Energy Efficiency in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin's Industrial Compressed Air Systems
Energy Efficiency in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin's Industrial Compressed Air Systems
This report analyzes energy efficiency and GHG reduction potentials and their cost-effectiveness in industrial compressed air systems in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin, separately.
Pages: 74 | Figures: 31 | Tables: 23
File format: PDF
Publication date: September 2017
Research Director: Ali Hasanbeigi, Ph.D.
Global Efficiency Intelligence, LLC.
Notice: Once the order has been completed, the PDF file of the report(s) you purchased with a unique ID number will be delivered to the email you have provided, up to 3 business days after receipt of your payment.
Don't forget to Follow us on LinkedIn and Facebook to get the latest about our new reports, projects, and news.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Industrial electric motors account for over 70% of electricity consumption in manufacturing in the U.S. Motors are used to drive pumps, fans, compressed air systems, material handling, processing systems and more. Industrial motor systems represent a largely untapped cost-effective source for energy savings that could be realized with existing commercialized technologies. Compressed air systems are widely used throughout manufacturing industries. In many industrial facilities, air compressors are among the highest electricity consuming equipment. Inefficiencies in compressed air systems are common.
One of the major barriers to effective policy making and increased action by states and utilities to improve energy efficiency in industrial compressed air systems is the lack of information and data on the magnitude and cost-effectiveness of the energy savings potential in industrial compressed air systems in each state. This lack of information creates an obstacle to developing a comprehensive and effective strategy, roadmap, and programs for improving compressed air systems efficiency cost-effectively. It is far easier to quantify the incremental energy savings of substituting an energy-efficient motor for a standard motor than it is to quantify the energy conservation of applying other energy efficiency and system optimization practices to an existing compressed air system.
Global Efficiency Intelligence, LLC. conducted a large initiative to study industrial motor systems in 30 states from different U.S. regions. This includes the top 20 U.S. states in terms of industrial energy consumption. We focused on industrial pumps, fans, and compressed-air systems which together account for over 70% of electricity use in U.S. industrial motor systems.
This report by Global Efficiency Intelligence, LLC. focuses on analyzing energy use, energy efficiency, and CO2 emissions-reduction potential in industrial compressed air systems in selected East North Central U.S. states of Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin. We have also published similar reports for industrial pump systems and fan systems for these states.
Now that states have different programs to set targets, including passing legislation to enact formal energy efficiency resource standards, setting long-term energy savings targets through utility commissions tailored to each utility, or incorporating energy efficiency as an eligible resource in renewable portfolio standards (RPS), investment in energy efficiency in industrial compressed air systems to tap into the huge saving potentials quantified in this report can help utilities to meet their targets, reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, and thereby help with climate change mitigation.
In addition, energy efficiency in industrial motor systems stimulates economic growth and creates jobs in a variety of ways (direct, indirect, and induced jobs creation). Investment in energy efficiency creates more jobs per dollar invested than traditional energy supply investments. Energy efficiency in industrial motor systems also creates more jobs in the local economy, whereas energy supply jobs and investment dollars often flow outside the state.
Key analyses and results included:
- Electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in each state studied
- Electricity use for motor systems and compressed air systems by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in each state studied
- Electricity use by industrial compressed air system by size in each state studied
- Market barriers to energy efficiency in industrial motor and compressed air systems
- Energy Efficiency Cost Curves for industrial compressed air systems for each state using ten major energy efficiency measures
- Energy saving potential and cost of conserved energy (US$/MWh-saved) for each efficiency measures in each state studied
- The cost-effective and total technical energy efficiency potential in industrial compressed air systems in each state studied
- Energy saving potential for each energy efficiency measure by system size
- GHG emissions reduction potential for each efficiency measure in each state
- Sensitivity of the results with respect to changes in electricity prices and discount rates
- Implications for markets, utilities, and policy makers
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who should read this report?
