ArticlePublisher preview available

A methodology for the assessment of multiple benefits of industrial energy efficiency measures

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract and Figures

Industrial energy efficiency measures are proving financially viable, but the implementation rate is stagnating. This results in the need to develop a comprehensive and standardized methodology to assess the multiple benefits of energy efficiency measures in an industrial context. However, a comprehensive methodology to assess the multiple benefits of energy efficiency measures are omitted. The methodology, as presented in this study, was developed and validated based on nine case studies performed between 2016 and 2018 in the Swiss industrial sector. The aim is to close this gap with the introduction of a three-phase standard methodology, applicable to a wide range of industrial processes and energy efficiency measures. The three phases are further split into individual steps, each pursuing a specific goal in order to facilitate the implementation of energy efficiency measures. The first phase, the delimitation, aims at defining the system boundaries of the considered industrial process(es). The second phase, the assessment, involves the identification, the quantification, and the monetization of multiple benefits, as well as the qualitative assessment of non-monetizable multiple benefits. The last phase, the evaluation, focusses on the integration of the obtained results into the financial valuation of the energy efficiency measure and, therefore, on the cash flow analysis and the determination of the payback time under consideration of the monetizable multiple benefits. The study has shown that the consideration of monetizable multiple benefits may reduce the payback time of energy efficiency measures by up to 40–85%.
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
Vol.:(0123456789)
SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:270 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-2071-2
Research Article
A methodology fortheassessment ofmultiple benets ofindustrial
energy eciency measures
ClaasWagner1· MelissaObermeyer1· RichardLüchinger1
Received: 28 October 2019 / Accepted: 17 January 2020 / Published online: 25 January 2020
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
Abstract
Industrial energy eciency measures are proving nancially viable, but the implementation rate is stagnating. This
results in the need to develop a comprehensive and standardized methodology to assess the multiple benets of energy
eciency measures in an industrial context. However, a comprehensive methodology to assess the multiple benets
of energy eciency measures are omitted. The methodology, as presented in this study, was developed and validated
based on nine case studies performed between 2016 and 2018 in the Swiss industrial sector. The aim is to close this gap
with the introduction of a three-phase standard methodology, applicable to a wide range of industrial processes and
energy eciency measures. The three phases are further split into individual steps, each pursuing a specic goal in order
to facilitate the implementation of energy eciency measures. The rst phase, the delimitation, aims at dening the
system boundaries of the considered industrial process(es). The second phase, the assessment, involves the identication,
the quantication, and the monetization of multiple benets, as well as the qualitative assessment of non-monetizable
multiple benets. The last phase, the evaluation, focusses on the integration of the obtained results into the nancial
valuation of the energy eciency measure and, therefore, on the cash ow analysis and the determination of the payback
time under consideration of the monetizable multiple benets. The study has shown that the consideration of monetiz-
able multiple benets may reduce the payback time of energy eciency measures by up to 40–85%.
Keywords Non-energy benets· Multiple benets· Energy eciency measures· Full-cost analysis· Industrial processes
Abbreviations
CO2 Carbon dioxide
EEM Energy eciency measure
EU European Union
KPI Key performance indicator
MB Multiple benets
SCCER—EIP Swiss Competence Centres for Energy
Research—Eciency of Industrial
Processes
CCPE Competence Center Power Economy
IEA International Energy Agency
Euro
€/a Euro per year
kWh Kilowatt-hours
kWh/a Kilowatt-hours per year
MWh Megawatt-hours
MWh Megawatt-hours per year
t Ton
t/a Tons per year
1 Introduction
In Switzerland, the energy demand of the industrial and
the service sector accounts for approximately 40% of the
total energy demand. The Swiss Federal Council plans to
reduce energy consumption by 20% and the CO2 emis-
sions by 40% until 2050. To support the achievement of
* Claas Wagner, claas.wagner@hslu.ch | 1Institute forInnovation andTechnology Management, Lucerne University ofApplied Sciences
andArts, Lucerne, Switzerland.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
... That is why, in order to address this problem, an innovative approach was developed based on the main ideas of the concept proposed for positioning of the energy saving and energy efficiency processes in the system of a company's management priorities. Its application, on the one hand, greatly complements and expands the possibilities of using previously obtained results in the framework of approaches developed by various researchers in order to overcome barriers to energy efficiency improvement [65,[79][80][81][82]. On the other hand, it makes a certain contribution into the investigation of the problem of identification and assessment of strategic multiple or non-energy benefits of energy efficiency in a company [83,84]. ...
