Spring 2004

ISSUE FOCUS:

Energy Savings Energy expenditures typically account 

for anywhere from 5% to 15% of operating 

costs of U.S. manufacturers, making prudent 

energy management an important bottom-line 

consideration. In some cases, just a fraction of 

a percentage point shaved from energy costs 

can amount to millions of dollars in savings.

Yet, by some accounts, energy considerations sometimes get short shrift in the competition for capital at major U.S. industrial 

concerns. With only limited dollars to spend, 

top management at many manufacturers may 

look first toward spending those dollars on 

process improvements or growth, even when 

the payback for spending projects aimed at 

energy savings can be rapid. “Weʼve heard 

reports lately of some large companies that 

arenʼt doing energy projects, even when they 

can get less than a 1-year payback,” laments 

one U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) staffer 

who asks not to be named.

At Rutgers Universityʼs Center for 

Advanced Energy Systems, Director Michael 

Muller confirms that spending on projects 

with energy savings paybacks are not always 

at the top of the list for smaller manufacturers 

either. The Center serves as the field manager 

for the DOEʼs Industrial Assessment Center 

(IAC) program, which provides free, on-site 

energy assessments for qualifying small to 

mid-sized manufacturers. 

“We tend to get more interest (in energy 

savings) during down-economic cycles,” 

Muller observes. “What happens in up-economic cycles is that small to medium-sized 

companies want to grow, so if theyʼve got 

50 or 100 grand to spend, theyʼd rather buy 

widget makers and not worry too much about 

cost cutting.” 

Here’s help

As energy prices continue to rise, however, 

and as U.S. natural gas prices, in particular, 

remain at painfully high levels, the incentives 

for improved energy efficiency are stronger 

than ever. For manufacturers who are looking 

for opportunities to trim their energy costs, the 

DOE, through its Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) “BestPractices” program, offers a 

breadth of assistance—ranging from informational resources and software tools, technical 

help, and emerging technologies access, to 

training in energy management practices and 

hands-on energy assessments. 

One major BestPractices activity aimed at 

large manufacturers is the plant-wide energy 

assessments program. For a relatively low 

initial investment, companies that participate 

in assessments can expect to realize a minimum of $1 million in savings annually from 

energy costs, waste reduction, and increased 

(continued on page 2) 

“ T U R N I N G I N F O R M A T I O N I N T O E N E R G Y S O L U T I O N S F O R I N D U S T R Y ”

I N D U S T R I A L T E C H N O L O G I E S P R O G R A M

IN THIS ISSUE

Don’t Miss Out on Energy Savings 1

California Compressed Air Users Go 

to CAMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Insulation Improves Economic 

Returns in Manufacturing . . . . . 4

DOE Announces Plant-Wide 

Assessment Financial Opportunity 6

DOE Launches NxEAT Tool to Help 

Industry Assess NOx Emissions . . .6

Look for These New BestPractices 

Titles From the Industrial 

Technologies Program . . . . . . . . 6

Coming Events . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

DOE Launches NxEAT Tool to Help 

Industry Assess NOx Emissions page 6.

Don’t Miss Out on Energy Savings

Some large manufacturers are saving a bundle, often at minimal capital expenditure, 

thanks to cost-shared, federally sponsored energy assessments at their plants. 

By Wes Iversen, Automation World

Energy Matters

Glass container manufacture is one industry of 

interest to the Industrial Technologies 

Program.

PIX 06984
2 Energy	Matters,	Spring	2004 

productivity—usually with a payback of 18 

months, the DOE says. Further, on average, 

the findings from a single assessment can be 

replicated in at least seven other facilities with 

equivalent systems and energy uses.

To participate in the assessment program, 

companies must submit proposals in response 

to a plant-wide assessment solicitation, usually offered in the spring. Eight to 10 proposals are typically selected each year for awards, 

funded at up to $100,000 per plant, with a 

required industrial match of at least an equal 

amount by the recipient. 

For each project awarded, a team of 

experts is assembled, which may include consultants, University faculty, retired executives 

and others, who perform a comprehensive 

energy assessment of the plant, and make 

recommendations based on current best practices and the adoption of best available and 

emerging technologies. The recommendations 

are detailed and specific, including cost and 

savings estimates for each of multiple projects 

and initiatives.

