EMPOWERING BUSINESSes, energising Resources. Large Industry Energy Network (LIEN) Annual Report 2012 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 2 Contents 3 Introduction 4 A message from the Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources 6 CEO Introduction 8 LIEN Membership, Development and Benefits 10 Network Activities for LIEN Members 12 Energy Awards 2012 15 Energy Agreements Programme 16 Company Profiles 20 Abbot Ireland Diagnostics Division Sligo 22 CG Power Systems Ireland 24 Dairygold Food Ingredients 26 Glanbia Ingredients Ireland 28 GlaxoSmithKline Ireland 30 Pfizer 32 EPS Group 34 Aviva Stadium 36 Results and Targets 38 Results Summary 39 Members and Targets 40 About SEAI 84 Members List 86 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 2012 – At a glance LIEN members by sector in 2012 Food/Drinks 52 Pharma/Chem 41 Other 41 Healthcare 17 Electronics 11 > An estimated 580 GWh of energy savings were achieved through the implementation of specific energy savings measures by LIEN members > The LIEN network as a whole recorded a loss in energy performance of 0.3%, primarily due to significant reductions in outputs for a small number of the larger LIEN members > With the exception of the Electronics and PharmaChem sector, the level of output increased across all sectors in 2012, following the trend in 2010 and 2011 > The output from the Healthcare sector has increased continuously since 2007. Food/Drinks and ‘Other’ sectors have increased outputs continuously since 2010 Drivers for Energy Saving Projects (kWh) Energy Management Systems 72% Other Driver 17% Not Defined 11% > Energy Management Systems such as ISO 50001 continue to be the main driver for energy saving projects > There are 162 companies in the LIEN, representing over 17% of the National Total Primary Energy requirement (TPER) 4 17% 2012 Overall Energy Performance LIEN Members represent 17% of all energy use in Ireland. 5 LIEN Total Primary Energy Requirement 26,000 GWh Energy Gains (Loss) due to Energy Performance (70) GWh National Total Primary Energy Requirement (TPER) 156,889 GWh LIEN as Percentage of National TPER 17% Total CO2 Emissions 5,650,964 Tonnes CO2 Avoided due to Energy Performance Gains (15,258) Tonnes SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 A Message from the Minister for Communications Energy and Natural Resources The experience and know-how in energy management that the LIEN, with SEAI’s assistance, has developed in the last 18 years is impressive. It keeps paying dividends and progress is sustained year after year. Energy is the lifeblood of our economy, but it does not come free. That is why we must reduce our energy use and cut down on waste, so that we reduce our energy bills, make our energy system more sustainable, and minimise our greenhouse-gas emissions. Economic competitiveness and success are closely associated with energy efficiency. For example, it is no coincidence that countries that are resurgent in manufacturing and are increasing their share of manufactured goods globally have a strong focus on energy efficiency, as well as renewable energy. 6 Section One – Foreword Since energy plays such a critical role in our economy, high energy prices, the volatility in world oil markets and our excessive dependence on fossil fuels make energy efficiency an obvious policy imperative. Energy efficiency is the foundation of a sustainable economy, a truth recognised at EU level in 2012 with the adoption of the Energy Efficiency Directive. Transposition in Ireland is on track for completion by June 2014. Under the Directive, Member States will be obliged to find ways to encourage domestic customers to use less energy, to incentivise business customers to invest in energy efficiency, and to ensure that the funding is in place to allow the public sector to act as an exemplar. The issue of financing is a live issue – it is important that both public sector and commercial organisations can access affordable finance. During the Energy Ministers’ Council that I chaired in Dublin during Ireland’s 2013 EU Presidency, there was wide agreement that in order to achieve the level of investment required the private sector needs to see the value of energy efficiency projects and part of the role of governments will be to set up the frameworks that allow the market to function competitively. The National Energy Services Framework that I recently launched is our policy response to this objective. It is underpinned by an Energy Efficiency Fund and will provide a robust process for nurturing investment-ready projects. The benefits of investing in efficiency improvement measures greatly outweigh the upfront costs. We’ve faced considerable financial difficulties due to the economic downturn, but the best way of reducing our exposure to energy bills is by taking steps to reduce our energy usage. By doing so, both businesses and households can save money, while improving comfort in the case of households, and increasing productivity and competitiveness in the case of businesses. 7 The National Energy Efficiency Action Plan states, in its “2020 Vision”, that “Irish business will be known internationally for embracing energy-efficient practices, innovation and competitiveness." To achieve this vision, the Government is continuing to provide procurement guidance and tax incentives to encourage companies to buy the most efficient equipment. The Better Energy Workplaces Scheme has helped to raise the competitiveness of Irish business by delivering savings in an affordable way for both public and private enterprise. It also supports the energy service and utilities providers’ business goals relating to energy demand reduction. SEAI, meanwhile, offers a great range of networking, training and advisory services that help organisations to reduce energy usage, while our largest energy users are undertaking best international practice in energy management. It is very encouraging to see the Large Industry Energy Network (LIEN) continuing to make substantial progress, and contributing so strongly to our target of 20% energy savings across the economy by 2020. The experience and know-how in energy management that the LIEN, with SEAI’s assistance, has developed in the last 18 years is impressive. It keeps paying dividends and progress is sustained year after year. The benefits are multiple. The energy efficiency achieved through energy management and continual improvement ensures operational cost savings, industrial productivity, competitiveness, sustained employment and job creation. In these times of acute challenges, I congratulate the LIEN members on their great achievements. Pat Rabbitte, T.D. Minister for Communications, Energy and Natural Resources 1 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 CEO Intro The Large Industry Energy Network (LIEN) brings together over 160 of Ireland’s largest industrial and commercial companies. Among the most innovative enterprises in the country, they share a goal of reducing energy use, costs and CO2 emissions. Their search for solutions advances best practice standards and strengthens competitiveness. 8 Section One – CEO Introduction “The network is a national and, indeed, international model for engaging in focused, and effective activities, taking action and implementing innovative solutions that result in measurable savings.” In nearly twenty years of existence, the network has grown steadily with members now represents over 17% of total primary energy requirement (TPER). What makes the LIEN remarkable is the way in which members renew their efforts year after year, seeking continual improvement. Since its inception the founding member companies have achieved, on average, energy savings of 28%. The member results for 2012 were strong against a backdrop of increased output across most sectors and an estimated €40 million in energy savings were achieved. This reduction in energy usage and CO2 emissions achieved, improves the competitiveness of LIEN members particularly in challenging economic times. While indigenous industry comprise the majority of LIEN membership, the active participation and track record of multinational organisations, particularly in the medical, pharmaceutical and ICT sectors, improves Ireland’s international reputation as a place to locate and invest. The LIEN’s achievements come about through the combination of many activities supported by SEAI, including networking, sharing experiences, challenges, new opportunities and best practice. Members gain significantly from the influence and encouragement of peers and can save not just energy but often many years of research time. The implementation of energy management systems, supported through our Energy Agreements Programme (EAP), has accelerated the progress in energy performance since 2005. 9 The implementation of energy management systems, supported through our Energy Agreements Programme (EAP), has accelerated the progress in energy performance since 2005. EAP members, representing about half of the LIEN, have demonstrated exemplary performance in global terms and their work on new initiatives greatly benefits the LIEN overall. A total of 77 organisations participate in the EAP. Given the great success of the programme, we expect continued growth in the years ahead. We at SEAI are proud of the way in which the LIEN has become one of the world’s leading sustainable energy networks and the way in which its members contribute so strongly to national energy objectives. The network is a national and, indeed, international model for engaging in focused and effective activities, taking action and implementing innovative solutions that result in measurable savings. Congratulations to all those who have contributed to the LIEN’s success. I have no doubt that it will continue to lead the way by uncovering new sustainable energy opportunities. Brian Motherway Chief Executive SEAI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 LIEN Membership, Development and Benefits The Large Industry Energy Network has not only grown over its nearly twenty years, it has achieved an impressive reduction in energy usage and CO2 emissions. LIEN members are thus making a strong contribution to the CO2 reduction targets set out in the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan. LIEN Membership 180 30 160 Membership 120 20 100 15 80 60 Figure 1: Increase in LIEN membership 1995-2012, with members’ total primary energy requirement (TPER) 10 40 5 20 0 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 LIEN 10 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 TPE 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 TPER (GWH) 25 140 Section One – LIEN Membership, Development and Benefits A total of 162 of Ireland’s largest industrial and commercial companies are now members of the network. They account for over 17% of Ireland’s TPER. In 2012, the accumulated energy avoidance of their energy requirement, based on each company’s respective base year, was approximately 28%. It is for such achievements that the LIEN, established in 1995, has a strong reputation as a unique, highly pragmatic energy forum for Ireland’s leading industrial companies – and one in which members renew their efforts year after year to ensure continual improvement. Members share the goal of reducing energy waste, related costs and CO2 emissions, seeking efficiency gains in cross-cutting technologies such as compressed air, heat generation, lighting and use of waste heat. Members know that investing in energy management is very cost-effective in that it reduces their operating costs and strengthens their competitiveness. Member companies come from a wide range of industrial and commercial sectors, engaged in many different business activities, with an interest in driving continuous and sustained improvements in energy efficiency. Developing The Network LIEN membership is open to companies with an energy bill of around €1 million. The current average energy spend of LIEN companies is around €8 million. As members of the LIEN, they commit to: >D eveloping a management programme for energy use > Setting and reviewing energy targets > Undertaking an annual energy audit >P roducing an annual statement-of-energy accounts In 2012, the network welcomed 11 new members: > Amgen Technology (Ireland) > Aviva Stadium > Becton Dickinson & Company Ltd > Creganna > Dunnes Stores > GE Healthcare Ireland > Johnston Mooney and O’Brien > Medite Europe Limited > Merck Millipore Ltd > Microsoft Datacentre (Grangecastle) > Musgraves Some LIEN members moved from reporting within the LIEN to reporting under the Public Sector Monitoring & Reporting programme: > Bord na Móna Energy Ltd > Dublin Airport Authority > Iarnród Éireann > Tyndall National Institute Within the LIEN network, support from industry peers contributes to in-house knowledge and expertise. Meanwhile, SEAI continues to expand its support activities. It organises workshops, seminars and site visits for LIEN members every year so that they learn from specialists, including energy experts, and fellow energy managers. The Energy Agreements Programme, a subset of LIEN, is a highly successful example of the SEAI supports. It has built up a huge body of knowledge about energy saving techniques, and it facilitates the replication of these at host sites. 11 How Members Benefit Companies are increasingly aware that energy efficiency is crucial. The price of fossil fuels is volatile. The demand for energy to support economic growth keeps rising. We are all under pressure to reduce carbon emissions. And energy use is crucial to a company’s cost structure and operating model. A general transition to a more energy-efficient, lowcarbon economy is one of the most crucial economic shifts that is currently taking place, while, at the company level, it is essential to ensure competitiveness and success, or even survival. LIEN members benefit in multiple ways from the network: > They can take advantage of the LIEN’s accumulated energy expertise and knowledge base > They save a huge amount of research time through the pooling of knowledge and experience > They identify energy-saving opportunities and techniques much more rapidly and at lower cost than if they were working individually > The return on their investments is maximised > Publication of their achievements raises their reputation as environmentally responsible operators Energy efficiency can be viewed as a low-cost energy resource. If companies unlock the value in energy savings, they gain a strong cost advantage when competing at home or internationally. However, to realise as much as possible of their energy saving potential, organisations must take a systematic approach and set concrete targets for improvement. SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Network Activities for LIEN Members Highlights of 2012 were the 2nd International Conference on the Global Impact of Energy Management Systems, with accompanying Poster Exhibition, the annual SEAI Energy Show and Sustainable Energy Awards. 12 Section One – Network Activities for LIEN Members A wide variety of events and activities were organised in 2012, including seminars and workshops addressing key issues. SEAI consults with LIEN members to ensure that it keeps up to date with their current needs as well as the practical needs of industry, and organises support activities accordingly. Members of the LIEN network host many of the events, which enhances their impact. potential global impact of ISO 50001 and the evolution of the new energy standards." The conference featured a range of international energy experts, with the following sessions and speakers: National policy and programme support Provided insights into different regions and economies to promote and support the energy management system (EnMS) approach: Closely integrated with SEAI’s wider energy programmes, these customised events and activities include workshops, site visits, seminars and conferences. The overall purpose is to disseminate information so as to encourage and enable wider replication and the achievement of additional energy savings in industry. > Vida Rozite, IEA Key events in 2012 were: Long-term strategies to develop capability and impact Explored new and transformative approaches that maximise the contribution that energy management programmes and ISO 50001 can deliver: APRIL 2012 Energy Show The 2012 Energy Show, Ireland’s national sustainable-energy exhibition, showcased developments in energy technologies and practices across Irish industry – with the theme "Open Up to Smart Energy Solutions." The seminar programme included the following presentations: > Smart Grid – Preparing for the future > Commercial Bio Energy – Investing in Fundable Projects > Energy Performance Contracting (EPC) – the necessity for all future energy saving projects > The Built Environment – Redefining zero-energy buildings > CIBSE Master Class – Building Services Engineering Design and the latest practices > Renewable Heat – Changing the way we think about energy MAY LIEN event: 2nd International Conference on the Global Impact of Energy Management Systems: Creating the Right Environment for ISO 50001 Held in Dublin’s Mansion House, this international energy conference was opened by Lord Mayor of Dublin Andrew Montague. International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Secretary General Rob Steele delivered the keynote address on "Reflections on the 13 > Julia Reinaud, IIP > Marco Matteini, UNIDO > Paul Scheihing, US Department of Energy > John O’Sullivan, SEAI > Aimee McKane, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory EnMS experiences: country reviews with future insights Provided an overview from countries where energy management systems have been successfully adopted in national programmes; including insights on ISO 50001 integration and programme development: > Thomas Bjorkman, Swedish Energy Agency > Hille Hyytia, Motiva > Geng Wang, CNIS Synergy with other policy measures Reflection by senior policymakers with different strategic approaches on how the ISO 50001 standard fits with existing measures; consideration of energy efficiency policies in different regions: > Erik Gudbjerg, Lokalenergi > Chad Gilless, EnerNOC > Albert Dessi, Department of Resources, Energy and Tourism, Canberra >KK Chakarvarti, Bureau of Energy Efficiency, New Delhi SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 MAY LIEN Exhibition Poster Display at the International Conference on the Global Impact of Energy Management Systems This Poster Exhibition accompanied the SEAI International Conference (outlined earlier) and the ISO Technical Committee meeting in Dublin. SEAI invited LIEN members to develop posters for display on the following themes: Experiences of ISO 50001 implementation and certification Focused on an organisation’s implementation and certification experiences, using lessons learned during the implementation and management processes, organisational change impacts and the resulting energy performance improvements. Members featured under this theme: > Abbott Ireland Pharmaceutical Operation > Tyndall National Institute High-impact projects arising from the EnMS process Focused on exemplar projects implemented as a result of the energy management process. Posters emphasised the added-value of the EnMS; identifying and prioritising project opportunities, implementation and the ongoing performance verification process. I nfluencing the organisation – attitude, behaviour and change Focused on the ISO 50001 implementation process, its effective operation and the opportunities that require organisational change in order to maximise benefit. Posters highlighted experiences of organisational change and the change management process that led to significant results benefits for the organisation. Members featured under this theme: > Roadstone Wood > Google > Aurivo > Pfizer – Newbridge Measuring the energy performance improvement and added benefits brought by an EnMS Focused on the additional contributions that an EnMS delivers compared with expected normal business performance. Provided insights into the methodologies used to determine performance improvement as well as the measurement and verification of energy savings. Members featured under this theme: > Pfizer – Lougbeg > Pfizer – Lougbeg I ntegrating ISO 50001 in management system frameworks Focused on alternative strategies to implement and operate the ISO 50001 EnMS within other management system frameworks; outlined what approaches are being taken to integrate management systems, including continual improvement and effectiveness. > Nypro Members featured under this theme: > Astellas > Boliden Tara Mines Members featured under this theme: > LEO Pharma > Heinz > Depuy Ireland > Allergan Pharmaceuticals Energy service company experiences Focused on the experiences of Irish and international companies delivering energy management services. The poster display by LIEN members provided a valuable added dimension to the conference and ISO technical meeting. It offered delegates and authors the opportunity to exchange views on a variety of practical applications of EnMS. October – LIEN seminar & site visit: Ireland’s Energy Market, Ardnacrusha Hydroelectric Power Station A popular and well-attended annual seminar, held in 2012 at the Ardnacrusha Hydro Electric Power Plant, celebrating its 85th anniversary. The seminar featured topics of interest relating to regulatory and policy issues, pricing trends, energy suppliers, demand-side units and energy procurement strategy. LIEN members were taken on a site tour. November – LIEN seminar: Renewable Energy Applications for Large Industry This seminar reviewed successful renewable energy projects carried out by LIEN & Energy Agreements Programme members. It focused on project presentations by companies on major renewable energy installations, followed by a site tour of the Astellas Killorglin, Co. Kerry facility. Presentations: > Anaerobic Digester Biogas CHP installation – Kerry Ingredients, Listowel > Biomass boiler installation to supply site thermal load – Astellas, Killorglin > Geothermal Process Cooling – Vistakon, Limerick > Wind turbine installation to reduce purchase of grid-supplied electricity – Astellas, Killorglin 14 Section One – Network Activities for LIEN Members Sustainable Energy Awards November 2012 Since its establishment in 2004, the annual event for the Irish business community has been growing each year in participation and significance. The 2012 award entrants reported energy savings of €23 million, based on their energy management initiatives. LIEN members were represented as follows: Energy Efficiency Award – Small/Medium Energy User Outstanding Leadership in Energy Management Award – Major User Winner: Recordati Ireland Ltd Winner: Tyndall National Institute Energy Efficiency Award – Major User Finalist: EPS Group Renewable Energy Systems Award Winner: EPS Group Winner: Astellas Ireland Co. Ltd. (Kerry plant) Finalists: Abbott Ireland, Cootehill Dawn Meats IBM Energy Sustainability in the Built Environment Award Integrated Energy Management Award – Major User Winner: MSD Ireland (Ballydine) Finalist: EMC2 Information Systems International 15 Finalist: Tesco Ireland Sustainable Energy Innovation Award Winner: Tesco Ireland Finalists: Diageo Ireland Dawn Meats 2 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Energy Agreements Programme Organisations can reduce energy-related costs and emissions by applying a strong, strategic and systematic approach to energy management. The Energy Agreements Programme (EAP) assists large energy users in achieving this through engaging in energy efficiency measures above and beyond business as usual. 