing national energy management standards, and the European Union has developed a regional energy management standard. In addition, similar standards are under development in China, Spain and Brazil. To facilitate progress, the United States created a comparison of the various national standards, and then worked with China's Standardization Administration and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization to prepare a framework for action for use by the project committee. This document is helping to keep the development of ISO 50001 on track.

To learn more about ISO 50001, read the Ask an Energy Expert column in this issue.

Ask an Energy Expert: A New International Energy Management Standard

A new international standard for energy management is scheduled to be in place by 2011. In this issue's Ask an Energy Expert column, Bill Meffert explains the new global standard, how it is being developed, and how it could help companies worldwide reach energy efficiency and emission-reduction goals.

What is ISO 50001?

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) is a network of member bodies representing more than 157 countries and including 200 technical or project committees. ISO assists in the creation of global- and market-relevant international standards that cover management systems, product specifications, services, test methods, conformity assessment, and organizational practices. In 2008, ISO designated the development of the energy management system standard, ISO 50001, as one of its top priorities.

ISO 50001, scheduled to be completed in 2011, will be a management system standard that provides an organizational framework for managing energy. The standard is structured around the Plan-Do-Check-Act continual improvement process model that is found in other management system standards, including ISO 9001 and ISO 14001. ISO 50001 integrates both technical and management system elements that are essential for efficient use of energy and improving energy performance. The standard allows an organization flexibility in how to integrate these elements into their company culture.

How is the United States involved in ISO 50001 development?

The United States is leading the development of ISO 50001. The American National Standards Institute (ANSI), which is the U.S. member body to ISO, submitted an application for a new work item on energy management, and in February 2008, the ISO Technical Management Board approved the formation of a new project committee called ISO/PC 242. This group is tasked with developing a management system standard for energy management. The United States, through ANSI, provides many of the key leadership roles on ISO/PC 242. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) funds ANSI's efforts and the administration of the U.S. Technical Advisory Group (U.S. TAG), which builds U.S. stakeholder consensus around the standard. The Georgia Institute of Technology's Energy and Sustainability Services has been approved to serve as the ANSI-accredited U.S. TAG Administrator for the ISO/PC 242 group.

The first ISO/PC 242 meeting occurred in Washington, D.C. and was hosted by DOE. This meeting resulted in a working draft document for ISO 50001. In preparation for the second ISO/PC 242 meeting in Brazil in March 2009, a second working draft was generated. The result of the Brazil meeting was a decision to move to the third stage of development, a committee draft, with the continued development of the text by the working group experts. The next meeting of the ISO/PC 242 group is currently scheduled for November 2009, in London, England. It is anticipated that the group will continue to make progress toward the development of ISO 50001 and may make the decision to move to the fourth stage of development, Draft International Standard, at the completion of the meeting. The final two stages of development are the Final Draft International Standard and International Standard. It is anticipated that International Standard ISO 50001 will be available in early to mid-2011.

How will ISO 50001 affect my business?

Currently, ANSI/MSE 2000-2008 is the national standard for energy management in the United States. When ISO 50001 is completed in 2011, it is expected to replace ANSI/MSE 2000-2008. ISO 50001 is a voluntary standard, and as such, companies will determine the value of implementing this standard in their organization. For many companies, energy is an important resource, and they will adopt the standard for the energy-saving benefits. Additionally, companies will benefit from setting up a management system framework to sustain savings. Many businesses will also be attracted by the environmental benefits, including greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction.

DOE is currently developing a program for industry that will use ISO 50001 as a central feature. The Superior Energy Performance program assists manufacturers in implementing ISO 50001 and committing to improved energy performance. ISO 50001 standards coupled with the energy performance improvements that the Superior Energy Performance program requires will lead to a robust program that will provide real, sustained energy savings. It is expected that many countries will develop similar programs that build on ISO 50001 to promote energy efficiency and GHG emission reductions.

Photo of Bill Meffert.

Bill Meffert is Group Manager of energy and sustainability services for the Georgia Technology Institute's Enterprise Innovation Institute and oversees the development, transfer, and adoption of best practices and leading-edge technologies for manufacturers and Georgia business. Mr. Meffert has 20 years of experience providing energy conservation, alternate fuel, and energy efficiency assistance to industrial, commercial, and institutional facilities. He has completed more than 200 energy assessments at industrial facilities and 100 commercial energy assessments at public schools, hospitals, and institutional facilities.