The DOE publishes case studies based on 

the results of these assessments on its Web 

site. And from the looks of those currently 

available on the site, the payoffs can indeed be 

substantial. 

Following a plant-wide efficiency assessment, Alcoa Inc.ʼs Layfayette aluminum 

extrusions plant saved more than $1.5 million 

by reducing its use of natural gas and electricity, for example, and Alcoa has identified 

opportunities to save at least an additional 

$50 million. ExxonMobil, meanwhile, has 

reduced annual energy consumption by 11% 

by upgrading the control system of a recovery unit in its Baton Rouge, Louisiana, site. 

And at a Vulcan Chemicals plant in Geismar, 

Louisiana, a four-month optimization project 

involving two chloromethane production units 

required no capital investment, yet reduced 

process demand by 22,000 million British 

thermal units (MMBtu), for an annual savings 

of $42,000.

For a closer look at energy management 

activities around industry, Automation World

talked to managers at some companies that 

have recently undergone BestPractices plantwide energy efficiency assessments. 

Ford Motor Co.

Fordʼs Cleveland Casting Plant, which produces cast iron engine blocks and other components, underwent a BestPractices plant-wide 

assessment in 2002 that resulted in 16 specific 

recommendations for short-term projects. The 

DOE picked up $100,000 of the $300,000 cost 

of the assessment. 

“Our Cleveland plant has always aggressively looked at energy, but with the assessment, we had an opportunity to bring in some 

fresh eyes to take a look,” notes Bill Ziemba, 

supervisor of energy leadership for Fordʼs 

Power Train Operations, in Livonia, Michigan. “And they did uncover some things that, 

honestly, weʼd looked at in the past, but kind 

of lost sight of,” Ziemba allows. “So it was 

very beneficial.”

Don’t Miss Out on Energy Savings (continued from page 1)

Energy Matters

is published quarterly by the 

U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) 

Industrial Technologies Program.

Information contained in the newsletter 

can be reproduced without permission 

provided due acknowledgement is given 

(the U.S. Department of Energy’s 

Energy Matters newsletter) and 

a copy of the publication is 

supplied to the editor.

■

Editorial Board

Tom Bishop

Electrical Apparatus Service 

Association

Rob Boteler, representing National Electrical Manufacturers 

Association

Eric T. Fletty, Business 

Development Manager, TAPPI

Gary L. Goehring, Alcoa 

North American Extrusions

Glenn Hahn, Spirax Sarco

J. Bruce Medaris, Facilities 

Consulting Services and 

Executive Director, Compressed Air 

Challenge®

Michael R. Muller, Center for Advanced 

Energy Systems, 

Rutgers University

Arvind Thekdi, E3M, Inc.

Chuck Whelan, DuPont 

■

DOE Staff

Chris Cockrill, BestPractices, Motors

Bob Gemmer, Process Heating and 

Steam

Grace Ordaz,

Technology Manager

Peter Salmon-Cox, Lead 

Technology Manager, Technology 

Delivery and BestPractices 

■

Comments?

Contact: 

David Wagman, Energy Matters Editor, 

at 303-275-3602, 

e-mail david_wagman@nrel.gov

or Karen Atkison, Associate 

Editor at 303-275-3730, e-mail 

karen_atkison@nrel.gov

1617 Cole Blvd., MS 1609

Golden, CO 80401

For new subscriptions, go to 

www.oit.doe.gov/

bestpractices/explore_library/

energy_matters.shtml

For address/subscription changes, please 

contact the editor.

Test furnaces for high-efficiency, ultra-lowemissions, integrated process heater systems.

PIX 11012

Replacing old motors with new, efficient models can be a winning strategy for industry.

PIX 01774
Energy	Matters,	Spring	2004 3

Technical Center, in Croydon, Pennsylvania. 

“Many of our plants use similar processes, so 

if we can make energy savings improvements 

at one site, we should be able to replicate that 

at other sites,” says Baker. “And in fact, thatʼs 

what weʼve found.”