16 Section Two – The Energy Agreement Programme Launched in May 2006, the EAP is a subset of the LIEN. SEAI provides tailored supports consisting of advice, networking and financial supports. As part of the EAP, organisations enter into a voluntary agreement whereby they implement and maintain a certified Energy Management System (EnMS) and complete an average of one Special Investigation per year. Special Investigations are feasibility studies that focus on significant energy users. Energy efficiency opportunities are identified and registered. They involve a ‘deep dive’ on specific technologies, equipment or processes, and thus enhance the EnMS process. Organisations generally achieve immediate energy cost savings through ‘low-hanging fruit’ and easily identifiable opportunities. The Special Investigations then reveal further more challenging energy saving opportunities. Programme Strategy and Supports for Members The EAP strategy is that each member organisation meets the requirements of the voluntary agreement and is then encouraged by the programme activities to carry out voluntary projects. In signing an Energy Agreement with SEAI, the organization commits to make the necessary efforts to obtain (and retain) certification to the EnMS ISO 50001 standard and to reduce its energy-related emissions. This means devoting sufficient resources to obtain the standard within 12 months (maximum 24 months) and then use the EnMS to maximise energy savings in both the short and long term. Programme activities and supports are designed to stimulate the development of the members’ energy management programmes. Programme Supports Agreement Support Managers (ASMs) provide: > Advice, mentoring and assessments > Support in implementing and operating an EnMS > Working with members to maximise energy performance through engaging with the organisation’s work programmes > Gap Analysis Special project initiatives: planned to support members in activities relating to significant energy users. These initiatives focus on new methodologies, specific technologies and industry sectors. Guidance notes, case studies and reports are produced so that the knowledge gained in the projects can be shared, replicated and applied. Special investigations: these focus on significant energy users, going beyond routine energy efficiency assessments. To ensure continued uncovering of opportunities, SEAI keeps developing processes, methodologies, specific technologies, and industry sectors. Successful actions and approaches are analysed, standardised and disseminated to the members of LIEN. Networking activities: tailored workshops, networking events, seminars and conferences. These are a core part of the EAP. SEAI works closely with members to make sure that the activities reflect the practical needs of industry, so they are varied each year depending on programme needs and topics of particular interest. Energy Efficiency Networks Special Working Groups (SWGs) are part of the Special Initiatives under the (EAP). They focus on specific technologies, initiatives and areas of interest to members. Members are drawn from the EAP and LIEN, and supported by SEAI-appointed experts. 17 A number of SWGs have evolved into sector-focused energy networks that bring together companies with shared objectives, while facilitating further dissemination and application of outputs from the previous working groups. Data Centre Energy Network The Data Centre Energy Network (DCEN) is the successor to the Data Centre Strategic Working Group (DC SWG) set up by SEAI in 2009 as a focus group to highlight energy efficiency best practice and to drive energy efficiency projects in Irish data centre facilities. Its terms of reference listed the following areas of interest: >Energy Performance Indicators (EnPis) - identifying the most appropriate measurements for energy management in data centres > Contracts and Energy Efficiency – the energy performance parameters from an outsourcing perspective > IT infrastructure and Energy Efficiency – initiatives to optimise the energy efficiency of servers, storage and networks > Functional Impacts and Influences – understanding the impact of energy efficiency in utilities, IT demands, Marketing and Sales and Customers > New Developments – dissemination of evolving technologies and methodologies from external sources: - Similar networks in other countries, EU research, Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) - Green Grid, IDA cloud computing initiative - Energy competence centre funded by IDA and Enterprise Ireland > Implementing ISO50001 in Data Centres SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Network benefits The participant companies have undertaken multiple initiatives since 2009, implementing better air management and installing new cooling infrastructure in a retrofit context. The current focus of the group is to understand the latest developments in technologies and methodologies that could be applied to increase energy efficiency and reduce their considerable energy costs. Network members The DCEN participants represent a variety of backgrounds where the data centre is (i) internal infrastructure, (ii) core business or (iii) ancillary business. Members include Bank of Ireland, BT, eBay, EMC, IBM, Intel Corporation, Interxion, Microsoft and Vodafone. The DCEN is open to new members. 18 Activities to date In 2012, the DCEN organised two half-day seminars, the first in April and the second in November. The April seminar, hosted by Microsoft, focussed on the latest research and trends in better energy management and increased energy efficiency, and the benefits arising from new developments in Direct Current (DC). The November seminar, hosted by Bank of Ireland, centred on recent electricity market changes in the area of emergency demand response, Data Centre Infrastructure Management (DCIM), and implementing ISO 50001 in data centres. Section Two – The Energy Agreement Programme Commercial Buildings Energy Network The Commercial Buildings Energy Network (CBEN) caters for companies in the LIEN with significant commercial buildings assets. The network is a natural progression for companies that participated in an SWG that focused on energy usage in the commercial building sector. With the assistance of a technical panel, activities were undertaken on behalf of members such as site audits, special investigations, case studies and research around operations, maintenance, benchmarking and retro-commissioning of buildings. The members met on three occasions and cited their desire to participate in a knowledge sharing network. Network members The network has an expanded membership, including companies such as Google, Tesco, Bank of Ireland, Eircom, Aurivo, Irish Rail, Citi, the DAA, Aviva Stadium, IBM, Vodafone and O2. Activities to date The network had its first gathering when Tesco hosted the group and provided a tour of an operational ‘zero carbon’ store, during which discussions focused on LED lights and their lux levels, automated controls and their reliability, the optimisation of natural lighting, recycling fridge cool air, systems to stop heat escaping, and the application of CHP driven by biofuel. This set the scene for all members to share their experiences and challenges in respect of energy management in their particular facilities. The half-day visit provided a rare opportunity to listen to a group of energy managers in the sector. SEAI representation gave an overview of the LIEN and the impact its members are having on reducing energy consumption nationally. Network benefits As well as knowledge-sharing and networking, benefits (or potential benefits) include: > Stimulating energy reduction activity that may not have happened otherwise, or at least not in the short term > Providing a structured approach for unrelated companies to work as a group on common energy issues > Exploring the large commercial buildings sector to determine the main opportunities > Creating and documenting deliverables, and producing outputs, which can be replicated or used by others, without them having to duplicate development effort > Uncovering possible strategic approaches in energy management that can be standardised to enable a longer-term and wider spread reduction of energy use > Exploiting links to other SEAI programmes and uncovering compatibilities with other SEAI support structures (e.g. Special Investigations) Activities to date The report and best practice work pulled together by the last F&D SWG has been disseminated to member companies. The network will aim to drive replication and implementation of opportunities identified in previous Food & Dairy Special Working Group. If there is sufficient interest and commitment from members, benchmarking for similar processes may be carried out. Network members There are 49 companies eligible for membership of the Network, across the food industry in Ireland. Benefits Benefits of joining the network include sharing of information, access to best practice in the industry and a collaborative approach to problem-solving. Targeted areas identified for energy savings include: 1 Heat Recovery 2 Optimised Drying & Heat Treatment 3 Energy Efficient Design Food and Dairy Energy Network The Food and Dairy Energy Network was set up to continue the work carried out by a Food and Dairy SWG. There has been a huge amount of investment in the food and beverage sector, with major expansion in many parts of the industry driven by increasing international demand. There has also been increasing focus on sustainable food production, driven by Origin Green and supply-chain initiatives by major customers. In this context, the network aims to drive implementation of best practices for the sector. 19 4 Effluent Treatment Optimisation 3 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 COMPANY PROFILES This section consists of a number of company profiles, in which a wide variety of energy efficiency projects and achievements are presented. These range from the implementation of energy management, use of CHP and Anaerobic Digestion to compressed-air, energy-efficient design projects and the application of the Delta learn-by-doing approach. All the initiatives resulted in a substantial reduction in energy use, carbon emissions and energy costs. 20 Section Three – Company Profiles 21 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Abbott Diagnostics Sligo Abbott Diagnostics Sligo finds the remedy for long-term energy efficiency. Abbott Diagnostics is a global leader of in-vitro diagnostics with around 70,000 institutional customers in more than 100 countries. Its diagnostic products include a broad range of innovative instrument systems and tests for hospitals, reference labs, blood banks, physician offices and clinics. Abbott established its first Irish diagnostics manufacturing facility in the Finisklin Business Park in Sligo in 1994 to manufacture blood-screening products and reagents. This impressive manufacturing facility has expanded eight times, and now spans nearly 170,000 square feet over a nine-acre site. The site is the second largest diagnostics manufacturing facility for Abbott worldwide. A research & development centre has been established to support the development of pioneering new products. Energy Strategy Implemented Abbott's diagnostics manufacturing facility in Sligo signed up to the Energy Agreements Programme (EAP) in 2010 and achieved certification to ISO 50001 in September 2013. The Sligo facility is the second largest diagnostics manufacturing site for Abbott worldwide. In 2010, the facility implemented a comprehensive energy strategy to improve energy efficiency and reduce carbon emissions. A detailed energy audit was commissioned to identify where energy was being used, what were the biggest energy users and where the most potential for energy saving lay. The audit focused mainly on significant energy users and concluded that the site offered a number of energy saving opportunities that could greatly reduce its cost base and environmental footprint. Senior management decided to progress the design of the energy saving solutions from the global energy team and the project came to fruition in 2011. The project, in three phases, focused on the following potential savings: Phase 1: The potential for savings from the integration of two adjacent manufacturing facilities in the Finisklin Business Park was addressed. As these had largely separate utility systems as a result of the phasing, construction and business criticality of the systems during site development, considerable opportunities for rationalisation of energy usage were identified. In particular the major utilities such as steam, hot water, compressed air and chilled water presented opportunities in terms of increased generation and distribution efficiencies from integration and general efficiency improvements. The areas addressed were: > Gas-fired low pressure hot water (LPHW) boiler installation to allow substantially more efficient and cost-effective generation of hot water for space heating. This replaced steam with hot water, making the heating system more efficient. > Interconnection of the Base and Atlas Facilities steam networks to allow consolidation of steam generation in one boiler house. Liquid petroleum gas (LPG) was chosen to replace diesel as the primary fuel for efficiency, cost and environmental reasons. > Efficiency upgrade to the LPHW pumping system for the site, ensuring that circulated water volumes were proportional to the heating demand. > Integration of the two chilled-water generation and distribution systems to allow chilled water to be generated in, and distributed from, the most efficient generation system. > Efficiency upgrade to the chilled water pumping system, ensuring that circulated water volumes were proportional to the cooling demand. > Integration of the process and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) cooling loops to reduce distribution costs. > Integration of the Base and Atlas compressed-air networks to prioritise the use of the most efficient air compressors and dryers on the site. 22 Section Three – Company Profiles Phase 2: After completion of Phase 1, the loads on the chilled-water system were concentrated in the Atlas plant room. The chilled-water production for the site consisted of two air-cooled Trane units providing a cooling capacity of 1,250 kilowatt (kW) each. These chillers operated at a coefficient of performance (COP) of 2.5 to 3.5. Phase 2 proposed replacement of the air-cooled chillers with a higher-efficiency water-cooled chiller and cooling tower arrangement, delivering a COP between 5.0 and 7.5 over its capacity range, to reduce operating costs. All HVAC units were modified to allow implementation of free cooling. Further improvements to the HVAC system included the calculation of dynamic setpoints, introduction of destratification fans in warehouses, and installation of actuated dampers in the meeting rooms linked to the lighting PIRs to allow airflow rates to depend on occupancy levels. Phase 3: The installation of the water-cooled chiller and cooling tower resulted in a site profile that matched the characteristics of a heat pump, whereby LPHW at 66 ºC and chiller cooling water (CW) are cooled simultaneously. The heat pump acted as a cooling tower to reduce the CW water heat rejection load and used this rejected heat to produce LPHW at 66 ºC. 23 Key Factors in Success Innovation and continuous improvement in energy management are key factors in the successful implementation of energy efficiency projects at Abbott Sligo. Since the site signed up to the EAP in 2010, a significant reduction in the LIEN EnPi performance was achieved in a short timeframe. This was driven by a focused EnMS, which resulted in certification to ISO 50001. EnPi Trend 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2010 2011 2012 Energy Performance Indicator - Improvement Trend SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 CG Power Systems Ireland CG Power Systems energy project has ‘dramatic’ results. The CG Power Systems Ireland Ltd factory in Cavan was established in 1977 for manufacture of distribution transformers for the electricity industry. The site has two facilities, Metal Parts and Assembly, employing 465 people. Customers include a broad spectrum of sectors in the energy market: utilities, renewables (solar, wind and biomass), industrial, energy performance contractors (EPC), nuclear, oil and gas. The company has an ISO 50001 EnMS and is working on projects and improved operational controls to enhance energy performance. Annual energy consumption is over 18 GWh, more than 60% of which is LPG. Improve Project Focused on Largest Gas User > Fitting a heat recovery system on the main exhaust stacks to preheat the intake air to the burner The Paint Plant was focused on as the largest gas user on site, with an annual usage of 7.4 MWh/year, costing over €500k in LPG gas – 65% of annual gas consumption. The team followed a process of Define, Measure, Analyse, Improve, Control (DMAIC). Define CG Power Systems Ireland – Gas Consumption Paint Plant 65% AAP Drying Ovens 21% Metal Parts Heating 9% AAP Building Heating 5% > Gathered information from oven manufacturers about air circulation in ovens and required air changes Control output variables by: > Reducing and controlling exhaust extract using variable-speed drives > Fitting fully modulating efficient burners > Fitting automated doors to control spillage from the oven Control New process controls were implemented and work methods adapted for the new regime. The improvement has been verified as part of the measurement and verification process for energy improvements. Issues Encountered > Found that no manufacturers contacted had carried out any modifications to control or recover heat air-to-air from the exhaust system to preheat the oven > Sourcing a company to take on heat recovery air-to-air at 200°C on this scale. CG had to take a lead to implement the technology > Worked with the paint suppliers regarding curing requirements, vapours emitted and recommended extraction rates > Automated doors – a number of attempts were needed, including the options of air knifes and electrically controlled doors before settling on mechanically controlled doors as the best solution Analyse The heat usage was analysed to find where losses were and where value was added. Measure Actual losses were measured and found to be of the order of 639 kW, costing almost €250,000 per year, so any reduction in this would yield significant benefits. 24 > Achieving a consistent balanced extraction was a challenge and during commissioning this was adjusted a number of times Section Three – Company Profiles Benefits Arising from Project > Substantially reduced gas usage and cost in paint plant – exhaust heat reduced by 50% > Cleaner air feeding into burner/oven > Reduced building heating cost as paint plant was drawing air from the factory building, made up with extra outside air which had to be heated to maintain factory floor temperature > Thermal energy required to heat oven reduced by 38% for Jan-Nov 2013 > Total annual savings arising from oven improvements: 2,700 MWh thermal and 340 MWh electrical on full year basis, equivalent to 788 tonnes CO2 > Improved process control due to modulation burners > Improved employee environment “The implementation of energy waste reduction and recycling wasted heat on CG Power System's paint curing ovens has had dramatic benefits for both the business and the environment” 25 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Dairygold Food Ingredients Dairygold project meets processing and energy needs while ensuring cost-effective waste water treatment. Dairygold Food Ingredients (DFI) is a part of Dairygold Co-Operative Society Ltd, formed in 1990 with the merger of Ballyclough Co-operative Creamery Ltd and Mitchelstown Co-operative Agricultural Society Ltd. DFI is one of Ireland’s leading dairy manufacturing companies, with over 400 employees. It operates four milk processing plants in Munster, two of which are situated in Mitchelstown – Castlefarm and Clonmel Road. The Castlefarm facility is one of the biggest powder manufacturing plants of its kind in Europe. The Clonmel Road facility is now the biggest single-line cheddar plant in the European Union. Annual output from the two Mitchelstown facilities is over 100,000 tonnes. Background In recent years DFI has worked closely with SEAI, developing energy management projects and infrastructure. Dairygold joined SEAI’s Energy Agreements Programme in 2010 and was quickly certified to EN 16001, and then achieved the ISO 50001 standard. In line with Dairygold’s energy management and continuous improvement programmes, it has set targets to reduce energy usage through projects, capital investment monitoring and awareness campaigns. The ending of milk quotas in 2015 and anticipated increase in milk volumes required Dairygold to plan for a substantial increase in milk processing capacity. The projected increase in milk volumes would produce more process wastewaters and therefore lead to an increased treatment capacity requirement. DFI’s anaerobic treatment project provided a solution to the processing, environmental and energy needs while at the same time providing cost-effective treatment capacity. The project, completed in 2012, involved the construction and commissioning of a 45,000m3 anaerobic digester for wastewater treatment. 26 Project Description One of the principal rationales for Dairygold’s technology choice was energy consideration. The other was to choose a technology that met the BREF and EPA guidance for Best Available Technology (BAT). The anaerobic treatment process meets both objectives. The process provides lower biomass yields than conventional aerobic processes and allows for higher loading rates. The production of biogas as a side-product of the wastewater treatment process is an additional advantage. Anaerobic digestion (AD) Anaerobic digestion is the natural breakdown of organic materials to methane, carbon-dioxide gas and a nutrient-rich sludge. The system operates in the lower end of the mesophilic range (20 to 30oC. Biogas generated during treatment is used to maintain the operational temperature within this range if required. Excess biogas is used to displace fossil-fuel usage through the production of steam in a secondary boiler. The excess steam represents 6% of monthly steam usage at the Castlefarm facility across the summer peak season. The anaerobic treatment is installed as a pre-treatment step for biodegradable organic waste streams. Dairygold’s anaerobic digester operates as a continuous above-ground low-rate anaerobic reactor. Additional nutrient removal of nitrogen and phosphorus is achieved through the existing aerobic Biological Nutrient Removal (BNR) systems. Section Three – Company Profiles The AD process at Dairygold The digester pre-treats the process wastewater from Dairygold’s production facility prior to entering the biological nutrient removal (BNR) system. The process wastewater arises from powder and cheese production. The reactor anaerobically digests a high percentage of the raw wastewater biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) “DFI’s anaerobic treatment project provided a solution to and total suspended solids (TSS) loadings, while our processing, environmental converting the degradable and energy needs while at the organics in the wastewater to energy-rich biogas and same time providing costa small amount of waste effective treatment capacity.” biomass (sludge). The reactor releases a high-quality anaerobic effluent to feed the downstream BNR system, with average BOD removal of 90%. Heat exchangers are used to recover heat from the treated effluent, which is used to preheat the influent entering the digester. The reactor is completely covered with a specialised floating geomembrane cover, which collects the generated biogas. Gas production is intimately linked to the BOD loading on the reactor. The biogas produced during the AD process is used in a dual-fuel boiler to produce hot water to heat the reactor. Surplus biogas is used for supplementing heating requirements in a plant boiler. The surplus gas represents 107 therms of gas (or 3,135 kWh) per 1,000 kg of COD treated, of which 70% is sent back to the factory for reuse. 