... It should be noted that the developed approach takes into account the logic of the currently used methodological approaches for identifying and evaluating the strategic multiple benefits of energy efficiency at a company. However, in comparison with other approaches used in the field under study, we compare the results of measures to improve energy efficiency with the achievement of the strategic goals of the company [71,83]. This comparison is ensured through the actualization of the innovative potential of energy technologies and is formalized in the form of a specific sequence of actions based on the generated mathematical models. ...
... In this case, the company's market share will grow considerably leaner-from 20% in 2018 to 24% by 2021. The acquired estimates do not contradict the results of the study [83], which concludes that the consideration of monetized multiple benefits can reduce the payback time of measures to increase energy efficiency by 40%-85%. There is no contradiction to the results of the study [130], which substantiates the position that investments in energy efficiency improvement significantly affect the growth and competitiveness of medium and small enterprises. ...
Article
Full-text available
Energy efficiency improvement in industrial companies is an essential prerequisite for the enhancement of their competitive positions in the national and global markets. Yet, the approaches currently employed in respect of the energy management do not fully utilize the innovative potential of energy technologies to achieve strategic goals. One way to further develop energy management is theoretical justification of the use of new approaches based on the suggested concept of the energy saving and energy efficiency processes’ positioning in the system of a company's management priorities. In this article, we consider the applied use of the developed conceptual approach from the perspective of the energy saving and energy efficiency program development at the company. The main purpose of this paper is to justify the relations between energy management and strategic decision making in industrial companies. The results of the research conducted, firstly, make a certain contribution into the research of strategic multiple benefits of energy efficiency in a company; secondly, they expand understanding of the impact of energy saving and energy efficiency improvement on the achievement of operational, tactical and strategic results of the company's activities; thirdly, they provide methodological decision support for the development of energy saving and energy efficiency programs taking into account the management and organizational barriers.
... Next to the IEA, a growing body of research and projects are dedicated to the topic of multiple benefits and to the quantification of these, in an attempt of making these benefits more visible to different stakeholders, including end-users (a few examples -non exhaustive: [3], [5], [6], [7], [12], [13]). ...
Conference Paper
Full-text available
Investments into energy efficiency in companies are currently considered rather one-sided; for the most part focusing on financial aspects only. Further benefits such as operational security, employee productivity, etc. are not systematically included in the investment analysis. According to the final report of the research project Management as a Key Driver of Energy Performance from 2018, 'Energy efficiency provides numerous benefits to companies, including improvements in worker comfort, product quality, overall flexibility and productivity, as well as reductions in maintenance cost, risk, production time and waste'. The overall benefits of energy efficiency improvements are not only related to energy but also include non-energy aspects, and are often referred to as multiple benefits. Non-energy benefits can have more importance than energy benefits only and ultimately help in convincing company management to invest into energy efficiency – having a positive overall impact on companies' competitiveness. Thus, multiple benefits, which include both energy- and non-energy aspects, have a significant potential in triggering the (timely) replacement of existing installations. [8], [9] A Swiss project aims to develop a decision-making tool for motor systems that supports decision makers in small and large companies, incorporating the aspects of multiple benefits. Since electric motor systems are widely used in companies of all sizes across different sectors (primarily in the industrial and services sectors), the market potential of such a decision-making tool is considerable. In addition to a technical approach, socio-economic as well as investment-related aspects will be incorporated, so that the basis for decision-making has the necessary breadth. The final product shall be a web-based tool, which is easily available and applicable for the target group. The project is implemented in three phases and concluded by mid-2020: 1. Phase 0: In this preparatory phase, the general approach was established, taking into account technical, behavioural and financial aspects. Interviews were conducted with four organisations, laying down the ground work. 2. Phase I: Following the preparatory phase, relevant multiple benefits will be further elaborated, identified and validated, based on interviews and data analysis. Four applications of motor systems will be analysed, namely air compressors, cooling compressors, fans and pumps (and in addition as an option variable frequency drives). 3. Phase II: The results of Phase I will be integrated into a web-based decision-making tool. 4. Phase III: Dissemination of the tool to relevant stakeholders. This paper focuses on the methodological approach taken and the results so far (Phase 0).