The assessment team came up with nine 

recommendations covering the Knoxville 

plantʼs steam generation and water cooling 

systems, among others, with total energy savings estimated at nearly 47,000 MMBtu in 

steam and fuel annually, and 11,000 megawatt 

hours (MWh) per year in electricity. Annual 

cost savings were estimated by the team at 

almost $1.5 million. When the assessment 

was replicated at LaMirada and Louisville, 

combined additional estimated cost savings 

totaled more than $500,000 per year. The 

$166,900 cost of the assessments was 50% 

DOE funded. 

To date, about three quarters of the Knoxville assessment recommendations have been 

implemented, with additional actions taken 

at the LaMirada and Louisville plants, Baker 

says. Savings opportunities identified during the assessments have been put in place at 

other plants as well. 

The DOE assessments and other energy 

savings activities at Rohm and Haas are part 

of an ongoing corporate program launched by 

the company in 1999 aimed at actively reducing energy usage and costs, Baker says. The 

companyʼs largest plant, based in Deer Park, 

Texas, in fact, has been aggressively focused 

on energy management since 1997—an 

attentiveness that has led to more than a 26% 

reduction in that plantʼs energy intensity, 

Baker adds. 

Among other activities, Rohm and Haas 

participates in the DOEʼs Allied Partner program, which provides access to BestPractices 

information and software tools, including 

training modules. The Deer Park plant has 

hosted DOE training sessions for its own staff, 

and for those of nearby companies, Baker 

says. 

As a way to more easily share energy 

savings best practices among all of it plants, 

Rohm and Haas is developing an internal 

Web site that is expected to go live by midyear, says Baker. The site will include energy 

(continued on page 4) 

For an investment of about $2.3 million, 

the 16 projects recommended could produce annual savings at the Cleveland plant 

of about $3.3 million, the assessment team 

estimated. The recommendations addressed 

issues including combustion, compressed air, 

water, steam, motor drive, and lighting system 

efficiency. If implemented, the projects could 

save 18 million kilowatt hours (kWh) and 

nearly 139,000 MMBtu per year, the team 

said, while reducing carbon dioxide emissions 

by about 63 million pounds per year.

Some of the biggest-payoff projects dealt 

with ways to more efficiently blend air into 

the Cleveland plantʼs cupola furnaces. By 

reducing excess air in cupola blast preheaters, for example—a step requiring no capital 

expenditures—the operation could reduce 

natural gas usage by 64,000 MMBtu per year, 

producing an annual savings of $361,000. And 

for an expenditure of just $10,000, the plant 

could save an additional $465,000 yearly by 

using supersonic oxygen lancing to improve 

cupola temperature profiles. 

In all, the Cleveland plant implemented 

13 of the 16 recommendations, says Ziemba. 

“The three that didnʼt get implemented fell 

outside of our parameters when we looked at 

the rate of return,” he explains. Current Ford 

guidelines for energy improvement projects 

require payback within 1 year. 

At the corporate level, Ford measures 

energy improvement on the basis of energy 

expended per unit of production, Ziemba 

says. “Weʼve established the year 2000 as our 

baseline and weʼve set some aggressive goals 

from 2000 forward.” The goal for 2003 was to 

be 8.5% better than 2000, he notes, and thanks 

in part to the DOE assessment-recommended 

projects, the Cleveland Casting Plant was able 

to exceed that goal, hitting 8.9% last year. The 

entire Power Train Operations unit, which 

includes Fordʼs engine and transmission 

plants, did even better, recording an 11.7% 

gain in 2003 compared to the year 2000 baseline, says Ziemba. 

“Iʼve been involved in energy for a little 

over 10 years now,” Ziemba adds, “and Ford 

has always been very aggressive on energy 

and the environment. Itʼs just the way we 

operate.”

Rohm and Haas Co.

Rohm and Haas conducted its first BestPractices plant-wide assessment at its Knoxville, Tennessee, facility in 2001, and then 

replicated the assessment methodology at 

plants in LaMirada, California, and Louisville, 

Kentucky.

As a specialty chemical producer with 

more than 100 manufacturing plants in 26 

countries, the company saw the assessment as 

an additional step in its internal benchmarking 

activities aimed at energy best practices, notes 

Ray Baker, manager of energy and utility 

systems at the Rohm and Haas Engineering 

ENERGY MATTERS GOES ELECTRONIC!