27 Future Plans Dairygold plans to complete further energy projects in 2013 through to 2015, including: > Installation of economisers on boilers at Clonmel Road > Water conservation projects Energy-efficient design (EED) is part of the Niro 3 spray dryer project. For example, the design features heat recovery on the exhaust air thermal energy; recovered heat from the evaporator secondary condensate steam will be used to preheat the incoming milk to the evaporator, and mechanical vapour recompression has been selected to reduce energy usage and operating cost. These projects will have a substantial effect on energy consumption and help to move DFI towards a carbon-neutral and more energy-efficient manufacturing process. SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Glanbia Ingredients Ireland Glanbia’s Delta way achieves alpha results. The Glanbia Ingredients Ireland Ltd (GIIL), Ballyragget multi-purpose dairy processing plant was established in 1966 in Co. Kilkenny and has been expanding ever since. Ballyragget is Europe’s largest integrated dairy processing facility. GIIL processes a broad range of dairy ingredients, including about 30% of the Irish milk pool, and employs 320 people. Background Energy management As energy represents 40% of controllable costs, both fuel prices and energy efficiency are crucial to future competitiveness. In the context of the EU Emission Trading Scheme, GIIL strives to reduce carbon emissions. The Delta Way The GIIL Delta Programme was rolled out in 2011. Delta adopts Lean principles and tools to maximise customer value while minimising waste, whether excess carbon, loss in energy efficiency or loss of product. The goal is to ensure a perfect valuecreation process, with zero waste across all production processes and activities. The Delta approach requires the involvement of all departments. It assumes a Learn by Doing approach, involving everyone from management to the shopfloor worker. Delta objectives are accomplished through processes such as: > 3M (Meet, Manage & Measure) – to align GIIL strategy through engagement, monitoring performance to ensure targets are met, and managing for today while improving for tomorrow > Local Improvement Programme (LIPS) – a forum for reviewing both short-term reactive issues and longer-term proactive planning, ensuring follow-through that drives final resolution “Our mission it to process our suppliers' growing milk volumes and maximise sustainable value in global markets for all our stakeholders.” 28 > Focused Improvement Programme (FI) – to solve specific issues, using structured problem-solving Section Three – Company Profiles 300 84,000 82,000 250 GWh per Product Tns 2.5 80,000 78,000 200 2.0 76,000 150 74,000 72,000 100 1.5 1.0 70,000 68,000 50 0.5 66,000 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Production Tonnes The graph above illustrates the increase in production output ( ), 2005–2012. Over the same period, the amount of carbon emitted ( ) fell following the introduction of the low-carbon energy efficiency management system in 2007. Project Description The most significant energy users (SEUs) on the Ballyragget site are the whey and utility plants, which is why GIIL, Ballyragget focused on these plants and processes in 2011 and 2012. With much success in reducing associated energy consumption, GIIL, Ballyragget addressed other general areas to reduce energy consumption, including: Refrigeration SEAI supported a project under the Better Energy Workplaces scheme, which improved control of the refrigeration plants. This project improved the coefficient of performance (COP – the ratio of cooling provided over the power consumed) by 30%, with a corresponding reduction in power consumption. Compressed air Compressed air is an SEU on site. Under the Delta/Lean programme, compressed-air leakage control was the focus of maintenance staff. This programme yielded a 10% improvement in compressed-air power consumption. 2010 2011 64,000 2012 0.0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 CO2 Emissions Condensate return Pipework and valves were installed to maximise boiler-feed condensate. Surplus-product condensate collection was maximised for heat recovery and reuse in flushing and washing cycles, thus reducing fresh water demand. Future Plans Insulation An extensive, ongoing insulation programme includes fitting of insulation wraps or jackets on steam valves and other in-line equipment. The re-insulation of the boiler-feed tanks reduced energy use in the boiler-house. > Increased metering on significant energy users HVAC HVAC control has been linked to production status in several areas to minimise runtime and optimise critical parameters such as air temperature, pressure and humidity. > Investigations into most efficient lighting options Lighting Continuing installation of motion and daylight sensors has reduced lighting costs in several areas of the plant. On-farm sustainability programme In the Life Cycle Analysis of a dairy product, up to 90% of all emissions are contributed on farm. The Open Source Dairy Sustainability Programme will help to ensure that our farmers are the most efficient they can be in the production of milk, remain economically viable and continuously improve performance under the heading of sustainability. VSDs VSDs were installed at several locations to reduce the electrical load drawn by motors. All motors on the new plants installed in 2013 have been fitted with VSDs. 29 As per the Origin Green Charter, GIIL Ballyragget has set targets to reduce energy consumption on site by 1% per tonne of product year on year up to 2020. Planned energy efficiency projects for 2013 and 2014 include: > Replacement of pasteurisers with more energy-efficient pasteurisers > Further condensate recovery > Focus on operational factors affecting energy consumption GIIL will ensure that at least 90% of our farmers (4,300) have been audited by March 2015 in order to establish a baseline for the GIIL Open Source Dairy Sustainability Programme, under the headings of Animal Health & Welfare, Carbon Emissions, Energy Efficiency, Water Efficiency, Waste Reduction, Biodiversity and On-Farm Health & Safety. These audits will be independently assessed. SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 GlaxoSmithKline Ireland (GSK) GSK no longer losing 90% of energy used in generating compressed air. GlaxoSmithKline, is one of the world's leading research-based pharmaceutical and healthcare companies. The Cork facility is a strategic global new-product introduction site. There is a highly automated manufacturing facility, as well as an R&D pilot plant at Currabinny. It is the primary production site for a number of GSK’s top selling drugs. Background GSK’s Currabinny manufacturing site uses compressed air for a wide range of instrumentation and process control purposes, and to supply breathing air for plant operators. In 2012 the compressed-air systems used 8% of the site’s total electricity supply at an annual cost of €217,711, with CO2 emissions of 957 tonnes. The Cork site has already achieved a 51% reduction in CO2 emissions since 2006 with help and support from SEAI, and is committed to achieving further year-on-year reductions. SEAI and GSK Cork had identified the compressed-air system as a priority for savings in contributing to these goals. Project Description In common with many sites, the compressed-air plant had developed incrementally over the years with changes in plant requirements. This resulted in a legacy of eight compressors in two locations, each serving separate instrument-air and breathing-air systems. This resulted in: > Increased electricity consumption due to poor compressor efficiency > Inefficient use of compressor capacity to meet the demands of separate instrument air and breathing air systems > Varying levels of compressed air dryness Approximately 90% of energy used in generating compressed air is lost as waste heat. The original compressors gave no opportunity to recover any of this lost energy. Project evaluation A strategic plan was required to meet the long-term compressed-air requirements of the site in the most energy-efficient way. 30 A User Requirement Specification was developed, working with SEAI and other specialists; main requirements for the new system were identified: > Single high efficiency compressor to serve both breathing air and instrument air systems > VSD for optimum matching of compressor output to combined instrument and breathing air demand > Metering of air output and electricity consumption > Recovery of waste heat from compressor to reduce site gas consumption > Consistent dryness, with dew point of -40 oC across all systems A load analysis was carried out to determine the optimum capacity for the new compressor, and to confirm that variable-speed operation with a single compressor would be the most efficient way to meet the combined air demand pattern. This showed that a single compressor with a variable output between 15m3/minute and 45m3/minute would be best. The most efficient of the existing compressors would be retained for backup. The most efficient air drying technology was determined to be a steam regenerated desiccant system. This is also less carbon-intensive than using electricity. A large part of GSK Cork’s site steam is generated from a waste heat boiler, of which the output often exceeds site demand during the summer. Using recovered heat A compressor with heat recovery can deliver a proportion of its total waste heat at up to 60oC without significantly affecting compressor efficiency. A review to identify which site heat load would be most compatible with heat output from the compressor identified the make-up water to the steam boiler as the optimum solution. Make-up water replaces condensate that cannot be recovered from some of the site’s processes and condensate lost from the return system. Using the compressor’s waste heat to preheat the boiler make-up water would reduce gas consumption by the gas-fired steam boiler. Section Three – Company Profiles The Project evaluation predicted that: > A new single air compressor to feed the instrument air and breathing air systems would reduce electricity consumption by 370,868 kWh > The heat recovery system would reduce annual boiler gas consumption by 899,257 kWh The projected combined annual energy cost saving would be €76,266, with additional non-energy savings of €13,125. The total capital cost of the project would have been €683,700, with a payback period of eight years. SEAI provided a capital grant for 33% under the Better Energy Workplaces (BEW) scheme, which enabled GSK to proceed with the project. Implementation and verification The new compressor and heat recovery system were installed and commissioned at the end of 2012. Energy savings for the compressor were verified by comparing metered electricity consumption during similar periods in 2012 and 2013. “The project was highly successful. We achieved greater energy and cost savings than predicted, saving €118,152 – with a payback of less than four years.” The comparison showed an average reduction in electrical load from 260 kW to 171 kW, with a saving of 34% and a predicted annual saving of 721,728 kWh, double the 17% saving predicted in the project evaluation. The air metering and electricity consumption data for the new compressor showed an average efficiency of 6.5 kW per m3/minute, in accordance with the manufacturer’s specification. Therefore it appears that the combined efficiency of the original compressors was worse than assumed in the project evaluation, at around 8.2 kW per m3/minute. 31 Heat recovered from the compressor was evaluated by monitoring the flow of make-up water to the boiler, and the temperature increase provided by the heat recovery system over 12 months. The average heat recovery over the year was 85 kW compared to a prediction of 112 kW in the project evaluation. The shortfall in predicted heat recovery was due to a reduction in boiler make-up water requirements, which occurred as a result of work done to improve condensate return, and reduce steam consumption. Benefits Overall, the project has been a great success, providing energy and cost savings greater than predicted. Projected Savings Electricity Actual Savings kWh Cost kWh Cost 370,868 €39,486 721,728 €76,842 Gas 899,257 €36,780 689,103 €28,184 Total 1,270,125 €76,266 1,410,831 €105,027 The total actual energy and non-energy savings achieved of €118,152, along with the reduced capital spend due to the SEAI BEW grant, has resulted in a payback of 3.8 years. SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Pfizer Pfizer Little Island compressed-air success is widely replicable. Pfizer is one of Ireland’s leading employers and the largest pharmaceutical sector investor and employer. It has a rich tradition of innovation and expansion over forty years, and employs over 4,000 people across eight locations. 32 Section Three – Company Profiles Instantaneous Power (kW) Annual Energy Consumed (kWh) Annual Energy Cost (€) CO2 Emissions (Tonnes) Old Fixed Speed Compressor 110 963,600 96,360 515 New VSD Compressor 78 683,280 68,328 365 Savings 32 280,320 28,032 150 Table 1: Project energy and carbon savings Pfizer Little Island in Co. Cork was the first site in Ireland to be certified to the IS 393 Energy Management standard, in 2006. It transitioned to international standard ISO 50001 in 2012. Pfizer Little Island approaches sustainability and hence energy efficiency as an inherent part of the company’s successful future. As part of the ISO 50001 programme, the site continuously seeks out opportunities to reduce its carbon footprint. Benefits of Project Background Under the energy management system, significant energy users (SEUs) are regularly reviewed and monitored. As part of this work, compressed air was identified in 2010 as an SEU that consumed over 7% of site electricity consumption. “The energy management work at Pfizer Little Island can be summarised in the site formula for success: Continuous Improvement & Innovation = Sustainable Business Excellence” In December 2011 a new variable speed drive (VSD) air compressor was installed in place of one of the older compressors. This project was part-funded under the SEAI Better Energy Workplaces (BEW) grant scheme. The new compressor uses an Intellisys controller to vary the speed of the compressor to precisely match the site compressed-air requirement, thereby avoiding the wasted energy associated with running a fixed-speed compressor unloaded. The supply of oil-free compressed air is essential for smooth and safe operation of the production processes; thus it is not only an SEU but also a critical utility in terms of process operations. This is true not only for Pfizer Little island but also for many other pharmaceutical and manufacturing sector companies. Hence, improvement work in this area is highly replicable both internally in the Pfizer group of companies in Ireland and abroad and in the wider sector. Project Description The supply of compressed air was provided by three 132 kW fixed-speed screw-type oil-free air compressors, installed in 1999. The average instantaneous energy consumption of the air compressors was 110 kW. A survey of the air compressor operation revealed that the oldest of the compressors spent approximately 85% of the time loading. This meant that for 15% of the time the compressor was operating in unloaded state inefficiently. During this time the compressor was still consuming around 30 kW of instantaneous power. In addition to the cost associated with this energy waste, the site faced the future costs of overhauling this ageing equipment. 33 This project has resulted in an overall reduction in compressed-air average instantaneous power consumption from 110 kW to 78 kW. This equates to a reduction of over 150 tonnes in CO2 emissions per annum. The new VSD air compressor is fitted with a hybrid permanent magnet (HPM) motor. HPM motor technology combines the reliability of a permanent magnet rotor with the strength of salient stator coils. The weight of the motor is much less than that of a traditional induction motor, which means it can be directly attached to the bull gear shaft of the compressor. This arrangement eliminates the energy and maintenance costs associated with the friction inherent in motor bearings. The HPM motor can start and stop as frequently as low air demand dictates. Traditional induction motors of this size have a typical minimum start-stop frequency of three times per hour. This is a major restriction; it means that a traditional VSD air-compressor induction motor needs to run unloaded during periods of low usage. This is not the case with the HPM motor; in periods of particularly low air consumption, the VSD air compressor will stop and start as required – yielding even more energy and cost savings. In addition to the energy savings, the cost of overhauling the older compressors has been avoided as these machines are now only run in standby mode; hence their running hours have been greatly reduced and their service life extended. SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 EPS Group Tullamore WWTP - a new level of energy efficient design practice in a wastewater treatment plant build & operation. The EPS Group is the largest fully Irish-owned environmental engineering company in the country. It provides water and wastewater treatment and pumping solutions. Clients range from homeowners to large multinational and municipal authorities. It operates in Ireland, the UK and mainland Europe, and exports to over 30 countries worldwide. GROUP Background Project Description The EPS Group formed a high-level committee in 2009 – the EPS Energy & Environment Committee – to reduce energy usage and promote the drive to use and conserve energy as a provider of sustainable water solutions throughout its operations in Ireland and abroad. The contract for the 45,000 PE (population equivalent) capacity Tullamore WWTP and 80,000 PE Sludge Treatment Centre was awarded to an EPS/SIAC consortium in April 2010. The project is being operated by EPS Operations for the next 20 years on behalf of Offaly County Council. EPS implements a company-wide Energy Policy, inclusive of suppliers, and adheres to an Energy Management Plan at all levels. It was the first company in its industry to achieve ISO 50001 accreditation. The sewage entering the treatment plant is converted into clean water well below the European standards; the rate of recycling of the incoming sewage is over 99.9%. Lifecycle costs focus It was decided to effect the design of the Tullamore Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) with whole lifecycle costs in mind and to future-proof the plant to easily accommodate future integration of emerging technologies. This meant instilling the knowledge learned through trials into a new design philosophy for the company, through education of design staff and investigation of alternative technologies. ‘Energy Efficient’, ‘Adaptable’ and ‘Operator Friendly’ were the key principles communicated to the design team. Each element of plant selected was compared for lifecycle costs against multiple other options. The operations staff were deeply involved in the design process so as to improve the user-friendly nature of the final design. The plant is innovative primarily because of the design-stage energy awareness principles and innovative technologies used. These include energy reduction measures developed by EPS Group in other plants such as the Dundalk and Drogheda WWTPs – recognised by Green Awards and the SEAI Sustainable Energy Awards. At Tullamore, online tracking and trending of load consumption enables regular plant efficiency reviews while high-efficiency aeration, preliminary treatment solutions and energy generation systems from the anaerobic digesters make this plant top of its class. Innovative features of project: > 3mm intake screens with zero wash water requirement operating on minimal, demand-only, operational configuration > Intensive drying and shredding facility to minimise screening waste and transport requirements > Batch sand-washing to minimise consumption and eliminate external water usage 34 Section Three – Company Profiles “The success of the Tullamore project has cemented our business model – having energy efficiency systems throughout all aspects of our organisation.” > Diffused aeration system with automatic self-cleaning controls to minimise efficiency losses > Systemised external site lighting wired through SCADA system to allow remote and flexible control options > High-efficiency pumps commonly using IE3 electrical motor; many large pumps are VSD-operated > High-efficiency medium-voltage transformer on mains power supply to minimise electrical losses > Stepped use covered storm tank to minimise cleaning requirements > All process water required is produced on-site and UV-treated > Tertiary filtration stage that operates only when required Benefits of Project > Individual reception and storage facilities for importing non-indigenous wastes or sludges to allow maximum flexibility and control as well as system protection > Two 955m3 anaerobic digester tanks with external mixing and recirculation as well as integrated dome membrane roofs for maximum biogas creation and storage with minimal footprint > Water-resistant high-efficiency insulation used on underground digester recirculation lines to minimise heat loss The Tullamore plant was jointly entered and shortlisted in the 2012 Engineers Ireland Excellence Awards – Environmental Infrastructure category. The site was also shortlisted for The Environmental Award in the SEAI Sustainable Energy Awards 2013. > High-efficiency CHP dual fuel-type generators capable of operating duty/ standby or duty/duty if operator chooses to operate treatment plant on natural gas as well as biogas; synchronised power supplies allow for flexible power sourcing; hot water provides heating for digesters (and future pre-heating for sludge thermal dryer) 35 The broader benefit is that the verification of this project moved the energy efficiency culture change (that has been so successful in EPS Group operations divisions) into the company’s design and tendering offices. These changes culminated in being certified with ISO 50001 and CEMARS certification for ISO 14064 through Achilles for Carbon Footprint tracking. Apart from the savings, the ability to reduce tender quotations for design, build & operate contracts is critical for the company’s sustainability. In addition, the techniques and experiences used in this project have enabled the company to fully understand the upcoming EPC & ESCOtype contracts currently seeking a foothold in this industry. SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Aviva Stadium Aviva Stadium scores high in energy efficiency measures. The Aviva Stadium in Dublin is home to the Ireland rugby and Republic of Ireland football teams. The 63,000m2 stadium, completed in 2010 at a cost of €410m, has a seated capacity of 51,700. 