Along with other Georgia Tech faculty, Mr. Meffert developed the first energy management system standard for the American National Standards Institute (ANSI/MSE 2000-2008). He holds a PE license from the state of Georgia and is a Certified Energy Procurement professional (CEP, Association of Energy Engineers), and a DOE Qualified Specialist and Energy Expert in compressed air. Recently, Mr. Meffert served on Governor Sonny Perdue's Energy Policy Council, which developed Georgia's first State Energy Strategy.

Harmonizing International Motor Efficiency Standards

By Gilbert McCoy, Energy Systems Engineer, EERE Information Center

This photo shows a motor in an industrial plant environment which is being measured by a person holding a square testing device with a screen. The testing device is connected to the motor by a cable.

The new IEC 60034-30 motor efficiency standard could have major energy-saving impact for industrial motors worldwide.

The International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) recently passed standard IEC 60034-30 (2008), which defines energy efficiency classes for single-speed, three-phase, and 50 Hz and 60 Hz induction motors. The standard is part of an effort to unify motor testing standards, efficiency requirements, and product labeling requirements so that motor purchasers worldwide have the ability to easily recognize premium-efficiency products. Industrial energy managers responsible for offshore facilities, and end users purchasing replacements for failed IEC or metric motors that are imported with equipment packages should be aware of these new efficiency standards.

Unifying Worldwide Efficiency Classifications

The new full-load efficiency standards apply to most worldwide industrial continuous-duty motors with the following parameters:

  • Single speed, three-phase, and 50 Hz and 60 Hz
  • 2, 4, and 6 poles (3,000; 1,500; and 1,000 RPM at 50 Hz)
  • Rated output from 0.75 to 375 (1 to 500 hp)
  • Rated voltage up to 1,000 V
  • Rated on the basis of either duty type S1 (continuous duty) or S3 (intermittent duty) with a rated cyclic duration factor of 80% or higher
  • Capable of operating direct online.

The table below shows the new IEC 60034-30 (2008) efficiency classes and comparable efficiency levels.

New International Efficiency (IE) Classes Efficiency Levels Comparison
IE1 Standard efficiency Efficiency levels comparable to the existing EFF2 in Europe
IE2 High efficiency Efficiency levels comparable to the existing EFF1 in Europe and identical to the U.S. EPAct for 60 Hz
IE3 Premium efficiency New efficiency class in Europe and identical to NEMA Premium® in the United States for 60 Hz

The standard also reserves an IE4 class (Super Premium Efficiency) for the future. The following motors are excluded from the new efficiency standard:

  • Motors made solely for inverter operation
  • Motors completely integrated into a machine (pump, fan, or compressor) that cannot be tested separately from the machine.

For 60 Hz operation, the IE2 and IE3 minimum full-load efficiency values are virtually identical to the North American National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) Energy Efficient and Premium Efficiency motor standards, respectively. (NEMA does specify different full-load efficiency values for motors with Totally Enclosed Fan-Cooled and Open Drip-proof enclosures.) The IEC minimum full-load efficiency standards are higher for 60 Hz motors than for 50 Hz motors. This is because as long as the motor torque is constant, I2R or winding resistance losses are the same at 50 Hz and 60 Hz. The motor output power, however, increases linearly with speed, increasing by 20% when the frequency is increased from 50 Hz to 60 Hz. In general, the 60 Hz efficiency is about 2.5% to 0.5% greater than the 50 Hz values. The efficiency gain is greater for smaller motor power ratings.

To show compliance with these new efficiency standards, motors must be tested in accordance with the newly adopted IEC 60034-2-1 testing protocol. This procedure provides test results that are largely compatible with those obtained by the North American IEEE 112B and CSA 390 test methods.

The new standard also requires that the motor efficiency class and nominal motor efficiency be labeled on the motor nameplate and given in product literature and motor catalogues in the following format:

IE3 94.5%

New Minimum Energy Performance Standards

While IEC sets guidelines for motor testing and efficiency classes, the organization does not regulate efficiency. With the new efficiency standards in place, the European Commission Eco-design Regulatory Committee recommended in March 2009 that electric motors with an output power of 0.75 to 375 kW equal or exceed new mandatory Minimum Energy Performance Standards (MEPS). The MEPS, expected to be adopted in June 2009, are set at the following levels:

  • IE2 by June 16, 2011
  • IE3 by January 1, 2015 (for motors >=7.5 kW, or IE2 with an adjustable speed drive)
  • IE3 for all motors by January 1, 2017 (or IE2 with an adjustable speed drive).