The content is the same, it publishes just as often and it’s still yours for the asking. The all-electronic version of Energy Matters makes it even easier for you to 

stay current on the latest energy efficiency topics from the Industrial Technologies 

Program. By converting your subscription to our all-electronic version, we’ll send 

you an e-mail when the newsletter is published and provide a clickable link to the 

newest issue! Plus, you’ll enjoy full access to the Energy Matters article library, 

putting its archive of energy efficiency information just a mouse-click away! Sign 

up today at www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/energymatters/energy_matters.shtml

Rohm and Haas’ Knoxville, Tennessee plant
4 Energy	Matters,	Spring	2004 

the annual compressed air energy costs are 

$180,000.

Maximizing such a compressed air 

systemʼs efficiency by optimizing it in accordance with industry best practices allows for 

better system performance, greater reliability, 

and typically yields annual compressed air 

energy savings of 20% to 30%.

In 1999, the Compressed Air Management 

Program (CAMP) was inaugurated to offer 

free, system-level assessments of industrial 

customersʼ compressed air systems using 

AIRMaster+, a free software tool that helps 

identify compressed air system improvement opportunities. AIRMaster+ provides a 

systematic approach for assessing the supplyside performance of compressed air systems. 

Using plant-specific data, the software evaluates operational costs for various equipment 

configurations and system profiles. It provides 

useful estimates of the potential savings to 

be gained from selected energy efficiency 

measures, and calculates associated simple 

payback periods.

CAMP is funded by the California Public Utilities Commission and is available to 

PG&E industrial customers. Customers that 

register for CAMP are expected to take steps 

to increase the efficiency of their compressed 

air systems in exchange for the evaluations. 

In addition to assessing system efficiency, 

CAMP provides technical support to help 

participants implement compressed air system 

optimization projects, and adopt best practices 

for ongoing system maintenance.

CAMP participants also receive a measurement-based verification of their compressed 

air energy savings using AIRMaster+, along 

with a one-time incentive payment of up to 

$0.04 per annual kWh saved, up to 60% of 

project costs. 

SBW Consulting implements CAMP on 

behalf of the state utility commission. The 

firm has audited 55 PG&E customers using 

AIRMaster+ since the audit program’s inception. To date, the total annual energy savings 

opportunities identified for these customers 

are 27 million kWh and just under $2.7 million. The main industrial sectors benefiting 

from CAMP are the food processing and forest products industries where savings opportunities account for approximately half of all the 

identified energy savings.

One recent participant is Lockheed Martin 

Space Systems of Sunnyvale, California. The 

Sunnyvale facility produces a wide range of 

satellites and space systems for military, civil 

government, and commercial communications 

organizations. In 2003, the Sunnyvale plant 

implemented a project that achieved annual 

compressed air energy savings of 722,000 

kWh and $71,600. Because both the system 

evaluation and project implementation costs 

were subsidized under CAMP, the project 

achieved an immediate payback.

To learn more about CAMP, contact the 

programʼs consultant, Ben Wildman, at 425-

827-0330, via e-mail at bwildman@sbwcons

ulting.com, or visit www.sbwconsulting.com/

CAMP.htm.

Training is recommended for anyone interested in using AIRMaster+. An overview presentation (1 to 1 1⁄2 hours) and short courses 

(4 1⁄2 hours) on the software are available 

through a network of Qualified AIRMaster+ 

specialists. These specialists have passed a 

rigorous qualifying exam conducted under 

the auspices of DOE and the Compressed 

Air Challenge®. Find a specialist to assist 

your facility by looking under Training at 

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices.

To download your copy of the AIRMaster+ 

software, visit the Compressed Air Challenge 

web site at www.compressedairchallenge.org/. 

For a CD version, call the Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy Information Center at 

(877)-EERE-INF (877-337-3463).

By Christopher Russell, Sr. Program Manager 

for Industry, Alliance to Save Energy

If purchased fuel is the “currency” of an 

industrial plantʼs energy budget, then mechanical insulation is one of its “savings” components. Just as savings have a specific place in 

a financial plan for creating wealth, so does 

insulation play a role in optimizing a plantʼs 

valuable energy resources.