36 Section Three – Company Profiles “The single most compelling reason for implementing ISO 50001 is that energy costs are the second highest expense in the stadium.” Eamonn Williams, Technical Services Engineer The stadium has won a number of design awards, including those from the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland and the Royal Institute of British Architects, and is Ireland’s only UEFA Category 4 / Elite Stadium. Since its opening in May 2010, over 3 million ticketed visitors have passed through the turnstiles for rugby, soccer and concerts. Energy efficiency was an integral part of the design and construction of the stadium. During construction, In August 2013, Aviva the demolished Stadium became the structures were broken first stadium in the up for use as hardcore and sub-bases for the world to achieve ISO 50001 certification. new ones. The old top soil was stripped, stored and reused for the new pitch. Blast furnace waste slag was used in the concrete mix throughout to minimise the amount of cement used and thereby reduce the energy required for concrete production. The CO2 saving achieved is calculated at 4,000 tonnes, or 6,896,500 kWh of electricity. A lighting control system, using intelligent control via PCs along with PIR sensors, is used to centrally control and monitor the 18,000 low-energy light fittings throughout the stadium; lighting requirements can be managed closely and kept as efficient as possible. Sports lighting was carefully modelled, with glare shields and long visors specified to minimise light spill from the stadium bowl. Heat Recovery Each of the four diesel-powered 1,700 kVA generators is fitted with heat recovery circuits capable of recovering 4 MW of heat to pre-heat hot water for bathrooms, kitchens and the under-pitch heating system. Energy-saving features of the building management system include soft starters on all motors which ensure longer life, more efficient operation and more economic running of the ventilation and pumping systems. Other elements of the services design include intelligent controls to ensure that power-consuming systems operate only when or as required; for example, escalators will only run when people are using them, while HVAC fans and pumps are VSD-controlled and will only run at the rate that is required. 37 Water Conservation Water is conserved through sensor taps and dual-flush cisterns. Waterless urinals provide a minimum annual saving of 400,000 litres. Rainwater is harvested from the roof and used to irrigate the pitch, and also used throughout the building to reduce demand on potable water. The 320,000-litre tank is sufficient for about seven days’ irrigation. The focus on sustainability has continued into the operational management of the stadium, which has been operating to ISO 20121 since May 2013. Implementation of an EnMS was a natural progression for the stadium management. In 2012 the stadium joined the SEAI Energy Agreements Programme and in August 2013 became the first stadium in the world to achieve ISO 50001 certification. EnPIs Identified Through the ISO 50001 Energy Review process, the stadium’s significant energy users were identified to be Electrical Baseload, HVAC, DHW and Pitch Heating. Energy performance indicators were identified to measure the performance of these systems, and SMART targets and objectives were established. The site’s energy performance is monitored through a comprehensive energy monitoring and targeting system, which has been regularly expanded with the addition of sub-meters for electricity and gas and heat-meters for hot water. This system is also used to identify significant deviations in consumption, which are then investigated. In this way this system continuously assists with the identification of opportunities for improvement. Benchmarking The Aviva Stadium energy policy commits to a process of continuous improvement using benchmarking. External benchmarking to SEU level, whilst difficult, is extremely valuable in managing energy performance. To achieve this, Aviva Stadium is initiating a benchmarking programme with other stadia in the UK, Europe and USA. Aviva Stadium participated in the LIEN Replication Project Initiative and has implemented the HVAC operational control in its preventative maintenance programme. This tool has already identified several opportunities that will be included in the 2014 Action Plan. 4 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 RESULTS & TARGETS This section summarises the overall energy performance of LIEN members in 2012. It explains the methodology used for the calculations together with historical and sectoral comparisons and a categorisation of energy saving projects. Individual reports from LIEN Members detailing their 2012 results and 2013 targets are also contained in this section. 38 Section Four – Results and Targets Methodology for LIEN Energy Performance Calculation Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs) are used to demonstrate the energy performance of each LIEN member. The EnPI is a normalised number, set to 100 in the year of joining (the baseline year). The EnPI reflects the difference in energy intensity between the current year and the baseline year: an EnPI of less than 100 shows an improvement in energy intensity whereas an EnPI of greater than 100 shows an increase. The year-on-year EnPI chart has been prepared for each member (presented later in report). The charts show the EnPI trend since the company joined the LIEN and also the target EnPI set for the forthcoming year. Some commentary is provided with each chart on the factors that influenced the EnPI in the current year. The year-to-year change in energy performance for the LIEN as a whole is reported using the principles of the Paasche Method. The change is calculated for each member by subtracting the actual energy consumed in the reporting year from the energy that would have been consumed in order to produce the same output, assuming the previous year’s energy intensity had remained unchanged. The summation of the change in each member’s energy performance gives the overall year-on-year energy saving, or loss, for the LIEN as a whole. To calculate the cumulative energy savings achieved by the LIEN as a whole since its inception, a similar methodology is used. The change in energy intensity is calculated for each member by subtracting the actual energy consumed in the reporting year from the energy that would have been consumed to produce the same output, assuming each company’s baseline-year energy intensity had remained unchanged. Again, the summation of these changes gives the overall energy saving, or loss, for the LIEN as a whole. Calculating the energy performance of a company and the LIEN as a whole using this methodology means that all the factors that influence a member’s energy performance 39 are captured, and not only specific energy saving projects. For example, fluctuations in the level of output, changes in quality control, improvements in productivity and all operational conditions will influence overall energy demand and, consequently, energy performance. While the LIEN programme is focused on encouraging the implementation of energy saving projects and performing special investigations of potential energy saving projects, it is recognised that the opportunity to improve or control energy performance through operational control and management of production-related variables provides a significant contribution. These activities are within the scope of ISO 50001, which is central to the Energy Agreements Programme. However, the methodology does not provide transparency on the root causes of changes in the EnPI and what the drivers were for the energy savings. Therefore, data on specific energy savings measures is also collected via the annual LIEN questionnaire. This provides a bottom-up means of calculating the energy savings achieved by the LIEN and EAP members as a result of specific energy savings measures. Results Summary The performance of LIEN members during 2012 is summarised in the table below: 2012 Overall Energy Performance LIEN Total Primary Energy Requirement 2012 (GWh) 26,000 Energy Savings/Loss due to Energy (70) Efficient Gains/Losses 2012 (GWh) National Total Primary Energy Requirement (TPER) 2012 (GWh) 156,889 LIEN as percentage of National TPER (%) 17% Total CO2 Emissions 2012 (tonnes) 5,650,964 CO2 Avoided due to change in Energy Performance Gains (15,258) SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 In 2012, there was a reported loss in energy performance of approximately 0.3% for the LIEN as a whole. This was primarily due to reductions in the level of output of a small number of the larger LIEN members which reduced the overall energy performance. Even though the 0.3% loss in performance equates to 70 GWh of additional primary energy consumption, based on the specific energy savings projects data reported by LIEN members, it is estimated that energy savings of 580 GWh could have been realised during 2012 through the implementation of energy saving projects. That is to say, if the energy saving projects had not been implemented, the losses in energy performance would have been even larger. On average over the last five years, the LIEN has achieved year-on-year energy performance improvements of approximately 2%. Since its inception in 1995 the LIEN and the founding member companies have achieved, on average, energy savings of around 28%. Compared to 2011, there was a drop in the national TPER of approx. 2.7% for 2012. However in the LIEN there was an increase in the TPER of the LIEN as a whole of around 6.1% due in part to the addition of 17 new members during 2012. When the data is analysed on a member-bymember basis, on average, each company recorded a 3.1% increase in energy consumption. The LIEN members classified as industrial sector account for about 50% of the industry primary energy requirement reported in the 2012 National Energy Balance. This, however, omits the energy consumed by those members not classified as being in the industry sector. Energy Performance The change in energy performance of the LIEN as a whole presented in this report accounts for all the influencing factors that either improve or erode energy performance. The methodology employed is a top-down calculation based on the change in energy intensity with respect to the previous year or a baseline year. The yearon-year reduction in energy performance recorded for 40 the LIEN as a whole was 0.3% for 2012. To quantify the energy savings attributable to measures aimed specifically at improving energy performance and reducing energy spend, data on specific energy savings projects was also collected in the LIEN questionnaire. For 2012, 61 companies reported specific energy saving projects for which the savings were quantified. In total, these projects saved a reported 217 GWh of primary energy. It should be noted that the LIEN questionnaire facilitates the reporting of only five specific energy saving projects. There is no obligation to report every energy saving measure implemented; thus the projects reported do not necessarily represent a complete list of all such measures implemented. Nevertheless, if it is assumed that the data provided by the 61 companies on specific energy saving measures is representative of the energy saving projects undertaken by all 162 members, then estimated energy savings of approx. 580 GWh could have been achieved by the LIEN as a whole. Energy Agreement v LIEN-only The Energy Agreements Programme (EAP) members are typically larger energy consumers than the LIEN-only members. In 2012, the 77 EAP members accounted for 47% of LIEN membership and almost 71% of energy consumption. Thus, the performance of EAP members influences greatly the performance of the LIEN as a whole. It is also the case that EAP members are committed to the implementation and operation of energy management systems (ISO 50001), which is considered a more effective means of finding, implementing and maintaining energy savings than pursuing an internal energy management programme only, as is the case with the LIEN-only members. EAP members also receive more support than the LIEN-only members. In 2012, EAP members’ energy performance was better than that of the LIEN-only members. EAP members reported a 0.8% improvement in energy performance Section Four – Results and Targets LIEN Historic Energy Performance 40% 37% % year-on-year Energy Savings* 31% 33% 32% 28% 30% 20% 18.8% 18.6% 19.7% 15.6% 16.3% 17.5% 14.5% 14.2% 17.8% 15.3% 16% 10% 10% 9% 0% 3.3% 2.5% 0.8% 0.9% 0% 0.1% 0.5% 2.8% 0% -3.1% 4.7% 3% 7% 5.3% % Energy Saved where 2000 is taken as ‘base year’ % Energy Saved where 2005 is taken as ‘base year’ 6.1% 5.5% -1.1% -0.3% -0.6% 0% % Energy Saved where 1995 is taken as ‘base year’ -10% ‘95 Note: LIEN members may elect to change the activity metric used to report output, e.g. change from tonnes of product A to tonnes of product B. When justified, this change can also be applied historically, which will affect the energy intensity and energy savings calculated for previous reporting periods. In 2012, a large energy consumer changed the metric used to report output for the years 2008 through to 2011; this affected the energy savings for the LIEN as a whole. Overall, this change led to an improved year-on-year energy saving for 2007, 2008 and 2010 and a reduced year-on-year energy saving for 2009 and 2011. ‘96 ‘97 ‘98 ‘99 ‘00 ‘01 ‘02 ‘03 ‘04 whereas LIEN-only members reported a 3.7% reduction. This is expected, given the additional supports available to EAP members and their commitment to operate energy management systems. Historical Performance of the LIEN The chart above illustrates the historical performance of the LIEN over the 18-year period from 1995 to 2012. It comprises four datasets: 1 Year-on-year energy performance change (illustrated by bar series) 2 E nergy performance of LIEN members, with 1995 as baseline 3 E nergy performance of LIEN members, with 2000 as baseline 4 E nergy performance of LIEN members, with 2005 as baseline In the case of the year-on-year performance, only those companies that reported in successive years are accounted for. For the remaining plots which illustrate the energy performance of the LIEN members relative to a base year, again only those companies that reported in the base year and in the subsequent years are taken into account. This data is not affected by new companies joining the network every year as the calculations only take into account those companies that reported in 1995, 2000 or 2005. 41 ‘05 ‘06 ‘07 ‘08 ‘09 ‘10 ‘11 ‘12 The following observations can be made on the data contained in the chart: > The members who joined in 1995 have achieved an improvement in energy performance of 28%, in comparison to 1995. There was a notable decrease in 2009 resulting from reductions in output in that year. Since 2009, the energy performance of this cohort of companies has remained relatively static. However, the energy performance declined in 2012, primarily because of the reduction in the energy performance of one very large energy consumer > The group of members that reported in 2000 and also in 2012 achieved savings in excess of 15% over that period, when 2000 is taken as the baseline year > The group of members that reported in 2005 and also in 2012 achieved savings of almost 14.5% over that period, when 2005 is taken as the baseline year. This percentage saving is lower than in previous years The LIEN group that has 2005 as a baseline year is an important dataset. The EAP was launched in 2006 following the publication of the Irish Energy Management Standard in 2005. During the period 2005– 2010, a large number of companies in this group would have transitioned from LIEN-only to Energy Agreements. The graph above shows that the energy performance, across all three baselines, peaked in 2008 and has either remained static or declined in recent years. LIEN member companies have continued to report energy saving projects annually in the LIEN questionnaire, which suggests that the reduced energy performance is being driven primarily by reduced output. SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Categorisation of Energy Savings by Technology or Project In addition to providing the quantity of energy saved, LIEN members are also requested to categorise energy saving projects in accordance with the Energy Venn Diagram. In 2012, the majority of projects (35%) were categorised by members under the heading of Equipment. Historically, Equipment-related projects have been the most popular, and this category of project accounted for the largest percentage of energy savings in kWh. In 2012, 16% of projects were categorised as Operation & Maintenance. As can be seen in the following pie chart, these accounted for 34% of energy savings. The increased share of energy saving categorised as Operations & Maintenance arose due to two energy saving projects carried out by one of the largest energy consumers in the LIEN. Categorisation of Energy Savings Projects (no. of projects) Category Average Payback (yrs) Equipment 35% Control 23% Operations & Maintenance 16% Process Change 8% Operations and Maintenance 3 Energy Service 2.8 Energy Service 7% Not Defined 7% Other 3% Housekeeping 1% Process Change 2.8 Equipment 3.1 HousekeEnPIng 2.3 Control 2.4 For 2012, the above table shows the average payback reported for each category of energy saving project. Categorisation of Energy Savings Projects (kWh) Operations & Maintenance 34% Equipment 27% Energy Service 12.5% Control 12.4% Process Change 6.7% Not Defined 3.7% Other 3.5% Housekeeping 0.1% 42 Section Four – Results and Targets Summary of LIEN Data Analysis Highlights from 2012 > The LIEN has grown to 162 companies in 2012 and now represents over 17% of the national TPER. It is expected that the number of companies engaged in the programme will increase again during 2013 > With the exception of the Electronics and PharmaChem sector, output increased across all sectors in 2012. Output from the Healthcare sector has increased continuously since 2007 and the Food/Drink and Other sectors have increased output continuously since 2010 > An estimated 580 GWh of energy savings were achieved through the implementation of specific energy savings measures by LIEN members Summary of LIEN Data Analysis Commentary Food/Drinks 52% Other 42% Pharma/Chem 41% Healthcare 17% Electronics 11% The number of members grew modestly in 2012. The LIEN now has 162 members. The Food/Drink, PharmaChem and Other sectors are the largest sectors, by member numbers, in the LIEN. The "Other" sector has grown steadily and is made up of a mix of retail, technology and services industries, and some of the more traditional ‘heavy industries’, such as cement manufacture and refining. Response Rate Commentary There was an above average response rate for 2012 (87% Energy Agreements, 80% LIEN-only). This follows a particularly weak response rate for 2011 and represents one of the highest response rates recorded. Response Rate (LIEN Only) No. of Companies Reporting 80% Not Reporting 20% Energy Agreements No. of Companies Reporting 87% Not Reporting 13% 43 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Energy Performance – Sector Trends (Percentage Change in Energy Performance, by Sector) Not Defined Electronics Healthcare Food/Drinks Pharma/Chem -25% -20% -15% -10 Average -5% 2007 2008 0% 2009 5% 2010 10% 2011 15% 20% 25% 2012 Commentary In general, energy performance gains have been made across almost all sectors. On average over the last six years, each sector has seen a gain of between 1% and 6% (illustrated by the Average bar). The Electronics sector was a notable exception in 2009 and 2012. The magnitude of the loss in performance during 2009 resulted in a loss in overall LIEN energy performance. Similarly in 2012, the reduction in energy performance recorded in the PharmaChem and "Other", as well as the Electronics sectors, contributed to the loss in energy efficiency for the LIEN as a whole. 44 Section Four – Results and Targets Energy Consumption (Percentage Change in TPER, by Sector) Other Electronics Healthcare Food/Drinks Pharma/Chem -25% -20% -15% -10 Average -5% 2007 2008 0% 2009 5% 2010 10% 2011 15% 20% 25% 2012 Commentary In general, there has been a reduction in each sector’s energy requirement, with the notable exceptions of: > Healthcare sector for most years – on average over the last six years the sector has recorded an increase of c. 2.4% in TPER > Other in 2010 and 2011 > Food/Drinks in 2010, 2011 and 2012 Among companies in the Other sector, there was a very large decline in 2009 driven primarily by a small number of very large energy consumers reporting reduced levels of output, which in turn reduced their energy requirement. This greatly affected the energy requirement of the sector and the LIEN as a whole. In 2012, the change in TPER for the Other sector increased by just 0.04%. 45 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Output (Percentage Change in Output, by Sector) Other Electronics Healthcare Food/Drinks Pharma/Chem -25% -20% -15% -10 Average -5% 2007 2008 0% 2009 5% 2010 10% 2011 15% 20% 25% 2012 Commentary Unlike the energy performance and TPER plots, this plot shows the average change in output for those companies that operate in each sector rather than the change for the sector as a whole. For example, in 2012 in the Food/Drink sector, on average each company recorded an increase of 6% in output. In 2012, most sectors, with the exception of Electronics and PharmaChem, recorded an increase in the average member’s output. On average over the last six years, 3 of the 5 sectors have recorded increases in output, with the Healthcare sector recording the largest increases. While members of the Food/Drink sector have, on average over the last six years, recorded a marginal decrease in output, there have been increases in the last three years in a row – reversing the trend of the previous three years. 46 Section Four – Results and Targets Driver of Energy Saving Projects Energy Management Systems 72% Other Driver 17% Not Specified Commentary Energy management systems and programmes were identified as the primary driver for the implementation of energy saving projects. The percentage of the energy savings driven by energy management systems was higher in 2012 than any previous year. Project Categorisation Operations & Maintenance 34% Equipment 27% Energy Service 12.5% Control 12.4% Process Change 6.7% Not Defined 3.7% Other 3.5% Housekeeping 0.1% Commentary Project activity is categorised using the Energy Venn Diagram. The largest reported category was Operations & Maintenance, which accounted for 34% of the reported energy savings. The average reported payback for Operations & Maintenance-related projects was 3 years, which is, on average, the second longest payback period for any of the project categories. On average, HousekeEnPIng has the shortest payback, followed by Controls. 47 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Historical Project Categorisation (Categorisation of Energy Savings Projects) 60% % of KWh Saving 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2007 2008 2009 Energy Service Equipment Operations & Maintenance 2010 2011 2012 Process Change Control Commentary In 2012, there was a marked increase in energy savings from Operations & Maintenance projects. The increase can be attributed to two energy saving projects reported by one very large energy consumer. If the energy savings reported for the two projects are excluded, Equipment would have contributed 36% of energy savings and Operations & Maintenance 12%. 48 Section Four – Results and Targets Dairygold Food Ingredients Waste water treatment 49 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Abbott Ireland Diagnostics Division 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 63.0 100 86.8 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >The > 2013 EnPI will be lowered through a heat pump, using return water from chiller to cooling tower (at 30 ºC) and generating LPHW at 65 ºC. >Further > improvements will be completed on server rooms – free cooling. TARGET: 63.0 72.