Article
Full-text available
Industrial energy efficiency is important for reducing CO2 emissions and could be a competitive advantage for companies because it can reduce costs. However, cost-effective energy efficiency measures are not always implemented because there are barriers inhibiting their implementation. Drivers for energy efficiency could provide means for overcoming these barriers. The aim of this article was to study the importance of different barriers to and drivers for improved energy efficiency in the Swedish aluminium industry and foundries that cast aluminium. Additionally, the perceived usefulness of different information sources on energy efficiency measures was studied. The data were collected through a questionnaire covering 39 barriers and 48 drivers, divided into different categories. Both the aluminium and foundry industries considered technological and economic barriers as the most important categories. The most important category of drivers for the aluminium industry was organisational drivers, while the foundries rated economic drivers as the most important. Colleagues within the company, the company group and sector, and the trade organisation were considered the most useful information sources. Important factors for driving work with improved energy efficiency included access to knowledge within the company, having a culture within the company promoting energy efficiency, and networking within the sector. The policy implications identified included energy labelling of production equipment, the law on energy audit in large companies and subsidy for energy audits in small- and medium-sized companies, voluntary agreements that included long-term energy strategies, increased taxes to improve the cost-effectiveness of energy efficiency measures, and EUs Emission Trading System.
Article
Full-text available
Investments in industrial energy efficiency are essential for meeting future energy needs. Nevertheless, the industrial sector’s current efforts in energy efficiency investments are insufficient. Additional benefits of energy efficiency investments have been suggested to improve the financial attractiveness of energy efficiency investments. Yet, previous research indicates that not all benefits are included when investment opportunities are evaluated, leading to an underestimation of what a firm will gain from the investment. Additionally, previous research lacks conceptual frameworks for describing these additional benefits at an early stage in the investment process. Moreover, various benefit terms are found in currently existing research, but there are a lack of definitions and distinctions attributed to these terms. Therefore, this paper provides a systematic review on the benefit terms of energy efficiency investments, establishes non-energy benefits as the term most relevant for such investments and provides a new definition of the concept. Further, a new framework for categorising non-energy benefits to enable them to be included during the investment process is developed, in which the level of quantifiability and time frame of the non-energy benefits are taken into account. Including non-energy benefits in the investment process can make energy efficiency investments more attractive and increase their priority against other investments. Moreover, non-energy benefits can reinforce drivers as well as counterbalance known barriers to energy efficiency investments. Acknowledging non-energy benefits can thus contribute to an increased adoption level for energy efficiency investments.
Article
Full-text available
Industrial activities are responsible for a significant share of both global delivered energy demand and CO2 emissions. Hence, a widespread adoption of energy-efficient technologies and practices represents a crucial means for sustainable production. Adopting a novel framework of drivers for energy efficiency describing the effect of drivers on barriers in the decision-making process steps and able to account for the nature of drivers and the stakeholders responsible for their promotion, we have performed an exploratory investigation into 61 manufacturing small- and medium-sized enterprises in Northern Italy. Our findings have highlighted the importance of information and economic drivers, showing the need for enterprises to be supported not only by public institutions but also by external stakeholders involved in the supply of energy-efficient technologies and practices such as industrial associations and groupings, as well as service and technology suppliers. Moreover, our study has highlighted an almost equal relevance of both internal and external drivers. According to our findings, the increase of awareness—generating the interest to energy issues and stimulated both by external and internal stakeholders—as well as financial issues have emerged as the most critical in the decision-making process to adopt an energy-efficient measure. A preliminary comprehension of the mechanisms relating drivers to barriers in the decision-making process brought additional value to the study, highlighting the most effective and specific means to overcome the existing barriers. We have also explored the effect of several firm characteristics, such as firm size and energy intensity offering suggestions for industrial decision-makers as well as policy-makers.