According to the U.S. DOEʼs BestPractices 

Steam program, mechanical insulation should 

be used on any surface over 120°F.1 Boiler 

Insulation Improves 

Economic Returns in 

Manufacturing

databases and will provide a place for plant 

personnel to post their energy savings ideas, 

including those garnered through the BestPractices plant-wide assessments. Energy 

savings are a “high level corporate objective” 

at Rohm and Haas, Baker asserts, and the 

company has found the DOE to be a valuable 

partner in that effort. “Theyʼre an organization 

that is really out there to do whatever they can 

to encourage energy reduction and savings,” 

he concludes.

Submit a proposal

For companies that may be interested 

in submitting a proposal for a DOE plantwide assessment during fiscal year 2005, 

beginning October 2004, information can 

be found on the ITP BestPractices Web 

site, at www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/

solicitations.shtml. Solicitations for proposals 

were issued some time this spring. Individuals may also subscribe to the E-Bulletin—an 

electronic newsletter from the DOEʼs Industrial Technologies Program that will contain 

information and links on solicitations when 

they are issued—by requesting a subscription 

via e-mail, at itpebulletin@ee.doe.gov, or by 

calling the ITP office at 202-586-7547 or 202-

586-9232.

Reprinted with permission from Automation World, copyright 2004 by Summit Media, LLC. For subscription information, visit www.automationworld.com.

Aimee T. McKane, Program Manager, 

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Robert B. Lung, Senior Associate, Resource 

Dynamics

Compressed air systems are found 

throughout industry and can consume a significant amount of the electricity used by manufacturing plants. Many industrial end-users 

do not realize how costly their compressed 

air systems can be. For example, a 400-horsepower compressed air system operating 6,000 

hours a year can consume about 1.8 million 

kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity. If the 

plant’s electric power costs are $0.10/kWh, 

California Compressed Air 

Users Go to CAMP

Don’t Miss Out on Energy Savings 

(continued from page 3)

(continued on page 5) 
Energy	Matters,	Spring	2004 5

surfaces, distribution mains, condensate 

return pipes and vessels, and hardware fittings 

should all be properly insulated to conserve 

thermal resources. Two tip sheets, part of a 

series of BestPractices Steam tip sheets that 

currently numbers 19, discuss the benefits of 

mechanical insulation and demonstrate the 

calculation of energy savings that it provides.

The value proposition is not the steam 

itself, but the heat that the steam provides. 

Steam can efficiently and safely dispatch 

thermal resources from the boiler to multiple 

locations within a plant, usually to locations 

appreciably distant from the steam source.

Plant managers depend on insulation not 

only to conserve thermal resources throughout 

a steam system, but to enhance process stability, ensure personnel safety, and to attenuate 

noise.

Two prime considerations are whether 

the insulation is dry and snugly fitted, and 

whether there is enough of it. Moisture drastically reduces insulationʼs heat retention 

capabilities. But if the insulation system (insulation and protective jacketing) is properly 

specified and installed for the steam application, moisture penetration will be reduced and 

the insulation system will remain effective 

indefinitely.

Specifying the correct thickness for the 

application maximizes the insulation systemʼs 

performance. Energy savings justify insulation up to a certain thickness, beyond which 

any additional economic or energy savings 

may not be worth the cost. One indication 

of potential savings comes from a review of 

DOE Industrial Assessment Center energy 

assessments covering 713 fabricated metals 

plants. From this group, 54 opportunities to 

improve steam system insulation were noted. 

In aggregate, the payback times for these insulation projects were only 0.6 year.2

Insulation results are sometimes dramatic. 