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >AIDD > Sligo’s EnMS is built on 4 core pillars – ‘reduce demand, invest in low-carbon energy, enhance global citizenship and foster an energy culture’ – which have driven the implementation of multiple energy efficiency projects. >Projects > implemented in 2012: upgrades on HVAC system, mainly free cooling, upgrading HVAC controls, a high COP chiller. RESULT: 72.2 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Abbott Ireland Ltd (Cootehill) 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 108.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >In > 2012 absolute reduction in energy use was achieved as were internal energy targets (set against production volume). Energy reduction was due to operational changes and refrigeration and HVAC project works. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 111.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >In > 2012 absolute reduction in energy use was achieved as were internal energy targets (set against production volume). Energy reduction was due to operational changes and refrigeration and HVAC project works. RESULT: 111.3 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1996 Abbott Ireland Ltd (Longford) Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Environmental > advantages were also highlighted as achievable by converting the boiler fuel source to LPG. >This > will be a target project for 2013. TARGET: 7.5 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 7.5 9.3 50 8.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Continued > focus on additional opportunities to reduce energy consumption. Early in 2012 specialised energy consultants were employed to generate a revised energy opportunities list, based on current plant performance. >From > this, additional efficiency projects were identified, focusing on adoption of additional free cooling on significant manufacturing AHUs. RESULT: 8.7 2013 Baseline year: 2006 AbbVie Ireland (formerly Abbott Ireland Pharmaceutical Operation) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 71.9 100 71.9 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Increased > Manufacturing and Technical Operations activities. >Major > plant expansion to be completed by October 2013. >Convert > to LPG LPHW project will deliver fuel efficiency savings. >Thermal > Oxidiser Heat Recovery project will deliver fuel efficiency savings. TARGET: 71.9 78.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Major > plant expansion under way will affect electricity, kerosene and LPG usage from February 2013. >Manufacturing > and Technical Operations activities increased in 2012 (e.g. HVAC requirements from 24-5 to 24-7). This increased electricity, kerosene and LPG usage. RESULT: 78.2 2013 Baseline year: 2007 50 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Allergan Pharmaceuticals Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 100.6 100 69.6 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > demand increasing due to site expansion and increased production output. TARGET: 100.6 95.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Electricity > consumption increase by 3.8% and natural gas increase by 12.1% over 2011 figures due to business expansion. >Water > usage: no change over 2011 figures. >EED > study completed for recently constructed Coldstore and Seriscaffold project and ongoing for new Biologics 2 plant project. RESULT: 95.9 2013 Baseline year: 1998 Amgen Technology (Ireland) 150 100 138.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Operation > in Ireland being expanded, with construction of c11,700 m2 manufacturing and warehouse area. >To > minimise environmental impact of the expansion, energy efficiency has been designed into the new facility through combination of cutting-edge manufacturing technologies and traditional energy-efficient building design. TARGET: 138.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Amgen > established in Ireland at Dun Laoghaire site in 2011. Energy consumption kept stable through 2012, but addition of construction site compound increased overall site energy consumption. >Variation > in production volumes and type will make assessment of performance over time difficult to achieve. Site focusing on efficiencies of SEUs. RESULT: 100.0 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2012 Arigna Fuels 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 75.0 100 85.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Based > on work done to date, continued focus on short-term capital payback projects and on control improvements, to reduce rework. >Rate > of progress on R&D projects could affect EnPI in either direction. TARGET: 75.0 77.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Gains > made in last few years from capital investment and control and housekeEnPIng are yielding continuous improvements. >Increased > baseload energy usage from R&D processes has negated some of the improvements but EnPI of 77 achieved. >Energy > consumption on thermal side (oil and wood) reduced, mainly via process improvements to reduce reworks. RESULT: 77.3 2013 Baseline year: 2009 Arkil Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 108.0 100 90.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Re-insulation > of Bitumen piping. >Installation > of time clocks on bitumen storage tanks. TARGET: 108.0 122.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Installed > VSD on tar plant main fan in late 2012. >Review > of control of production plant took place, with future savings to be implemented. RESULT: 122.3 2013 Baseline year: 2009 51 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Arvato Digital Services Ireland 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 117.0 100 95.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >New > product launch. >2012 > HVAC project. TARGET: 117.0 93.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >HVAC > upgrade. >Reduced > volumes. RESULT: 93.4 2013 Baseline year: 2009 Astellas Ireland Co Ltd (Dublin) 250 200 100 151.0 150 180.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Investigating > feasibility of heat recovery from an operation on-site. Resources needed for design and engineering works. This will be main focus for energy in 2013. Project will not contribute to energy savings in 2013, but will lead to savings in future years if implemented. TARGET: 151.0 164.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Some > energy saving projects implemented, but consumption rose due to additional cooling requirements for operator comfort in packing rooms. >Plans > to install wind turbine cannot be progressed, as Irish Aviation Authority seems reluctant to facilitate project as Astellas is on flight path for Dublin Airport. RESULT: 164.7 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Astellas Ireland Co Ltd (Kerry) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 67.0 100 61.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Decreased > batch sizes in production. >Increased > thermal consumption due to fuel change. Wood-chip boiler installed; is less efficient than oil boiler, so more fuel burned to produce same amount of steam. TARGET: 67.0 66.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Continued > use of EnMS and overall site energy awareness. >Decreased > batch sizes in production. >Increased > thermal consumption due to fuel change. Wood-chip boiler installed; less efficient than oil boiler. >Two > energy-intensive lines installed and consuming energy, but are being validated so producing no product. RESULT: 66.6 2013 Baseline year: 2007 Aviva Stadium 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 95.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Completion > of M&T project will provide greater visibility of energy consumption and help identification of projects. >Investigation > of feasibility of modifying light fittings from metal halide HID lamps to CFL lamps. TARGET: 95.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Commencement > of ISO 50001 implementation project was main driving factor in improving operational control of SEUs and identifying opportunities for improvement in 2012. >Operational > control projects affected site energy baseline. RESULT: 100.0 2013 Baseline year: 2012 52 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Bank of Ireland 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 89.7 100 85.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Building > upgrades. >Building > closures. >ISO > 50001. TARGET: 89.7 90.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Business > operating hours. >Climate > conditions. >Building > upgrades. >Building > closures. RESULT: 90.7 2013 Baseline year: 2009 Baxter Healthcare SA 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 67.7 100 72.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Recover > heat from boiler blowdown. >Hot > water reduction/awareness. >Cooling > tower pump upgrades. >Insulation > projects. TARGET: 67.7 69.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Installation > of economiser on main steam boiler, reducing natural gas consumption of boiler. >Upgrade > of raw water booster pump set integrated VSDs and improved pressure controls. Reduced electricity consumption for raw water pumping by 60%. >Identified > uninsulated sections of steam condensate return piping and insulate. >Replacement > of 4-tube T8 light fittings with 3-tube T5 light fittings. RESULT: 69.8 2013 Baseline year: 1995 BD Medical 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 79.5 100 47.7 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Due > to wide physical product variety, EnPI index is based on manufacturing cost rather than physical output. With continuous improvements, value of individual products goes down. Thus increased output is not reflected in increased value. >Energy > saving efforts remain primarily focused on facilities as design of production processes is constrained by validation issues. TARGET: 79.5 79.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Due > to wide physical product variety, EnPI index is based on manufacturing cost rather than physical output. >Oversized > process pump drive reduction required changes perceived as sensitive – and thus cautious approach. This resulted in direct-drive energy reduction and reduction in cooling effort. >HID > lighting replaced by T5 fittings which will last longer as well as give energy savings. RESULT: 79.7 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Becton Dickinson & Company Ltd Factors Influencing 2013 Target: No influencing factors provided. TARGET: 98.0 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 98.0 100 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increased > productivity resulted in greater plant use, and less energy consumption during idle production time. >As > new assembly machines are brought in, energy efficiency is a key deliverable, resulting in lower compressed air and electrical demand. >Sustainability > targets set at business and plant level. Targeted reduction of 30% compared to 2008 will be achieved in 2014. RESULT: 100.0 2013 Baseline year: 2012 53 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Boliden Tara Mines Ltd 150 139.7 100 133.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Investigations > progressing into potential ESCO model to implement infrastructure projects to optimise mine ventilation. >Continued > focus on assessing energy efficiency of suppliers and contractors as part of maturing EnMS. >Monitoring > and verification of site building retrofits to assess energy efficiency improvements in heating and lighting. TARGET: 139.7 131.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Mine > continues to deepen to access ore body, resulting in longer haul routes and higher ventilation demand, requiring increased fuel and electricity use. >Continued > effort on minimising diesel emissions underground and improving ventilation efficiency to maintain underground air quality and safety. >Major > energy efficiency focus is on optimising control of mine systems. RESULT: 131.8 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Boston Scientific Ireland Ltd (Clonmel) 200 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 90.7 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Introduction > of new production lines. >Boiler > energy saving opportunities. >Cooling > tower pump optimisation. TARGET: 90.7 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Energy > reduction projects increasing in importance in tandem with need for cost‑competitiveness, as sites are compared within the network of a multinational business. >Carbon > tax is extra burden on energy cost base. RESULT: 100.0 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2012 Boston Scientific Ireland Ltd (Cork) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 19.7 100 23.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Replaced > 15-year-old R22 chillers with new chillers in Q1 2013. >2 > cleanrooms not in use in Q2 2013 as result of business consolidation. >Reduction > in site occupancy levels. >Air-change > reduction to be implemented. TARGET: 19.7 23.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Production > demand increased considerably with transfer of new product from another plant. >Compressed > air control matched demand to supply. >Air-change > reduction proposal in manufacturing areas. >Ongoing > energy monitoring and reporting to global facilities team. >Thermal > energy project carried out. RESULT: 23.3 2013 Baseline year: 2004 Boston Scientific Ireland Ltd (Galway) 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 37.4 50 43.4 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Improved > energy performance resulted in 2.2% kWhr reduction on 2011 electricity consumption and 5% kWh reduction in natural gas consumption, despite manufacturing output increase. TARGET: 37.4 42.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Improved > energy performance resulted in 2.2% kWh reduction on 2011 electricity consumption and 5% kWhr reduction in natural gas consumption, despite manufacturing output increase. >Energy > costs increased due to market rates. RESULT: 42.8 2013 Baseline year: 1999 54 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Bristol-Myers Squibb (Cruiserath) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 64.8 100 72.9 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continuing > changes in product mixes continue to affect EnPI. >Gas > reduction project completed Aug 2013; good initial savings. >Large-scale > energy projects being identified in 2013 for implementation in 2014. >Continued > focus on identifying and resolving operational inefficiencies to sustain present energy levels. TARGET: 64.8 67.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Changes > in product mix affected EnPI. >Gas > usage higher – 12% increase in heating degree days. >Implementation > of large-scale gas reduction project affected gas usage. >Electrical > usage lower than previous year; overhaul of chillers and correction of inefficiencies. >Site > transitioned to IS0 50001. RESULT: 67.8 2013 Baseline year: 2005 Bristol-Myers Squibb (Swords) 300 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 192.0 200 191.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continuing > production mix changes affecting energy usage. >Special > investigations and surveys completed in 2012 and early 2013 are transitioning to project concept, with expected savings in 2014 if successful. TARGET: 192.0 179.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Focus > continued in 2012 to identify new energy reduction projects while sustaining existing energy efficiency on site. >Site > gas usage affected by increase in heating degree days; up 12% on previous year. >Site > transitioned to ISO 50001. RESULT: 179.2 2013 Baseline year: 1998 BT 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 89.6 100 91.6 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Further > efficiency programmes at business‑case stage. >These > will help to ensure sustainable performance in line with emerging market demands. TARGET: 89.6 104.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Growth > in number of customers hosted along with customers’ demand for more electrical power. Computing appliances has been counterbalanced by an ongoing efficiencies programme incorporating consolidation and virtualisation of internal systems as well as driving down cooling overheads. >Efficiencies > programme has driven down PUE. RESULT: 104.3 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Bulmers Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 67.0 100 80.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Anticipated > increase in production activities expected to help 2013 energy performance. TARGET: 67.0 77.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Lower > manufacturing volumes puts pressure on EnPIs due to overheads. >Smaller > batches, due to higher mix of products, more energy-intensive. >More > beer bottling and pasteurisation add to thermal load. >Energy > management activities have minimised effects of above factors. RESULT: 77.0 2013 Baseline year: 2003 55 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Carbery Milk Products Ltd 150 100 66.6 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 67.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >2012 > milk throughput down 6% on 2011. >Product > mix variation negatively affected energy consumption. TARGET: 67.0 60.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >2012 > milk throughput down 6% on 2011. >Product > mix variation negatively affected energy consumption. RESULT: 66.6 2013 Baseline year: 1995 CG Power Systems Ireland Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 86.0 100 97.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Aim > to achieve ISO 50001. >Encourage > involvement and responsibility for energy at all levels. TARGET: 86.0 88.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Identified > SEUs. >Set > up energy teams around SEUs. >Carried > out projects on SEUs in line with BEW and in conjunction with building CGPSIE EnMS. RESULT: 88.2 2013 Baseline year: 2011 Charleville Foods 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 85.4 100 63.7 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > efficiency continues to be high priority. New projects identified through energy audits will be implemented in 2013. >Continued > energy awareness. TARGET: 85.4 90.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Weekly > focus on energy usage – part of KPI. >Energy > management team established; regular meetings. RESULT: 90.0 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Citadel100 Datacentres Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 95.0 100 100.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Strategy > being developed to optimise both lifecycle and environmental impact of cooling plant. >This > plan is to be staged over 3 years (estimated). TARGET: 95.0 95.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >2012 > was a very good year; operational parameters of colos raised. >Utilisation > factor of central plant and colo occupation increased. RESULT: 95.3 2013 Baseline year: 2008 56 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Citi 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 83.0 100 89.6 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Next > biggest challenge is to address lighting systems. >LED > technology being embraced; fluorescent and CFL lighting systems to be retrofitted in coming months. TARGET: 83.0 85.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Citi > Environmental Expo run for its 4th year, for one day, with around 40 environmentrelated exhibits. >Intention > was to promote environmental experience through competitions, info booths, environmental tips, awareness campaigns, environmental documentaries/ movie clips. RESULT: 85.0 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Connacht Gold Ltd (Shannonside) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 94.0 100 91.2 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Refrigeration > system optimisation project. >Process > cooling load reduction. >Condensate > recovery project. TARGET: 94.0 95.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Use > of LEAN metrics throughout organisation. >Compressed > air leak-reduction programme. >Dryer > throughput optimisation project. RESULT: 95.7 2013 Baseline year: 2006 Connolly’s Red Mills 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 115.5 100 97.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Reduced > consumption per tonne produced due to dryer grain compared to 2012. >Increased > output due to longer winter. TARGET: 115.5 113.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Dryer > retrofit influenced energy consumption. Smaller, more energyefficient dryer installed for seed drying and larger one moved to a feed drying area. >Other > efficiencies achieved through improved operational control of SEUs. >Wet > harvest in 2012 influenced fuel consumption. Grain at higher moisture required more drying. RESULT: 113.6 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Covidien (Athlone) 57 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 Baseline reset: 2002 Actual EnPI Period of missing data 2012 91.0 100 81.8 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Insulation > of steam valves/flanges and boilers. >Reduction > in set pressure of main air compressor. >Due > to planned product change with associated higher energy intensity, EnPI is expected to rise considerably in 2013. Strong energy reduction programme will help offset some of energy-related effects of this in the years ahead. TARGET: 91.0 80.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Energy > monitoring system introduced; measurement and monitoring of energy performance on a weekly basis. >Plant > boilers upgraded to gas condensing boilers (from oil boilers) in mid-2012. Improved efficiencies contributed to drop in energy intensity. >Contributor > to drop in energy intensity is identification and repair of leaks in air compressor system. RESULT: 80.5 2013 Prior data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Creganna 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 97.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > savings of c3% over the next 12 months expected as Energy Team becomes established and gains in effectiveness. >Joining > LIEN will increase knowledge of energy conservation and networking opportunities for key energy management personnel. TARGET: 97.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Structured > approach to energy management has begun, based on SEAI Energy MAP methodology. >Energy > team established; targets for energy conservation are being set. RESULT: 100.0 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2012 Dairygold Co-Op Society 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 54.2 100 56.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Anaerobic > digester will be fully commissioned in 2013 and deliver energy savings. >Production > capacity will increase in 2013 and this is expected to improve EnPI. >Development > of Niro 3 project will increase dryer capacity; modification to cheese lines has improved throughput. >Economisers > installed on two boilers. TARGET: 54.2 53.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Anaerobic > digester (45,000m3) installation improved thermal energy efficiency. >Comprehensive > external Energy Audit Report completed in 2012. RESULT: 53.3 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Danone, Macroom (formerly Nutricia Infant Nutrition Ltd) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 49.0 100 73.