- Utilities
- Government energy and environmental agencies
- State regulators and policy makers
- Energy Service Companies (ESCOs)
- Demand Response (DR) service and technology providers
- Energy management service and technology providers
- Motor, compressor, and compressed air systems service and technology providers
- Energy efficiency equipment vendors
- Climate and environmental NGOs and think tanks
- Investor community
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
1. Introduction
2. Market Barriers to Energy Efficiency in Motor and Compressed Air Systems
3. Energy Use in Industrial Motor and Compressed Air Systems in each State, by Manufacturing Subsector
3.1. Industrial Electricity Use in each State by Manufacturing Subsector
3.2. Industrial Motor Systems Electricity Use in each State by Manufacturing Subsectors
3.3. Electricity Use in Industrial Compressed Air Systems in each State by Manufacturing Subsectors
3.4. Electricity Use in Industrial Compressed Air Systems in each State by System Size
4. Energy Efficiency Potential and Cost in Industrial Compressed Air Systems in each State
4.1. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Compressed Air Systems in Illinois
4.2. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Compressed Air Systems in Indiana
4.3. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Compressed Air Systems in Michigan
4.4. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Compressed Air Systems in Ohio
4.5. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Compressed Air Systems in Wisconsin
4.6. Sensitivity Analyses
5. Summary and Implications for Markets, Utilities, and Policy Makers
5.1. Summary
5.2. Implications for Markets, Utilities, and Policy Makers
Appendices
Appendix 1. List of acronyms
Appendix 2. List of Figures and Tables
Appendix 3. Methodology and Scope of the Study
Appendix 4. Bibliography and References
Appendix 5. Related Reports from Global Efficiency Intelligence, LLC.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Figures
Figure 1. Global total final electricity use by end use in 2014
Figure 2. Electric motor systems energy use profile
Figure 3. Final electricity consumption in motor-driven systems in the IEA’s New Policies and 450 Scenarios
Figure 4. Illustration of two industrial electric motor-driven systems: (a) normal and (b) efficient
Figure 5. A typical compressed air system
Figure 6. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in Illinois in 2015
Figure 7. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in Indiana in 2015
Figure 8. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) in Michigan in 2015
Figure 9. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in Ohio in 2015
Figure 10. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS 31-33) in Wisconsin in 2015
Figure 11. Share of motor systems from total electricity use in manufacturing in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin in 2015
Figure 12. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Illinois in 2015
Figure 13. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Indiana in 2015
Figure 14. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Michigan in 2015
Figure 15. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Ohio in 2015
Figure 16. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Wisconsin in 2015
Figure 17. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by system size in Illinois in 2015
Figure 18. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by system size in Indiana in 2015
Figure 19. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by system size in Michigan in 2015
Figure 20. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by system size in Ohio in 2015
Figure 21. Estimated industrial compressed air systems electricity use by system size in Wisconsin in 2015
Figure 22. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial compressed air systems in Illinois
Figure 23. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Illinois when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 24. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial compressed air systems in Indiana
Figure 25. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Indiana when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 26. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial compressed air systems in Michigan
Figure 27. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Michigan when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 28. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial compressed air systems in Ohio
Figure 29. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Ohio when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 30. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial compressed air systems in Wisconsin
Figure 31. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Wisconsin when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
List of Tables
Table 1. Industrial compressed air system electricity-savings potential in five East North Central U.S. states in 2015
Table 2. Share of motor systems and compressed air systems electricity use in each U.S. manufacturing subsector
Table 3. Industrial motor systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) for each state studied in 2015
Table 4. Share of compressed air systems from total electricity use in manufacturing and from industrial motor systems electricity use in each state in 2015
Table 5. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Illinois ranked by final CCE
Table 6. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial compressed air systems in Illinois
Table 7. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Illinois by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 8. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Indiana ranked by final CCE 31
Table 9. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial compressed air systems in Indiana
Table 10. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Indiana by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 11. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Michigan ranked by their final CCE
Table 12. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial compressed air systems in Michigan
Table 13. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Michigan by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 14. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Ohio ranked by their final CCE
Table 15. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial compressed air systems in Ohio
Table 16. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Ohio by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 17. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Wisconsin ranked by their final CCE
Table 18. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial compressed air systems in Wisconsin
Table 19. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial compressed air systems in Wisconsin by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 20. Sensitivity analyses for the cost-effective electricity saving potentials in the industrial compressed air systems with different discount rates
Table 21. Sensitivity analyses for the cost-effective electricity saving potentials in the industrial compressed air system with different electricity price
Table 22. Total annual technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial compressed air systems in the studied states
Table 23. Policies driving customer-funded energy-efficiency programs