• A Georgia-Pacific plywood plant in Madison, Georgia, upgraded the insulation on 

steam lines to its dryers. This allowed the 

plant to reduce its steam load by 6,000 

pounds per hour and cut its fuel bill. The 

investment paid for itself in 6 months.3

• Carastar Industries Baltimore, Maryland, 

received a DOE plant-wide assessment in 

2000. Among the recommendations was 

an upgrade of insulation on steam system 

piping. The estimated implementation cost 

was $3,200, with annual projected savings 

of $6,100. This is a 6-month payback.4

• An Oklahoma manufacturer of plastic 

floatation devices installed fiberglass insulation measuring 1 inch thick to 133 feet 

of previously uninsulated pipe. Heat loss 

was reduced 89%. The cost of insulating 

material was $1,800, saving $4,460 per 

year in natural gas costs. The payback was 

0.4 year.5

By conserving thermal resources, insulation not only saves money, but improves plant 

productivity. In this sense, insulation makes 

money for the plant. In addition, the expense 

relief becomes a new source of cash that can 

be invested elsewhere at the plant. These benefits make insulation a priority for manufacturers in a competitive marketplace. 

Insulation is only one opportunity 

described by BestPractices Steam, a DOE 

initiative. This program generates references, diagnostic software, case studies, and 

industry outreach events for the benefit of 

the industrial steam community. A series of 

19 steam tip sheets is available. Each is one 

page in length, provides an overview of a 

steam improvement opportunity, and offers an 

example for calculating its economic impact.

Two steam tip sheets are devoted to 

insulation use: “Insulate Steam Distribution 

and Condensate Return Lines” and “Install 

Removable Insulation on Uninsulated Valves 

and Fittings.” Determining the appropriate 

thickness for a given mechanical component 

is addressed by “3E Plus®,” a free software 

tool developed by the North American Insulation Manufacturers Association and distributed by BestPractices Steam. An insulation 

energy appraisal performed by a certified 

insulation energy appraiser can provide an 

energy user with a comprehensive assessment 

of the piping and equipment in a facility and 

provide recommendations that will reduce 

fuel costs and greenhouse emissions while 

adding to workplace safety.

The National Insulation Association has 

developed an insulation energy appraisal 

certification training program. Visit 

www.insulation.org for more information. 

You may also want to visit the BestPractices 

website at www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices. 

Steam tip sheets and most other resources are 

free of charge and may be downloaded from 

www.steamingahead.org/resources.htm or 

may be requested from the Energy Efficiency 

and Renewable Energy Information Center at 

877-EERE-INF (877-337-3463) or via e-mail 

at eereic@doe.gov.

(Endnotes)

1 U.S. Department of Energy, Insulate Steam Distribution 

and Condensate Return Lines. BestPractices Steam 

Tip Sheet #2, www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/pdfs/

insulate.pdf

2 William J. Clark, Leanne K. Birkmire, BestPractices 

Energy Management: Experience with IAC Assessments in the Metals Fabrication Industry. Proceedings: 1999 ACEEE Summer Study.

3 U.S. Department of Energy, Georgia-Pacific Saves 

Fuel Costs and Improves Efficiency with Insulation Upgrades. www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/

energymatters/jul1998_georgia_pacific.shtml

4 U.S. Department of Energy, Carastar Industries 

Energy Assessment. A BestPractices Case Study. 

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/caraustar.pdf

5 William J. Clark, Leanne K. Birkmire, BestPractices 

Energy Management: Experience with IAC Assessments in the Metals Fabrication Industry. Proceedings: 1999 ACEEE Summer Study.

INDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGIES PROGRAM

E-BULLETIN: YOUR ONLINE

CONNECTION

 The Industrial Technologies Program 

E- Bulletin is your online connection 

to news and resources from ITP. Each 

monthly edition keeps you up-to-date 

on key developments and news of 

interest to industrial partners. Don’t 

miss announcements about new tools 

and resources, training, events, and 

project opportunities.

The Industrial Technologies Program 

E-Bulletin helps you tap into opportunities to improve industrial energy 

efficiency today and tomorrow! To 

view the most recent E-Bulletin and 

sign up to receive future issues, visit 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/industry/

resources/itp_ebulletin.html.

Insulation Improves Economic Returns in 

Manufacturing (continued from page 4)
6 Energy	Matters,	Spring	2004 

Look for These New BestPractices Titles From the 

Industrial Technologies Program

The DOE Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energyʼs Industrial Technologies 

Program is seeking public-private partnerships 

to conduct plant-wide assessments (PWA) for 

U.S. energy-intensive industrial plants. The 

solicitationʼs goal is to gather a suite of energy 

assessment methodologies that systematically 

evaluate and assess the energy efficiency of 

industrial plants and identify cost-effective 

energy reduction measures. 