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > efficiency continues to be improved; services of SEAI being availed of to get further ideas for energy efficiency register. >Full > ISO 50001 certification hoped for in 2013. TARGET: 49.0 75.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >In > 2012, new dryer commissioned; with best-practice energy saving technologies. Plant viewed by Danone as crucial to its worldwide target of reducing carbon footprint by 30% between 2009 and 2013. >In > November 2011 changed from oil-fired to natural gas burners; new boiler also installed. >Economiser > installed on boiler to preheat make-up water to boiler. RESULT: 75.1 2013 Baseline year: 2009 EnPI Dawn Meats (Grannagh) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 47.6 100 60.2 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > efficiency continues to be high priority; new projects identified through energy audits will be implemented in 2013. >Continued > energy awareness for management teams and employees. TARGET: 47.6 50.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Weekly > focus on energy usage – part of KPI. >Energy > management team established; regular meetings. RESULT: 50.2 2013 Baseline year: 2010 58 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Depuy (Ireland) Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 76.0 100 106.9 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > efficiency continues to be high priority. >Efficiency > improvements planned for implementation in 2013 will further improve energy performance. TARGET: 76.0 76.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Strategy > based on 3 pillars: Cost, Usage and Sustainability. >kWh/unit > shipped performance improvement as new production equipment brought onsite over last year is now producing product. >J&J > position on climate change is that it is real; thus sustained, long-term action taken to address GHG emitted as result of operations. RESULT: 76.1 2013 Baseline year: 2007 Diageo Ireland (Kilkenny) Factors Influencing 2013 Target: No influencing factors provided. TARGET: 94.9 150 0 ’95 ’12 2012 94.9 50 98.6 100 93.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Recognised > thermal savings are brought about readily with management of steam supply lines. >Management > of CO2 recovery forecast allows system to be placed in standby for periods when small gas recovery volumes predicted. >Site-wide > drive to reduce small users, marginal increase of production setpoints to reduce electrical pump and motor running costs. RESULT: 93.6 2013 Baseline year: 1996 Diageo Ireland (St James’s Gate) 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 47.4 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >New > production facilities expected to be built and operational by autumn 2013. >ISO > 50001 methodologies will help sustain energy savings already made and integrate new production plants into operations in efficient way. TARGET: 47.4 47.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Major > investment announced for St. James’s Gate: build new brewhouse, install additional fermentation vessels, and provide additional utilities to support brewing processes. >Certification > to ISO 50001 achieved in Q1 2012. This keeps focus on driving efficiencies in a systematic way. RESULT: 47.4 2013 Baseline year: 1997 Diageo Ireland (Waterford) Factors Influencing 2013 Target: No influencing factors provided. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 150 100 85.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Boiler > feedwater optimisation project. >Installation > of VSDs where applicable. >Production > recipes streamlined. More product for less energy consumption. >Roaster > afterburner burner box replaced and upgraded. RESULT: 85.9 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2006 59 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Donegal Meat Processors 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 85.8 100 98.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Method > used to heat 82 ºC, 72 ºC and 45 ºC degree water changed from oil-fired steam boilers to direct gas-fired water boiler. >Fine-tuning > of this system expected to deliver further savings. TARGET: 85.8 92.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Changed > in mid-year from oil-fired steam boilers to direct gas-fired water boiler. >Monitoring > of power, gas and water installed. RESULT: 92.6 2013 Baseline year: 2005 eBay-PayPal 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 98.0 100 94.2 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continued > increased head count should improve EnPI targets. >Consolidation > of night-shift activity into reduced number of buildings, allowing for shutdown of environmental controls. >Replacement > of obsolete chiller with latest chiller technology introducing ‘free cooling’ element. TARGET: 98.0 100.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Upgrading > BMS systems to raise early warning plant issues and provide clearer building energy management reports. >More > engagement with Facilities partners on targeting downward EnPI. This will form a strong consideration for budgeting, maintenance planning and capital expenditure. RESULT: 100.8 2013 Baseline year: 2011 Edenderry Power Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 98.0 100 125.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >ISO > 50001 system using revised list of SEUs is providing clearer indication of achievable projects. >Main > improvement factor for 2013 will be reduced carbon output due to increasing level of biomass used. TARGET: 98.0 103.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Incoming > fuel difficulties: milled peat wetter than anticipated due to poor harvesting weather in summer 2012. >Increased > levels of biomass; now ~20% on energy content basis. Dry biomass fuels offsetting some difficulties with main milled peat fuel. >Transition > to ISO 50001 resulted in renewed focus on EnMS and clearer, more effective system. RESULT: 103.1 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Eircom 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 82.4 100 86.8 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Ongoing > audits carried out to identify additional energy savings projects. >Energy > awareness campaign to continue. TARGET: 82.4 83.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Energy > savings projects in areas of air conditioning, heating and IT implemented successfully. >Energy > awareness raised by companywide intranet campaign and road show at major sites. RESULT: 83.9 2013 Baseline year: 2008 60 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Elan Pharma Factors Influencing 2012 Results: No influencing factors provided. RESULT: 525.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: No influencing factors provided. TARGET: 500.0 600 500.0 525.1 400 200 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1997 EPS Group 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 95.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Replacing > onsite pumps with higherefficiency alternatives. >Onsite > lighting will be replaced with higherefficiency alternative. >Aeration > system will be replaced and higher-efficiency blowers will be installed. TARGET: 95.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Replaced > 2 inefficient pumps with 2 resized higher-efficiency alternatives operating on VSDs. >Aeration > system replaced with higherefficiency alternative. Blowers resized and replaced with higher-efficiency alternatives. >Inlet > pumping levels optimised and aeration piping pressure corrected, leading to onsite energy saving. RESULT: 100 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2011 Eli Lilly SA 250 200 150 100 205.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Process > reheat modifications. >Reduction > of gas usage in emission abatement equipment. >Compressed > air-leak survey and repair. TARGET: 205.0 205.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Installation > of economisers during switchover from HFO to natural gas. >Process > control measures. >Lighting > controls. RESULT: 205.5 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1995 EMC Information Systems International 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 42.0 100 56.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Transitioned > to ISO 50001 from EN 16001. >Chiller > electronic expansion valves. >Further > HVAC optimisation projects. >Management > of energy by SEUs. TARGET: 42.0 42.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Completion > of energy action plans led to 9% reduction in electricity and 15% reduction in gas consumption. >Improved > EnPI despite increased output. RESULT: 42.1 2013 Baseline year: 2005 61 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Fournier Laboratories Ireland Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 129.0 100 92.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Introduction > of new products has resulted in increased energy intensity per unit produced. >The > need to run demo/pilot production runs for new products has resulted in increased energy consumption. TARGET: 129.0 109.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Fournier > Laboratories Ireland (AbbVie) won 2012 Western Europe Region Corporate Energy Management Award from Association of Energy Engineers (AEE), for EnMS. >Energy > usage onsite was more variable in 2012 due to new-product introductions. >EnMS > has allowed greater understanding of changing load requirements of new products. RESULT: 109.8 2013 Baseline year: 2010 GE Healthcare Ireland 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 96.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Increase > in production by 2.1% forecasted for 2013. >Targeting > 2% energy reduction for 2013. TARGET: 96.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >In > 2012 energy efficiency increased by 15.5% due to energy management activities. >7 > energy projects executed in 2012. RESULT: 100.0 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Genzyme Ireland Ltd Factors Influencing 2013 Target: No influencing factors provided. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 300 200 215.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >HVAC > optimisation – manufacturing and support areas. >CHW > conservation and flow reversal mitigation. >LPHW > consumption focus and boiler demand/service. RESULT: 215.8 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2005 Glanbia Ballitore 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 107.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >New > refrigeration plant installation will improve energy efficiency in process cooling. >In > 2013 focus on improving in-house EnMS to continue. TARGET: 107.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increased > air inlet temperature for boilerhouse. >Carried > out steam trap survey. RESULT: 100.0 2013 Baseline year: 2012 62 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Glanbia Drogheda 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 99.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Upgrade > of boilers to single high-efficiency boiler should improve EnPI for 2013. >Additional > metering and improvements to energy monitoring system will also assist in improving site EnPI. TARGET: 99.5 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Reduction > in production volumes has led to negative impact on site EnPI. >EnMS > has continually assisted in reducing energy consumption. RESULT: 100.0 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2012 Glanbia Ingredients Ltd (Ballyragget) 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 46.0 50 47.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Lean > process embedded in site management structure and energy targets. >Additional > whey processing equipment and higher-quality requirements will negatively affect 2013 EnPI due to added electricity demand, without additional increase in production throughput. >Planned > milk pasteurisation investment in 2013 will improve unit operational efficiency. TARGET: 46.0 45.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Specific > energy consumption continued to improve – by over 2% in 2012. >Control > of main refrigeration plant and cold stores. >Improvements > in boiler feed water control, maximising heat recovery. >Delta > Lean programme rolled out across site, with daily energy metrics being developed for each area. RESULT: 45.5 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Glanbia Ingredients Ltd (Virginia) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 79.0 100 77.7 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continuous > monitoring and reporting of usage and awareness with managers have resulted in improvements in overall plant efficiencies. >Lean > manufacture projects focusing on energy losses. TARGET: 79.0 80.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Continuous > monitoring and reporting of usage and awareness with managers have resulted in improvements in overall plant efficiencies. >Gradual > improvement in energy reduction measures has resulted in improved energy consumption per unit ratio. RESULT: 80.3 2013 Baseline year: 1995 GlaxoSmithKline Ltd (Cork) 63 200 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 Baseline reset: 2009 Actual EnPI Period of missing data 2012 56.4 100 99.2 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Performance > Management System will be used to maximise savings from plant when not required for production. >Steam > and nitrogen dashboards will be introduced to identify issues with generation and distribution systems. >Contract > for supply and installation of wind turbine will begin. >Work > will start on site strategy for achieving energy carbon-neutral status. TARGET: 56.4 96.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Good > progress made on energy reduction in 2012: 7.6% reduction on 2011. >Site > achieved ISO 50001 certification during year. >Planning > permission obtained for 3MW wind turbine. >SEAI > BEW funding to three projects: air compressor with heat recovery, air pre‑heater on incinerator, and improved steam metering. RESULT: 96.8 2013 Prior data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 GlaxoSmithKline Ltd (Dungarvan) Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Aggressive > targets of 8 ACPH being investigated for implementation in ISO Class 8 manufacturing. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 150 100 51.8 50 0 ’95 ’12 30.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: No influencing factors provided. RESULT: 51.8 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2001 Google Ireland 150 107.5 100 50 37.6 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Increased > output due to head count rise from 2,000 to 2,150. >Overall > site energy reduction set at 4% with increased output. >Additional > energy reduction of 1% on baseload during redesign of office space. TARGET: 107.5 81.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Operating > hours increased in line with higher head count in 2012. >Achieved > ISO 50001 certification across 8 EMEA sites. >Energy > reduction target of 4% for 2012 achieved. RESULT: 81.7 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2007 Green Isle Foods (Gurteen) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 83.0 100 90.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Implementation > of energy efficiency project at effluent and water treatment plant. >Ongoing > programme to replace obsolete light fittings will improve energy efficiency. >Continued > energy awareness programme. TARGET: 83.0 88.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increased > production in 2012; due to energy saving projects in previous years, improved EnPI. >Installation > of diffused aeration system at effluent treatment plant. >VSDs > installed on main water pumps. RESULT: 88.0 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Green Isle Foods (Longford) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 105.0 100 95.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >EnPI > in 2013 should reduce due to increase in plant volume. >Further > efficiency improvements on 11.5" product will also help reduce EnPI for 2013. TARGET: 105.0 108.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Change > in product (10" to 11.5" product) mix adversely impacted site EnPI. >Electricity > consumption continues to decrease due to ongoing internal projects. RESULT: 108.0 2013 Baseline year: 2008 64 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Green Isle Foods (Naas) 150 100 91.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Slight > negative impact on 2013 EnPI due to higher energy intensity on one product line. >In > 2013 use of satellite steam generators will be investigated, to reduce current steam transmission losses. >ISO > 50001 gap analysis completed. TARGET: 91.0 90.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Drive > in 2012 to raise awareness of energy consumption among all employees. >Ongoing > project to analyse and optimise usage of CHP plant. RESULT: 90.8 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Green Isle Foods (Portumna) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 110.0 100 98.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Decreased > production volume will negatively impact site EnPI. >Management > maintaining focus on energy management and energy reduction throughout 2013. TARGET: 110.0 106.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increased > production volume led to improvement in site EnPI in 2012. >Transition > in 2012 from heavy fuel oil to LPG has improved efficiency. RESULT: 106.4 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Gypsum Industries Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 98.5 100 91.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Further > heat recovery and process modification should contribute to performance in 2013. >Similar > EnPI expected despite further falls in production. TARGET: 98.5 98.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Heat > recovery project and good compressed-air operational controls improvement have contributed to performance. >This > is in the face of reduced output due to reduced building activity. RESULT: 98.8 2013 Baseline year: 1999 Hewlett-Packard (Manufacturing) Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 112.0 100 77.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Contract > manufacturing energy consumption to increase. >Non-manufacturing > energy consumption to increase. TARGET: 112 104.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Focused > on energy reduction and control strategy for production operations. >Continuation > of energy management focus for both manufacturing and non‑manufacturing divisions across site. RESULT: 104.0 2013 Baseline year: 1997 65 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 HJ Heinz Frozen & Chilled Foods Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 63.6 100 63.3 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Maintain > top management commitment to environmental and energy policy. >Internal > energy audits. >SEUs > operation controls. >Energy > metering system – EnMS. >Energy > awareness among employees and contractors. TARGET: 63.6 64.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increased > process efficiency. >Increased > environmental and energy awareness and training across site. >ISO > 50001 standard. >Internal > audits. >Strong > commitment by top management. RESULT: 64.8 2013 Baseline year: 1997 Honeywell Turbo Technologies 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 31.2 50 36.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Air-leak > identification and reduction programme. >Installation > of metering plan for all energy sources and SEUs for gas and electricity re. ISO 50001. TARGET: 31.2 39.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Accredited > to ISO 50001; identification of SEUs. >Voltage > optimising on one transformer. RESULT: 39.4 2013 Baseline year: 1997 IBM 200 150 100 35.1 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 38.2 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Increase > in electricity consumption expected due to business expansion. >Continuous > efforts in energy conservation activities to meet corporate annual challenge. TARGET: 38.2 38.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Influencing > factors include increase in energy consumption driven by business expansion requirements. >Efficiency > drivers include process control changes plus equipment upgrade plans. RESULT: 35.1 2013 Baseline year: 1999 Intel Ireland Ltd 66 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 67.0 100 48.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Facilities > commissioning of Fab 14 in preparation for production is largest influence on EnPI. >Implementation > of chilled water heat recovery in Fab 14, to displace incoming natural gas for boilers. >Continuation > of cross-site intelligent lighting installation. >HVAC > humidification system upgrade to reduce requirement for compressed air. TARGET: 67.0 52.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Continuation > of facilities upgrade in Fab 10/14. >Implementation > of cross-site intelligent controlled lighting in office, plant rooms and data centres has had large positive impact. >Chilled > water plant control upgrades target one of the SEUs. RESULT: 52.6 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Interxion Ireland Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 100.0 100 92.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Constant > monitoring and auditing of mechanical and electrical infrastructure to match performance with demand. >As > customer load grows further in contracted space, overall efficiency and design PUE will be achieved. >Where > possible in older data centre, retrofit projects are deployed to improve efficiency, incl. lighting refits and Air Con replacement projects. TARGET: 100.0 112.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >As > customer load grows in contracted space, overall efficiency improves. >Retrofitting > of more efficient HVAC and lighting equipment in older data centre also results in improved efficiency. >Continued > fine-tuning of supply and demand within infrastructure. RESULT: 112.6 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Irish Pride (Ballinrobe) 150 100 116.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Reduced > production due to decreased demand. >Increased > gas usage due to colder outside temperatures. TARGET: 116.0 103.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Installed > new burner tubes in ovens, which increased efficiency of heat distribution. >Dispatch > boiler fuel changed from oil to gas. >Replaced > 28 x 58w fluorescents with 20w LEDs; a number of sensors installed. RESULT: 103.3 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Irish Pride (Taghmon) 150 100 95.6 50 0.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Separating > lighting circuits for better control. >Reduction > of cooler fan loads. >Investigating > installation of additional meters and M&T system. TARGET: 95.6 98.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Power > perfector installed in early 2012. >Production > up compared to 2011. RESULT: 98.5 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2011 Janssen Pharmaceutical Ltd 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 25.0 50 40.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Plant > output projected to increase again in 2013. >Centralisation > of key utilities such as CHW system will enable reduced energy consumption. TARGET: 25.0 38.