Search

The energy efficiency gap is known as the difference between optimal level of energy efficiency and the actual level of achieved energy efficiency. Energy management has proven to further close the energy efficiency gap. Energy management may differ depending on whether it concerns a large, energy-intensive company or small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). SMEs are of high interest since they form a large share of the economy today. For SMEs, a lighter form of energy management, in the form of energy efficiency network participation, has proven to deliver sound energy efficiency impact, while for larger, energy-intensive firms, a certified energy management system may be more suitable. However, various barriers inhibit adoption of energy efficiency measures. While there is an array of research on barriers to and driving forces for energy efficiency in general, research on barriers to, and driving forces for, energy management is rare, one exception being a study of energy-intensive pulp and paper mills. This holds even more so for industrial SMEs. This paper aims to identify the barriers to, and drivers for, energy management in manufacturing SMEs. Results of this explorative study show that the top four barriers to energy management are lack of time/other priorities, non-energy-related working tasks are prioritized higher, slim organization, and lack of internal expert competences, i.e., mainly organizational barriers. The top four drivers for energy management are to reduce production waste, participation in energy efficiency networks, cost reduction from lower energy use, and commitment from top management. Furthermore, results show that energy management among the studied SMEs seems to not be as mature, even though the companies participated in an energy management capacity building program in the form of energy efficiency networks, which, in turn, shows a still largely untapped potential in the societal aim to reduce the energy efficiency and management gaps. The main contribution of this paper is a first novel attempt to explore barriers to, and drivers for, energy management among SMEs.

Research has revealed the existence of an energy-efficiency gap – the difference between optimal and actual energy end-use, suggesting that energy efficiency can be improved. Energy management (EnM ...

Our study looked at the extent to which firm characteristics such as total firm capital affect electricity saving in energy-intensive industry in Sweden from 2007 to 2015. Specifically, the most influential variables for systematic variation in electricity saving in the energy-intensive companies participating in Sweden’s voluntary programme for improving energy efficiency in energy-intensive industry (the PFE) were studied by analysing monetary investment, payback time and firm characteristics. Monetary investment and payback time influenced electricity savings during the PFE more than firm characteristics, with monetary investment being most influential. Nevertheless, the total systematic variation in firm characteristics may account for ∼16% of the systematic variation in electricity saving, where ∼74% (32 of 43) of the studied firm characteristics seemed to merit further investigation and where ∼49% (21 of 43) of firm characteristics appeared most influential. The most influential firm characteristics were total firm capital, stock turnover ratio, machinery, short-term liabilities per turnover ratio and goodwill. The overall results showed that firm characteristics can influence a firm’s energy-saving activities and indicated a tendency for more energy savings in companies that were financially weaker or had done less work to improve energy efficiency prior to the PFE.

Climate and environmental targets place significant requirements on energy efficiency and improved industrial energy efficiency is viewed as one of the most important means of reducing CO2 emission ...

Improvements in industrial energy efficiency demonstrated various additional effects beyond pure energy savings and energy cost savings. Observed on many levels, these additional effects, often denoted as non-energy benefits, constitute a diverse collection, for instance, effects related to firms production or improvements in the work environment and the external environment. Previous studies showed the potential of including quantified and monetised non-energy benefits in energy efficiency investments. However, there seems to be a lack of methodological overview, including all the steps from observation to monetisation and inclusion in investments. This study systematically reviews the academic literature on non-energy benefits relating to methods for observation, measuring, quantification, and monetisation of the benefits. The most commonly applied research design was a case study approach, in which data on non-energy benefits were collected by conducting interviews. Furthermore, the primary methods used to enable quantification and monetisation of observed non-energy benefits were based on classifications, indexes in relation to the energy savings, or frameworks. Calculation methods, databased tools, classification frameworks, and ranking were applied to evaluate the benefits potential in relation to energy efficiency investments. Based on a synthesis of the review findings, this article contributes a novel scheme for improved utilisation of the non-energy benefits of industrial energy efficiency. Funding Agencies|European Commission within the European Regional Development Fund; Linkoping University [20201478]

Increased global competition and resource scarcity drives industrial companies to cut costs. Energy can be a significant component of such cuts, particularly for energy-intensive companies. Improving energy efficiency in industry is complex, as it pertains to various energy-using processes that are heavily intertwined. One such process is the compressed air system (CAS), which is used in most industrial companies worldwide. Since energy efficiency improvement measures for various types of energy-using processes differ, technology-specific measures might encounter different barriers to and drivers for energy efficiency. The same applies to the non-energy benefits (NEBs) related to energy efficiency improvement measures; since measures vary between various energy-using processes, the perceived NEBs might be different as well. The aim of this paper is to study the barriers to, drivers for and NEBs of CAS energy efficiency improvement measures from the perspectives of three actors. Carried out as an interview study combined with a questionnaire, the paper merges the perspectives of users, audit experts and suppliers of CASs. The results showed that the major barriers are related to the investment, or are of an organisational character, and that organisational and economic factors seemed to be important for making positive decisions on energy efficiency investments and measures in CASs. Major NEBs for CASs include productivity gains and the avoidance of capital expenditures. The results of this study also address the importance of having a comprehensive approach to recognise additional effects of energy efficiency improvements in CASs. Funding Agencies|European Commission within the European Regional Development Fund; Linkoping University

Compressed air is widely used in supporting industrial manufacturing processes due to its cleanness, practicality and ease of use. However, the efficiency of compressed air systems is often very low. Typically, for compressed air-driven tools only 10-15% of the energy input is utilised as useful work. Despite these recognised inefficiencies, and even though energy efficiency measures for compressed air systems normally offer several opportunities for energy savings and energy cost savings, generally, less attention has been given to the energy use and energy costs incurred in compressed air systems. Industrial energy efficiency measures might also yield additional effects, beyond the energy savings, which are denoted as non-energy benefits. This study reviews the existing base of scientific knowledge on energy efficiency in compressed air systems combined with the perspective of non-energy benefits. Even though some measures were mentioned more frequent than others, the results revealed significant variation in which measures could be undertaken to improve energy efficiency in compressed air systems. However, few publications employ a comprehensive approach by examining the entire compressed air system. Furthermore, few publications have addressed the possible additional benefits to be gained from energy efficiency measures in compressed air systems. This study provides a compilation of the various energy efficiency measures reported in the reviewed scientific literature that can be undertaken in order to improve energy efficiency in compressed air systems. It also provides a comprehensive take on the measures, including a systems perspective, by categorising them in respect to where in the compressed air system they can be undertaken. This paper suggests that energy efficiency measures in compressed air systems, and related non-energy benefits, should be studied on a specific measure level to fully understand and acknowledge their effects on the energy use of a compressed air system and possible additional effects, i.e. non-energy benefits.

Improved industrial energy efficiency is viewed as an important means in the reduction of CO2 emissions and climate change mitigation. Various energy efficiency measures for improving energy effici ...

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. Funding Agencies|Swedish Energy Agency; Department of Management and Engineering at Linkoping University