Energy Smart Industrial (ESI): Energy Management Offering

1
Energy Smart Industrial (ESI) Energy Management
Offering

• RTF
• August 4 2009
• BPA, Cascade Energy, Strategic Energy Group

2
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

3
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

4
Energy Management

• 5 Year Target
• 20 aMW

5
Energy Management in 6th Plan
6
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
  projects
• 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

7
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
  (IPMVP)
• Three Program Offers End User can choose any or
  all.
• 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
  levels)
• 2. Track and Tune (TT)
• OM Program Offering. This will be a custom EE
  measure.
• 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

8

• Track Tune Overview

9
Track Tune

• What is being offered?
• Site or sub-system tune-up (aka
  retro-commissioning)
• Normalized efficiency tracking system
• What is the primary goal?
• Improve plant energy performance through OM
  improvements
• An attractive business opportunity for the End
  User
• 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
  items
• Repeat payments?
• Incentives paid annually for documented savings
  seen through ongoing tracking tool

10
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.

11
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.

12
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
  Measurement)
• Use Option B (Retrofit Isolation w/ All Parameter
  Measurement)
• Use Option C (Whole Facility Measurement)

13
MV Conventional Custom Projects versus Track
Tune

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

14
Track Tune Case Studies
15
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
  cu-ft
• Continuing to pursue greater energy savings

16
SYSCO Identified Savings from Tune-ups

• Savings never lower than 7 (across 105
  facilities).
• 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
  identified.

17
SYSCO Realized Savings(YoY, FY08 versus FY06)
18
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
19
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
20

• High Performance Energy Management (HPEM)

21
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
  lives

21
22
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
22
23
High Performance Energy Management is similar in
concept to
BC Hydro
EPA Energy Star
NEEA
23
24
Delivery of HPEM

• One-on-one coaching
• Structured Network Group
• 10 12 industry focus, or non-competitive
  customers
• 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

25
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

26
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
27
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

28
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

29
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
30
MTR Reporting
31
MTR Performance Targets
32
MTR CUSUM
33
Important Considerations for Track Tune and
HPEM Savings

• Count savings only once!
• Re-Baselining
• Measurement
• Identifying and getting the right production
  data
• 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
  line.

34
Avoid Double-Counting of Savings
35
Re-Baselining

• 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
  claim
• Assess whether these savings are maintained after
  the transition
• Re-establish new baseline after transition
• Add savings achieved after the transition

36
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
  cost-effectiveness
• 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)

37
Next Steps

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

38
Questions?
39
More information on IPMVP Concepts relevant to
TT and HPEM Savings
40
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
  process/sub-system.
• Duration of the Baseline and Reporting Periods.
• Savings Analysis Using Statistical Tools.

41
Key Concepts (cont.)

• Long Reporting Period (aka post-installation
  monitoring) equates to higher confidence in
  savings.
• 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
  Boundary
• 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.

42
IPMVP Measurement Boundary
43

• EPM Funding

44
Background for EPM

• Situation Large industrial customers are short
  on staff to spearhead and manage efficiency
  projects
• 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.

45
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

46
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
  25,000
• Maximum annual funding per participating site
  250,000
• 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
  goal
• Mechanism for under performance