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Plant > output increased (including weekend production), which allowed increased energy consumption to be attributed to increased volumes. >1MW > CHP plant installed, which has increased gas consumption but will reduce energy costs. RESULT: 38.5 2013 Baseline year: 1996 67 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Kepak 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 97.5 100 99.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Installation > of new natural gas boiler. >Tallow > tank insulation. >Fat > plant heat recovery. TARGET: 97.5 98.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >New > natural gas boiler with economiser commissioned in November. >Hot > storage tanks insulated. RESULT: 98.1 2013 Baseline year: 2011 Kerry Foods Ltd (Shillelagh) Factors Influencing 2013 Target: No influencing factors provided. TARGET: 78.3 150 0 ’95 ’12 2012 78.3 50 100.0 100 91.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Refrigeration > cost increases due to implementation of 7-day work cycle. >Heavy > fuel oil usage increase due to implementation of 7-day work cycle. RESULT: 91.4 2013 Baseline year: 2006 Kerry Ingredients & Flavours (Listowel) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 85.0 100 84.9 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Efficiency > upgrades undertaken in 2012 will feed into improved energy performance in 2013. >Increased > focus on energy metrics being used to drive efficiency. TARGET: 85.0 86.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >2012 > challenging from milk processing perspective as season was more condensed than usual, but energy efficiency projects completed in previous years helped to offset any major impacts on energy consumption. >Maintaining > ISO 50001 is keEnPIng focus on continuous improvement in energy efficiency. RESULT: 86.0 2013 Baseline year: 2004 Kostal Ireland GmbH 68 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 Baseline reset: 2010 Actual EnPI Period of missing data 2012 107.6 100 95.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continued > activities in all departments to minimise energy usage. >Proposed > upgrade works to replace AHUs with more energy-efficient type, incl. better air diffusion and air quality in production areas. >Consider > installation of more energyefficient lighting for production areas, which will also improve lux levels. TARGET: 107.6 108.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Power-down > procedures for production equipment, with monthly audits. >Improved > housekeEnPIng to ensure effective use of HEVAC systems. >Ongoing > compressed-air leakage audits incorporated into manufacturing PM system. >Energy-efficient > lighting installed in mezzanine storage area. RESULT: 108.4 2013 Prior data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Kraft Foods Ireland Ltd (Dublin) Factors Influencing 2012 Results: No influencing factors provided. RESULT: 90.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: No influencing factors provided. TARGET: 102.0 150 0 ’95 ’12 2012 102.0 50 86.0 90.0 100 2013 Baseline year: 1997 Kraft Foods Ireland Ltd (Kerry) 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 86.3 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Implementation > of energy saving opportunities will reduce energy consumption and cut CO2 emissions. >Ongoing > high-level management commitment to energy reduction. >Reduced > production volumes will make it difficult to achieve energy targets. TARGET: 86.3 86.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increased > production volumes had positive influence on energy targets in 2012. >Ongoing > savings realised from recent upgrade projects. RESULT: 86.3 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1997 Kraft Foods Ireland Production Ltd (Tallaght) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 75.0 100 74.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Drive > to reduce baseloads using CI/LSS tools. >Drive > to reduce loads with demand-based instead of time-based scheduling. TARGET: 75.0 75.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Completion > of low-cost Lean Six Sigma (LSS) project in CW distribution system is helping deliver improvements across loads and COP. >As > part of Continuous Improvement (CI)/ LSS, internal Energy Team being relaunched with new members. RESULT: 75.4 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Lakeland Dairies (Bailieboro) 69 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 70.0 100 65.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Improvement > in EnPI expected, through continual improvement in process technology and systems. >Cleaning > systems and process control will conserve resources and reduce plant downtime. >Scope > of management information systems will support setting targets and monitoring consumption. TARGET: 70.0 69.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Some > milk powders produced in 2012 had slower drying rates that negatively affected EnPI. >New > tertiary treatment filtration including UF and RO operated throughout 2012, negatively affecting EnPI. RESULT: 69.2 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Largo Foods Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 101.0 100 104.8 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >CHP > plant installation in 2013. >VSD > and dynamic control. >Continued > improvement through ISO 50001. TARGET: 101.0 103.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >ISO > 50001 system in place. >Energy-efficient > lighting installation towards end 2012. >Lean > Six Sigma projects on kettle line gas. RESULT: 103.3 2013 Baseline year: 2009 LEO Pharma 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 105.0 100 112.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >With > several energy efficiency initiatives plus running CHP for full 12 months, good reduction in EnPI in 2013 expected. >Very > full programme of energy projects running this year; benefits noted where these were completed. TARGET: 105.0 113.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Following > introduction of CHP in April 2012, EnPI reduced; further reduction expected in 2013 with whole-year running, along with other ongoing energy-reducing projects. RESULT: 113.0 2013 Baseline year: 1996 Liffey Meats Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 90.0 100 98.7 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Projects > below, implemented in 2012 with SEAI support through Better Energy Workplace grant. Savings will be realised in 2013, and verified by new M&T system installed in 2012. >Diffuse > aeration in effluent treatment plant, VSD installed on LT refrigeration compressor, heat recovery on compressed air and refrigeration, upgrade of fat plant control and equipment. TARGET: 90 111.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Reduction > in number of cattle killed in 2012 had adverse affect on EnPI. >Several > energy saving projects completed towards end 2012; improvements will not be evident until 2013. RESULT: 111.2 2013 Baseline year: 2009 Lisheen Mine 70 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 90.0 100 78.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Strong > efforts to maintain energy savings achieved in previous years, through continuous monitoring and implementing more controls on main users: conveying, fixed underground pumping and ventilation. >Continued > upgrading of control of auxiliary pumps and fans. Improved process control and installation of VFDs have led to improved efficiency in process plant. TARGET: 90.0 85.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Strong > efforts to maintain energy savings achieved in previous years, through continuous monitoring and implementing more controls on main users: conveying, fixed underground pumping and ventilation. >Continued > upgrading of control of auxiliary pumps and fans. Improved process control and installation of VFDs have led to improved efficiency in process plant. RESULT: 85.9 2013 Baseline year: 2000 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Masonite Ireland 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 85.0 100 60.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continued > use of Lean Six Sigma tools to improve overall efficiency of process; modest improvement in overall plant efficiency expected in 2013, and thus improved EnPI. >Options > being examined to reduce energy consumption of heat energy plant during periods when plant is not in production. TARGET: 85.0 88.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Building > products market going through difficult time internationally; this has affected plant output, with operation of plant to match demand and consequent increase in EnPI. >Electrical > energy side has been stable but big increase in wood energy EnPI value as heat energy plant cannot be stopped on non-manufacturing days as this would cause unacceptable maintenance problems. RESULT: 88.2 2013 Baseline year: 2001 Meadow Meats 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 82.0 100 97.4 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > efficiency continues to be high priority. >New > projects identified through energy audits being implemented in 2013. TARGET: 82.0 86.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >KPIs > reviewed monthly by site management team. >Energy > Master Plan (EMP) completed for 2012. RESULT: 86.3 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Medite Europe Limited Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Production > output. >New > technology. >Equipment > upgrade. >Improving > monitoring system. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 150 100 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Equipment > upgrade. >New > technology. >Energy > trend analysis. RESULT: 100.0 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2012 Merck Millipore Ltd Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >This > is the first year reporting in this format so there is nothing to trend the EnPI against. Since it is a multi-product site, it is difficult to select a perfect EnPI. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 150 100 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >EnPI > based on feet of filter membrane used as this is used over multiple products. This is the first year reporting on the existing facility and products so there is nothing to compare against. RESULT: 100.0 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2012 71 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Micro-Bio Ireland Ltd Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Main > DC rectifiers being replaced to improve capacity and efficiency. >Anodes > and cathodes being re-coated in 2013 (a periodic activity). TARGET: 67.0 150 100 67.0 50 0 ’95 ’12 67.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Quality > of the raw material and the cell efficiency. >Cell > efficiency. RESULT: 67.0 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1996 Microsoft 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 94.0 100 79.6 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Replacement > of chillers. >Ongoing > BMS analysis and maintenance. >Ongoing > sub-meter analysis and feedback. TARGET: 94.0 96.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Optimisation > of HVAC and BMS control setpoints. >Optimisation > of data and plant room cooling. >Replacement > of obsolete BMS and upgrade of VRV control system. >Sub-meter > installations. >Conversion > to ISO 50001. RESULT: 96.1 2013 Baseline year: 2012 Microsoft Datacentre (Grangecastle) 150 100 131.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >DB5 > being built and planned to be operational in Q2 2014. This will increase power consumption at site. >Energy > efficiency was key part of design of DB5, which will be 100% free-air-cooled. >Operating > PUE design for DB5 is 1.25. TARGET: 131.1 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Dublin > Data Centre is growing and adding additional server capacity. DB4 became operational in Q4 2012; based on 100% free air cooling and optimised design. >Dublin > Data Centre is at forefront of energy efficiency, with design PUE of 1.25. RESULT: 100.0 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Molex Ireland 150 100 120.0 75.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Prolonged > cold season. >New > products being developed. >Under-used > equipment due to low demand. TARGET: 120.0 136.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Compressors. > >Lighting. > RESULT: 136.4 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2008 72 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Monaghan Mushrooms Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 95.0 100 87.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continued > projected increase in production. >Completion > of phase 2 tunnels in Carbury. TARGET: 95.0 95.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Start-up > costs for additional 8 tunnels in Carbury. >Refurbishment > of ice plant, Monaghan. RESULT: 95.8 2013 Baseline year: 2008 MSD Ireland (Brinny) 200 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 72.0 100 124.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Production > volumes projected to decrease in 2013. >Aggressive > energy reduction plan for 2013 will reduce consumption. TARGET: 72.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Slight > increase in electricity and gas consumption due to increased use of production buildings and thus increased production volumes. >Increase > in consumption tempered by energy performance improvements achieved by site energy team. RESULT: 100.0 2013 Baseline year: 1995 MSD Ireland (Carlow) 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 63.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Site > Energy Management Policy signed off by plant manager. >Site > energy management standard operating procedures being drafted; implementation by last quarter. >Cooling > tower projects approved and 100% implemented by year end. >Chilled > water project approved and 66% implemented by year end. TARGET: 63.1 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Energy > management programme started mid-2012. >Preliminary > energy audits carried out. >Large > volumes of water losses uncovered through auditing, management programme introduced. >Projects > identified on chilled water generation and distribution and cooling tower water system. RESULT: 100.0 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2011 MSD Ireland (Rathdrum) 400 300 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 162.0 200 196.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Electricity > and gas usage will increase slightly in 2013 due to production plan and newly installed equipment. Higher production volumes causing EnPI to improve. >Liquid > nitrogen usage will reduce dramatically in 2013 due to major investment project completed in December 2012. TARGET: 162.0 167.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Waste-heat > recovery equipment performed well in 2012; helped to reduce natural gas usage from network. >Strategic > capital project to achieve 80% reduction in liquid nitrogen usage was completed in December 2012. >Collaboration > between all 5 MSD Ireland manufacturing sites stepped up, which will deliver long-term benefits through sharing of best practices. RESULT: 167.6 2013 Baseline year: 1995 73 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 MSD Ireland (Swords) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 75.5 100 84.3 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >EnMS > is generating effective capital and non‑capital projects and initiatives to save energy and water on a continuous basis in line with Lean methodologies. >Aggressive > energy reduction targets at business unit level will be set and tracked using new M&T system. >Projects > focus will remain largely on grey utilities with site-wide initiatives to improve operational and production efficiencies. TARGET: 75.5 79.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Returned > to decreasing energy usage trend in 2012, coupled with a >30% increase in production volumes compared with 2011 due to Kaizen-driven efficiency improvements and better shutdown energy management. >Focus > primarily on HVAC optimisation projects and water reduction activities in 2012. RESULT: 79.4 2013 Baseline year: 2005 Novartis Ringaskiddy Ltd 200 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 12.0 100 11.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Glycol > system will be reviewed and altered to ensure better control in system. >High-energy > systems will be studied to see if control can be improved for better efficiency. TARGET: 12.0 12.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Gas > saving of 12% compared to 2011 due to improvements to various systems and new systems installed to generate steam from alternative sources. >Electricity > consumption increase of 4% in comparison to 2011. >Solvent > segregation going to liquid vapour incinerator. High calorific-value solvents are leading to more heat being recovered for use on site. RESULT: 12.3 2013 Baseline year: 1996 Nypro 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 93.5 100 70.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Operational > optimisation of compressed air using EED methodology undertaken through replication project initiative, which identified opportunities for improvement. >Improved > operational control for SEUs. TARGET: 93.5 93.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >EED > methodology now integrated into design of all new production and process lines. >Lifecycle > cost analysis undertaken for all new facilities plant and equipment. RESULT: 93.5 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Organic Lens Manufacturing 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 70.3 100 70.6 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Improved > productivity allowing equipment to run more economically. >Improve > energy awareness and education among employees. >Process > and facilities improvements to deliver energy improvements. TARGET: 70.3 70.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Improvements > in process and BMS management. >Implementing > Lean initiatives. >Increase > in production. RESULT: 70.6 2013 Baseline year: 2007 74 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets P&G Manufacturing Ireland Ltd (Newbridge) 150 100 69.6 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 67.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Focus > on sustainability; corporate targets for reducing energy output. >Production > ownership for energy use/output. TARGET: 67.0 56.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Focus > on sustainability; corporate targets for reducing energy output. >Production > ownership for energy use/output. RESULT: 69.6 2013 Baseline year: 2009 P&S Civil Works Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 98.4 100 97.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Weather > conditions in early 2013 and possibility of similar end to year will affect EnPIs. >Continuity > of sales and sporadic production will be a factor for 2013 EnPIs. TARGET: 98.4 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Extreme > winter conditions had major affect on dewatering energy usage. >Lack > of continuity in orders and abnormal spread of product requirements required unscheduled production which resulted in inefficient energy use. RESULT: 100.0 2013 Baseline year: 2011 Pfizer (Newbridge) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 60.0 100 70.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Reduction > in air changes in some production areas and out of hours shut down in technical spaces. >Use > of free cooling in IT and tech spaces in one production department. >Compressed > air operational control introduction and leak management program. >Chilled > water optimisation program. TARGET: 60 65.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Amalgamation > of all utilities in one Central Utilities Building (CUB). >Reuse > of CHP low-grade heat into production building for space heating. >Introduction > of HVAC operational control tools. >Installation > of VFDs on major HVAC systems. RESULT: 65.5 2013 Baseline year: 2009 Pfizer Biotechnology (Grange Castle) Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >HVAC > maintenance. >Increased > production. TARGET: 35.2 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 35.2 12.0 50 44.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Reduction > in the air change rates of qualified spaces. >Increased > activity associated with future capacity expansion. RESULT: 44.3 2013 Baseline year: 2009 75 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals (Little Island) 200 182.0 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 42.9 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Due > to the introduction of new process methods, the EnPI will be adversely affected. >An > increase in the proportion of electrical consumption with respect to gas will also cause an adverse affect to the EnPI. TARGET: 182.0 41.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Production > at lower level than in 2011, but much of background services still required, resulting in higher EnPI value. >Reduction > in both electricity and gas consumption, however, due to work undertaken as result of energy management programme. RESULT: 41.3 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2000 Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals (Ringaskiddy) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 133.0 100 92.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >EnPI > expected to disimprove in 2013 due to change in product mix, but to continue implementing energy saving projects. >Further > optimise HVAC, encompassing room air-change rate optimisation. >Concept > study being carried out, which will reduce carbon footprint. >Continued > leveraging with tools of right‑first‑time and technology and innovation techniques. TARGET: 133.0 67.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >During > 2012, the production activity increased slightly, resulting in a marginal improvement in EnPI. >Increased > ownership and accountability, through EnMS expansion and integrating energy usage review into daily production meetings, in each operational area. RESULT: 67.4 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Phillips 66 Whitegate Refinery Ltd (formerly ConocoPhillips Whitegate Refinery Ltd) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 126.0 100 108.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Reduce > spillback on compressors by fitting modified pistons. >Re-engineer > and install new furnace damper to reduce O2 giveaway. >Install > new twisted tube bundle exchanger to increase heat transfer duty. TARGET: 126.0 113.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Crude/HFO > exchangers cleaned to increase heat transfer and reduce energy costs. >Improved > furnace tuning programme. RESULT: 113.3 2013 Baseline year: 1996 Queally Group Naas 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 94.6 100 93.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Proposals > being drafted to change lighting in cold stores from 400W to 110W LED type. >Implementation > of ISO 50001 aiding in identifying sustainable solutions. >Poorly > insulated tanks and cooking processes will be reinsulated. >Special > investigations being carried out on refrigeration and steam generating facilities. TARGET: 94.6 87.