The new MEPS will supersede the existing voluntary 1999 European Committee of Manufacturers of Electrical Machines and Power Electronics EFF1, EFF2, and EFF3 efficiency standards.

Adoption of the MEPS by the European Commission will put them on a path similar to that taken by the United States in the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 (PDF 151 KB). Download Adobe Reader. This Act increases the U.S. MEPS for 1 to 200 hp, 1,200, 1,800, and 3,600 RPM general purpose motors from the Energy Policy Act of 1992 Energy Efficient (IE2 equivalent) levels to NEMA Premium Efficiency (IE3) levels by December 2010. EISA also establishes an Energy Efficient (IE2) level for motors with output power ratings of 201 to 500 hp.

For additional information, you can purchase the new IEC standard on motor efficiency classes, or download the Motor MEPS Guide (PDF 4.2 MB). Download Adobe Reader. Also, watch for the IEC 60034-31 Guide for the Selection and Application of Energy-Efficient Motors Including Variable Speed Applications, which will be available soon.

In addition, visit the U.S. Department of Energy Industrial Technologies Program software tools Web site to learn about and download the MotorMaster+ International software tool.

Top Technology Company Decreases Risk, Improves Data Center Efficiency

This photo shows a view down a long hallway toward a wall. On the right hand side of the hallway is a vertical metal structure with a grid-like pattern on the structure. On the left hand side is a row of refrigerators. Lights run the length of the ceiling.

As a result of implemented cooling plant, air management, and lighting measures, Sybase's data center cooling system can now keep up with rapid growth demands.

Sybase implemented the following projects to achieve energy savings:

Cooling Plant

  • Installed high-efficiency base-load chiller
  • Implemented custom control program

Air Management

  • Relocated perforated tiles
  • Sealed raised floor
  • Installed variable frequency drives on 20 computer room air handlers
  • Installed partial air-side economizer
  • Added heat recovery to air-side economizer

Lighting

  • Controlled lights with 30-minute enabled zones.

When an energy audit revealed that their data center's cooling system was at risk due to rapid growth, Sybase energy managers took action. With the help of local utility company incentives, Sybase is saving $262,000 in annual energy costs and has regained cooling capacity to meet increasing power demands. DOE's DC Pro software tool suite confirmed the energy-saving estimates.

Sybase, a company recently named one of the "4 Companies Leading the Mobile Revolution" by Seeking Alpha Web site along with Apple, Google, and Qualcomm, has found a way to save $262,000 annually in their rapidly growing database technology center in Dublin, California. A major enterprise software and services company, Sybase's products are used in the most data-intensive industries across all systems, networks, and devices, including PDAs, smartphones, and notebooks.

Energy managers at Sybase know the value of a proactive energy efficiency program to keep data center systems running efficiently. In 2005, they conducted an energy audit of the Dublin center's cooling system to determine the best options to meet increasing power demand and identify projects that could qualify for energy incentives from Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E).

Sybase discovered that their data center N+1 cooling capacity was at risk due to the center's rapid growth. With the help of incentives from PG&E, the company's energy managers took action to optimize existing power and cooling resources and free up capacity. The 16,000-square-foot data center reduced annual energy use by nearly 2.3 million kWh, achieved a simple payback of 2.2 years, and has regained cooling capacity to meet growth demands.

After the assessment, Sybase applied the U.S. Department of Energy Industrial Technologies Program's (ITP) DC Pro software tools and determined that the potential energy savings estimates provided by the tools closely matched the company's realized savings.

Read the case study (PDF 1.6 MB) to learn more. Download Adobe Reader.

Visit ITP's data centers Web page to get information on data center efficiency, download tools to help your company find ways to save energy, and read other related case studies.

Energy Matters, the BestPractices' quarterly of DOE's Industrial Technologies Program, is your online source for in-depth information that can help you manage energy use and enhance efficiency in your plant. You can read technical articles from industry experts, find practical tips on how to improve your operations today, learn how others are saving energy and money, and access the latest BestPractices tools, resources, and opportunities. Energy Matters is for industry professionals like you. Subscribe today—it's free!

Visit www.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/energymatters/ for issue archives, to browse articles by topic, and to subscribe.

Summer 2009
DOE/GO-102008-2699

NOTICE: This online publication was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.