Article
Full-text available
Editors note: This paper is reprinted by permission of Lucidus Consulting Limited. It first appeared in Lucid Thoughts, the newsletter of Lucidus Consulting, a change and project management consultancy based in the UK, in November 2005. It was also published in Project Manager Today in December 2005. Considering and understanding stakeholders and then acting to engage them is generally agreed as being one of the most critical parts of any managed change initiative. Initial consideration of stakeholders is often done using a technique based on some kind of stakeholder grid or map of which many versions exist. Some grids or maps are in one dimension for example showing stakeholders (individuals or groups) mapped against their area of interest in the project or programme. However, in our experience, most are in two dimensions where two axes are labelled with features of stakeholder status or behaviour and the area between the axes (the two dimensional grid) populated with the names of each individual or group. Commonly used grids include: • Power vs. Interest – easy to understand in concept but what's the point of knowing if someone is powerful and interested (will be active) if you have not considered whether they are for, or against the project i.e. have a positive or negative attitude. • Interest vs. Attitude – again easy to understand but again what's the point of knowing someone is an active backer or active blocker without an assessment of whether they are powerful and therefore likely to be influential or not. This Lucid Thought puts the case for including a third dimension in the stakeholder grid. This we believe will make the technique even better at stimulating thought and informing the project or programme manager in a truly meaningful way. It seems to us that there are three basic things (dimensions) that are important to know when initially considering stakeholders and these are: 1. Their power or ability to influence in the organisation. This may be their potential to influence derived from their positional or resource power in the organisation, or may be their actual influence derived from their credibility as a leader or expert. 2. Their interest in the project or programme as measured by the extent to which they will be active or passive. 3. Their attitude to the project or programme as measured by the extent to which they will 'back' (support) or 'block' (resist). Considering any two of the three dimensions only gives a partial and less than useful picture.
Article
Full-text available
“Investment in energy efficiency: do the characteristics of firms matter?” In their famous 1998 paper, DeCanio and Watkins raised the question and answered it affirmatively. Our paper addresses a parallel question: “Investment in energy efficiency: do the characteristics of investments matter?” To answer this question, we first describe our new investment decision-making model, applicable to all investment types. We then discuss our research results, based on questionnaires submitted to finance managers of 35 major electricity consumers in various commercial and industrial sectors. We show how characteristics other than profitability play an important role in investment choices. The investment category influences profitability evaluation, profitability requirement, and, ultimately, the decision made. For half of the firms in our study, energy-efficiency investments did not exist as a category. However, wide diversity regarding investment behavior is observed between firms. Our findings lead to a different explanation of the energy-efficiency gap and open the way for a new approach to promoting energy-efficiency investments, which is briefly discussed in the conclusion.
Article
Industrial energy efficiency has been widely recognized as a major contributor to the reduction of greenhouse gases emissions and improvement of industrial competitiveness. Nevertheless, a broad set of studies have pointed out the existence of barriers limiting the adoption of promising Energy Efficiency Measures (EEMs). Recently, scholars have shown the relevance of the so-called “non-energy benefits” (NEBs) coming from the adoption of EEMs for overcoming those barriers. Still, the existence of such benefits has been pointed out from specific studies and manuals for practitioners, but an overall framework describing them in terms of savings and benefits, as well as technical and management implications, is missing yet. Moreover, a considerable part of the scholars and of the practitioners just focuses on the identification and definition of the positive benefits deriving from these measures after they have been completely adopted, thus neglecting to describe the full set of both positive and negative effects occurring also during the implementation phase. Thus, starting from a literature review of scientific as well as practitioners’ studies, we have proposed a novel framework and characterization of the relevant items to be considered by an industrial decision-maker when deciding whether to adopt an EEM considering both the implementation and service phases. Hence, by taking this perspective, we have tested and validated the framework and the characterization in a two-step process: firstly, considering a set of EEMs well diffused and adopted in industry; secondly, investigating benefits and losses in ad-hoc selected manufacturing companies. Finally, considerations and implications are drawn from the preliminary validation and suggestion for further research are proposed, for both industrial decision-making as well as policy-making purposes.
Article
When industrial firms invest in energy efficiency, the effect may go beyond energy cost savings and produce additional non-energy benefits as well. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding experiences in non-energy benefits and the extent to which these are acknowledged by industry. This study attempts to explore firms' perspectives on non-energy benefits of industrial energy-efficiency investments and if and how non-energy benefits are considered in the investment process. Moreover, this study also explores investment motives and critical aspects of adopting energy-efficiency investments. Based on a questionnaire and interviews with representatives of Swedish industrial firms, the results indicate that energy efficiency seems to be an important issue for the firms, but profitability and payoff appear to be the most important factors for adopting an investment, implying that it is often difficult to meet the payoff requirements with energy cost savings alone. In the meantime, various non-energy benefits are observed, but there seems to be a lack of knowledge of how these should be quantified and monetised. To facilitate such an assessment of non-energy benefits and to include them in the investment analysis, a measurement framework is provided. It is concluded that including non-energy benefits in the investment analysis can contribute to a framing of energy-efficiency investments that can meet the firms' requirements for profitability assessment, which can further enhance opportunities for energy-efficiency investments in industry. Thus, the study contributes with new insights into the energy-efficiency investment process and the extent to which non-energy benefits are considered, along with the methods for measuring them.