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >One > of the cooking process facilities was upgraded and new efficient pots installed. >Centralised > steam generating plant reconfigured. >Lean > principles implemented on various cooking processes to remove energy waste. >Additional > sub-metering added to site energy monitoring system, allowing greater energy consumption transparency. RESULT: 87.3 2013 Baseline year: 2009 76 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Quinn Cement Ltd Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Development > of alternative fuels programme to substitute 45% of fossil‑fuel use. >Progression > on EnMS to ultimately achieve ISO 50001 accreditation. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 150 100 97.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Another > tough year in construction sector affected efficiency because of high baseload requirements; so EnPI remained above base year. >Current > objectives and targets have timescale of over one year, so little improvement in 2012 EnPI. RESULT: 97.9 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline reset: 2008 Recordati 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 85.0 100 59.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Better > understanding of energy usage during unmanned periods through improved energy monitoring. >Improve > structure and organization of a site wide Energy team. TARGET: 85.0 87.3 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Staff > highly committed to reporting energy saving opportunities. >Production > and Quality departments to work together, challenging established procedures to implement energy saving measures. RESULT: 87.3 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Roadstone Wood Group 200 100 150.0 150 165.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Focus > on compressed-air and lighting requirements, with awareness campaigns. >Increased > emphasis on fuel monitoring in mobile plant and equipment. Data obtained will be used for training. >Ongoing > emphasis on verification audits in line with ISO 50001 requirements. >Monthly > analysis of compressed-air requirements will continue. TARGET: 150.0 149.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Volumes > down again in 2012, emphasising need to reduce baseload. Carry-through electrical charge cost increases are raising total unit costs. >Over > 20 energy reduction projects implemented in 2012, resulting in reduction of over 2.2 million kWh. >All > factors affecting energy requirements during times of non-operation were reviewed. RESULT: 149.5 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2007 Roche Ireland Ltd 600 200 0 ’95 ’12 2012 355.0 400 417.8 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Challenge > for 2013 is to maintain energy consumption at constant level despite increase in activity of about 8%. >Energy > management programme focused on operation efficiencies for each unit operation. TARGET: 355.0 394.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Gas > consumption of incinerator continues to be a significant driver in energy consumption. >Provision > of utilities consumes about 65% of site electrical requirements. RESULT: 394.7 2013 Baseline year: 1995 77 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Rosderra Meats (Edenderry) 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 93.3 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Implementation > of ISO 50001. >Implementation > of air-leak management system. TARGET: 93.3 95.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Lighting > projects completed to reduce electrical load. >Optimisation > on refrigeration plant. RESULT: 95.1 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2011 Rosderra Meats (Roscrea) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 97.0 100 84.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Implementation > of ISO 50001. >Completion > of M&T system will help identify further areas where savings can be achieved. TARGET: 97.0 103.5 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increased > use of on-site heat recovery systems. >Implementation > of revised energy reporting system has helped identify where energy savings can be achieved. RESULT: 103.5 2013 Baseline year: 2011 RUSAL Aughinish 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 72.7 100 74.4 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Ongoing > heat recovery improvement programme to reduce energy. >Installation > of new feed water heater will improve performance and reduce energy costs. >New > operating configurations when key equipment is offline will further improve performance. >In > 2012 design work completed for 2 new gas-fired boilers, vendor order placed. TARGET: 72.7 73.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Heat > recovery upgrade programme in digestion area continued to improve steam efficiency. Performance in Q3 was best ever achieved and is new benchmark. >Programme > to replace obsolete 3.3 kV motors with high-efficiency units continued. In 2012 two fixed-speed 900 kW motors installed. >Calciners > converted from fuel oil to gas. This reduced CO2 emissions. RESULT: 73.7 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Sanmina-SCI 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 114.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Increased > Production Output & earned hours. >Additional > production lines & shifts in operation. >Additonal > Cleanroom Installation. TARGET: 114.0 100.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Energy > Awareness for employees and production areas. >Encourage > energy conservation outside of production hours (for machines, office lighting & equipment). RESULT: 100.0 2013 Baseline year: 2012 78 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Servier (Ireland) Industries Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 58.4 100 62.4 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Increase > in production. >Increase > in use of third cycle shift. TARGET: 58.4 63.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Production > activity – volume and mix increased. Additional third shift. These would offset savings. >HDDs. > >Two > additional production rooms commissioned (8kW extra fan power + heating and cooling requirements). RESULT: 63.6 2013 Baseline year: 2009 Silver Hill Foods 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 83.0 100 69.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Training > and maintaining awareness with all employees. >CIP > in place to highlight areas for focus, to become more efficient or make savings. TARGET: 83.0 85.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Continuous > improvement programme (CIP) identified key areas for energy efficiency projects. >Ongoing > energy monitoring and reporting to senior management maintains focus on energy reduction and awareness throughout company. >Annual > energy training with all employees maintains awareness. RESULT: 85.7 2013 Baseline year: 2007 Taconic 400 300 200 48.7 100 0.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Due > to changes in process 2 SEUs – thermal oxidiser and coating machine – are no longer operating, resulting in energy savings. >LPG > replaced by natural gas, resulting in improved energy performance and cost savings. >More > efficient operation of premises. TARGET: 48.7 52.6 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Energy > savings and increased operational efficiencies. >Financial > savings. >Better > overall management of facility. RESULT: 52.6 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 2010 Takeda Ireland Ltd (Bray) 200 150 157.3 100 85.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Air > handling units. >Boilers. > >Lighting. > TARGET: 157.3 185.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Chillers. > >Boilers. > >Air > handling units. >Compressors. > >Process > equipment/lighting. RESULT: 185.8 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 2013 Baseline year: 1999 79 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Takeda Ireland Ltd (Grange Castle) 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 3.0 50 30.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Change > from single-shift plant to 2-shift plant, with increased product output. >Production > output has increased almost five-fold from 2011 to 2012; plans to increase almost four-fold from 2012 to 2013. >More > structured EnMS implemented, resulting in reduction in energy consumed by some SEUs. TARGET: 3.0 8.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increase > in production output in 2012. >Site > has transitioned from R&D Facility to bulk manufacturing facility. RESULT: 8.0 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Tech Group Europe Ltd (Dublin) 150 100 50 0 ’95 ’12 Baseline reset: 2010 75.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Working > to improve chilling efficiency. >Continue > energy savings through Lean Six Sigma programmes. >Add > further heat recovery from compressors. TARGET NOT SPECIFIED 96.4 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Work > on air handling and removal of cooling tower as part of 2012 drive. >Continued > investment in energy-efficient injection moulding machines and equipment. RESULT: 96.4 2012 2013 Prior data Temmler Ireland Ltd Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Electrical > baseload reduction. >Boiler > Banking. RESULT: 42.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Installation > of a Biomass Boiler will have a positive effect on our EnPI. >Sequencing > of Major Electrical loads will also improve energy efficiency. TARGET: 45.9 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 45.9 31.4 42.5 50 2013 Baseline year: 1996 Tesco Ireland Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 58.0 100 58.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Continued > focus on reducing energy consumption to meet carbon reduction target of 50% by 2020, using 2006 baseline. >Innovative > projects will be rolled out in 2013, focusing on smarter fridge and lighting control systems and using LED lighting systems. TARGET: 58.0 60.7 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >On > track to reduce energy consumption to meet carbon reduction target of 50% by 2020, using 2006 baseline. >This > is being achieved by focusing on retrofitting estate with low-energy technologies, driving good energy housekeEnPIng and optimising energy performance of stores. RESULT: 60.7 2013 Baseline year: 2007 80 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Thermo King Europe Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Other > savings will be generated from action plans throughout site. TARGET: 38.1 150 100 0 ’95 ’12 2012 38.1 38.4 50 37.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >In > 2012, site gained ISO 50001 accreditation – first site in Ingersoll Rand Climate Solutions to do so. Site also reduced absolute energy consumption by 5% compared to 2011. >New > clear roof lights installed over factory floor in 2012, resulting in more natural light and increased thermal performance. >In > 2013, site will begin to use new pretreatment and painting process. RESULT: 37.9 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Transitions Optical Ltd 150 100 76.8 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 82.7 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Expected > reduction in number of lenses manufactured will negatively affect overall energy efficiency. TARGET: 82.7 74.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Focus > on industrial ovens. Reducing exhaust rates from plant-wide ovens. >Reduction > of process water in plant. Extensive recycling of RO and DI water. RESULT: 76.8 2013 Baseline year: 1998 UCB Pharma Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 50.0 100 49.5 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Key > energy reduction projects implemented, resulting in kWh consumption saving. Existing production plant was started up, which resulted in energy increases. >Overall > plan is to continue driving energy cost-saving projects while implementing new products. TARGET: 50.0 58.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Central > Energy Reporting – standard reports being obtained from Plant SCADA. >Continue > to implement energy saving initiatives as identified in Resource Management Plan. >Use > skeleton lighting both internally and externally during periods of little to no personal occupancy of bespoke buildings and areas. RESULT: 58.2 2013 Baseline year: 2009 United Fish Industries Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 96.0 100 100.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >No > improvement expected in 2013, but as plant is being reconfigured from 2014, step change from 2015 is expected. TARGET: 96.0 96.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Large > boilers were being lit just for heating oil during summer when there is little production, taking over 4 hours to warm up, so steam generator was installed for low steam demand days. >Factory > is fed with high-pressure water from booster system which had not been analysed from energy perspective for some time. VSDs fitted to vary speed while maintaining set pressure. RESULT: 96.2 2013 Baseline year: 2008 81 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Vistakon Ireland 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 59.0 100 72.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Energy > projects cancelled due to production constraints. Some energy projects progressed well this year – and are planned for completion in Q4 2012. >New > production lines installed; expected increase in electricity and gas import in 2013. TARGET: 59.0 73.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Increase > in production put pressure on electricity and gas usage. >Number > of lenses produced as part of product development which are not included in EnPI but required energy to manufacture. RESULT: 73.9 2013 Baseline year: 2005 Vodafone 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 103.3 100 105.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Plan > to roll out LED lighting to all retail shops by end March 2014. >Target > energy reduction for 2013 is 10%. TARGET: 103.3 114.8 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >LED > lighting installed in 10 shops in 2012 as part of shop redesign. >Measured > savings from this initiative show 12% reduction. RESULT: 114.8 2013 Baseline year: 2008 Wellman International Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 88.7 100 88.4 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Plan > to replace a number of process water pumps throughout factory with more efficient ones. >Detailed > CHP study will be completed in 2013 to assess potential for this technology to be used on site. TARGET: 88.7 89.1 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Old > mercury vapour and fluorescent lights replaced in 10 areas with induction lighting to increase efficiency; occupancy controls installed to switch off lights when areas not in use. >Air > meters installed on 6 Denseveyor material transporting vessels. Adjustments made to optimise performance. Energy saving of 5%, giving payback of 1.5 years on investment. RESULT: 89.1 2013 Baseline year: 1995 Western Proteins 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 87.6 100 87.0 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Investment > in R&D has led to identification of heat recovery potential capable of powering thermal needs in abattoir together with new methods of using organics in waste water. Plan to develop this potential. TARGET: 87.6 88.0 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Site > continues to develop and investigate new ways of reducing energy. Energy is part of site KPIs and is monitored and reported weekly. Strong focus on energy and continued R&D to find new ways to retain competitiveness in challenging environment. >Corrective > actions being followed through from energy audit carried out during period. RESULT: 88.0 2013 Baseline year: 2000 82 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI Section Four – Results and Targets Wyeth Nutritionals Ireland (formerly Pfizer Nutrionals Ireland) 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 98.5 100 97.1 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >Lower > volumes in 2013 will again have negative impact on site EnPI. >Improved > operational control of HVAC systems will lead to improved energy efficiency. >Many > ISO 50001 principles applied to energy management practices in 2013. TARGET: 98.5 99.9 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >Output > volumes reduced, which had negative impact on site EnPI. >Control > modifications carried out on refrigeration system in 2012 to increase efficiency and measure COSP. RESULT: 99.9 2013 Baseline year: 2007 Xerox (Europe) Ltd 150 50 0 ’95 ’12 2012 38.0 100 57.9 Factors Influencing 2013 Target: >New-product > energy efficiency. >Development > of raw material specification to specifically address energy efficiency impact. >Changing > product mix. TARGET: 38.0 54.2 Factors Influencing 2012 Results: >New-product > energy efficiency improvement. >Investigation > of impact of raw material variability on energy efficiency. RESULT: 54.2 2013 Baseline year: 2005 Non responding members list Covidien (Mulhuddart) Johnston Mooney and O'Brien Abbott Vascular Devices Ireland Ltd Cuisine de France Ltd Kerry Ingredients & Flavours (Charleville) Analog Devices BV Dawn Meats Ltd (Ballyhaunis) MSD Ireland (Ballydine) Bausch & Lomb Ireland Ltd Diageo Ireland (Dundalk) Musgraves Britvic Ireland Dunnes Stores Nutricia Ireland Ltd Cara Partners Element Six Ltd Premier Periclase Ltd Celtic Linen Glanbia Consumer Foods Ltd (Inch) Sonoco Plastics (APT Ireland) Cognis Ireland Ltd Helsinn Birex Pharmaceuticals Ltd Tegral Building Products College Proteins Group Irish Cement Ltd Teva Pharmaceuticals Ireland 83 Actual EnPI Period of missing data Actual EnPI Target EnPI 5 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 ABOUT SEAI The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, was set up by the Government in 2002 as Ireland's national energy agency to play a leading role in transforming Ireland into a society based on sustainable energy structures, technologies and practices. 84 Section Five – About SEAI Our Mission To play a leading role in transforming Ireland into a society based on sustainable energy structures, technologies and practices. Our Key Strategic Objective Energy efficiency first Implementing strong energy efficiency actions that radically reduce energy intensity and usage. Low carbon energy sources Accelerating the development and adoption of technologies to exploit renewable energy sources. Innovation and integration Supporting evidence-based responses that engage all actors, supporting innovation and enterprise for our low-carbon future. Our Roles > Supporting Government decision-making through advocacy, analysis and evidence > Driving demand reduction and providing advice to all users of energy > Driving the decarbonisation of energy supply > Raising the standards in sustainable energy products and services > Building markets based on quality, confidence and proven performance > Fostering innovation and entrepreneurship > Improving the coherence of Irish energy research and development SEAI Funding SEAI is financed by Ireland’s EU Structural Funds Programme co-funded by the Irish Government and the European Union. 85 SEAI – Large Industry Energy Network – Annual Report 2012 Members List Covidien (Mulhuddart) Abbott Ireland Diagnostics Division Creganna Abbott Ireland Ltd (Cootehill) Cuisine de France Ltd Abbott Ireland Ltd (Longford) Dairygold Co-op Society Abbott Vascular Devices Ireland Ltd Danone, Macroom AbbVie Ireland Dawn Meats (Grannagh) Allergan Pharmaceuticals Ltd Dawn Meats Ltd (Ballyhaunis) Amgen Technology (Ireland) Depuy (Ireland) Ltd Analog Devices BV Diageo Bailey's Global Supply Arigna Fuels Diageo Ireland (Dundalk) Arkil Ltd Diageo Ireland (Kilkenny) Arvato Digital Services Ireland Diageo Ireland (St James's Gate) Astellas Ireland Co Ltd (Dublin) Diageo Ireland (Waterford) Astellas Ireland Co Ltd (Kerry) Donegal Meat Processors Aviva Stadium Dunnes Stores Bank of Ireland eBay-PayPal Bausch & Lomb Ireland Ltd Edenderry Power Ltd Baxter Healthcare SA Eircom BD Medical Elan Pharma Becton Dickinson & Company Ltd Electrical and Pump Services Ltd Boliden Tara Mines Ltd Element Six Ltd Boston Scientific Ireland Ltd (Clonmel) Eli Lilly SA Boston Scientific Ireland Ltd (Cork) EMC Information Systems International Boston Scientific Ireland Ltd (Galway) Fournier Laboratories Ireland Ltd Bristol-Myers Squibb (Cruiserath) GE Healthcare Ireland Bristol-Myers Squibb (Swords) Genzyme Ireland Ltd Britvic Ireland Glanbia Ballitore BT Glanbia Consumer Foods Ltd (Inch) Bulmers Ltd Glanbia Drogheda Cara Partners Glanbia Ingredients Ltd (Ballyragget) Carbery Milk Products Ltd Glanbia Ingredients Ltd (Virginia) Celtic Linen GlaxoSmithKline Ltd (Cork) CG Power Systems GlaxoSmithKline Ltd (Dungarvan) Charleville Foods Glen Dimplex CITADEL100 Datacentres Ltd Google Ireland Citi Green Isle Foods (Gurteen) Cognis Ireland Ltd Green Isle Foods (Longford) College Proteins Group Green Isle Foods (Naas) Connacht Gold Ltd (Shannonside) Green Isle Foods (Portumna) Connolly's Red Mills Gypsum Industries Ltd Covidien (Athlone) Helsinn Birex Pharmaceuticals Ltd 86 Hewlett-Packard (Manufacturing) Ltd Nypro HJ Heinz Frozen & Chilled Foods Ltd Honeywell Turbo Technologies Organic Lens Manufacturing IBM P&G Manufacturing Ireland Ltd (Newbridge) P&S Civil Works Ltd Intel Ireland Ltd Pfizer (Newbridge) Interxion Ireland Ltd Pfizer Biotechnology (Grange Castle) Irish Cement Ltd Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals (Little Island) Irish Pride (Ballinrobe) Pfizer Ireland Pharmaceuticals (Ringaskiddy) Irish Pride (Taghmon) Janssen Pharmaceutical Ltd Johnston Mooney and O'Brien Kepak Kerry Foods Ltd (Shillelagh) Kerry Ingredients & Flavours (Charleville) Kerry Ingredients & Flavours (Listowel) Kostal Ireland GmbH Kraft Foods Ireland Ltd (Dublin) Kraft Foods Ireland Ltd (Kerry) Kraft Foods Ireland Production Ltd (Tallaght) Lakeland Dairies (Bailieboro) Largo Foods Ltd Phillips 66 Whitegate Refinery Ltd Premier Periclase Ltd Queally Group Naas Quinn Cement Ltd Recordati Roadstone Wood Group Roche Ireland Ltd Rosderra Meats (Edenderry) Rosderra Meats (Roscrea) RUSAL Aughinish Sanmina-SCI Servier (Ireland) Industries Ltd Silver Hill Foods LEO Pharma Sonoco Plastics (APT Ireland) Liffey Meats Ltd Taconic Lisheen Mine Takeda Ireland Ltd (Bray) Masonite Ireland Takeda Ireland Ltd (Grange Castle) Meadow Meats Tech Group Europe Ltd (Dublin) Medite Europe Limited Tegral Building Products Merck Millipore Ltd Temmler Ireland Ltd Micro-Bio Ireland Ltd Tesco Ireland Ltd Microsoft Microsoft Datacentre (Grangecastle) Molex Ireland Monaghan Mushrooms Ltd MSD Ireland (Ballydine) Teva Pharmaceuticals Ireland Thermo King Europe Transitions Optical Ltd UCB Pharma Ltd United Fish Industries Ltd MSD Ireland (Brinny) Vistakon Ireland MSD Ireland (Carlow) Vodafone MSD Ireland (Rathdrum) Wellman International Ltd MSD Ireland (Swords) Western Proteins Musgraves Wyeth Nutritionals Ireland Novartis Ringaskiddy Ltd Xerox (Europe) Ltd Nutricia Ireland Ltd 87 Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland Wilton Park House, Wilton Place Dublin 2, Ireland T. +353 1 8082100 F. +353 1 8082002 [email protected] www.seai.ie The Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland is partly financed by Ireland’s EU Structural Funds Programme co-funded by the Irish Government and the European Union.
* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project