The project period for each award is generally 1 year. DOE is targeting approximately 

$1 million for solicitation funding, which 

is subject to fiscal year 2005 funding availability. The awards are limited to $100,000 

per awardee, and all awardees must provide 

at least 50% of the assessmentʼs cost. Priority 

will be given to sites in the following energyintensive industries: agriculture, aluminum, 

cement, chemicals, food processing, forest 

products, glass, metal casting, mining, petroleum refining, and steel. Proposals from other 

energy-intensive industries, however, will also 

be considered.

Help your company save energy and 

money by conducting a PWA. The solicitation is now open. Proposals are due 

July 9, 2004. For detailed information, 

please see the BestPractices Solicitations 

page at www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/

solicitations.shtml.

DOE Announces PlantWide Assessment 

Financial Opportunity DOEʼs Industrial Technologies Program 

introduces the NOx and Energy Assessment 

Tool (NxEAT). This new software tool helps 

plants in the petroleum refining and chemical 

industries assess and analyze NOx emissions 

and application of energy efficiency improvements. 

Users can inventory emissions from equipment that generates NOx, and then compare 

how various technology applications and 

efficiency measures affect overall costs and 

reduction of NOx. By performing “what-if” 

analyses, users can determine optimal and 

cost-effective methods for reducing NOx from 

DOE Launches NxEAT Tool to Help Industry Assess NOx 

Emissions

THERE’S MORE TO LEARN AT ENERGY

MATTERS EXTRA

Learn more about the topics covered in this issue of Energy Matters 

by checking out Energy Matters 

Extra. It’s our on-line complement 

to the print publication. Visit the 

Energy Matters Extra web site at 

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/

energymatters/emextra/.

systems, such as fired heaters, boilers, gas turbines, and reciprocating engines.

NxEAT is the latest addition to ITPʼs 

suite of software tool that help users assess 

and analyze potential energy and cost savings in industrial energy systems, such as 

compressed air, motors, process heating, and 

steam. Download NxEAT and the other tools 

from www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/software_tools.shtml.

BestPractices offers a variety of resources to help address your companyʼs energy management 

needs. We offer a range of software tools and databases that can help you self-assess your plantʼs 

steam, compressed air, motor, and process heating systems. We also provide an extensive library 

of publications covering just about every aspect of energy management. Look online for these 

recently published titles. Or, contact the Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Information 

Center with specific questions and to get assistance in finding the information you need. Call the 

EERE Information Center hotline at 877-EERE-INF (877-337-3463).

Fact Sheets:

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/technical_publications.shtml#technical

Publications offering “how-to” technical detail on increasing system efficiencies.

• Working with ITP

• Best Practices Process Heating Fact Sheet: Metal and Glass Manufacturers Reduce Costs by 

Increasing Energy Efficiency in Process Heating Systems 

Reports:

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/library.shtml

Whether youʼre looking for information on how to recover waste heat from your steam system 

or wondering about the market potential of efficient motors, the BestPractices library has the publication for you.

• Partnering for Success

• Evaluation of the Compressed Air Challenge(R) Training Program (Executive Summary and 

Full Report)

• Variable Speed Pumping: A Guide to Successful Applications, Executive Summary

• Steam Digest 2003

Sourcebooks: 

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/technical_publications.shtml#source

Reference books that provide information on activities, resources, applications, standards, and 

guidelines for increasing industrial energy efficiency.

• Improving Compressed Air System Performance: A Sourcebook for Industry 

• Improving Steam System Performance: A Sourcebook for Industry
Energy	Matters,	Spring	2004 7

A Strong Energy Portfolio 

for a Strong America

Energy efficiency and clean, renewable energy will mean a stronger 

economy, a cleaner environment, 

and greater energy independence for 

America. Working with a wide array 

of state, community, industry, and 

university partners, the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy 

invests in a diverse portfolio of 

energy technologies.

�����

������ ��� ���� Case Studies:

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/case_studies.shtml

See what others in your industry have done to increase their energy savings by reading their 

case studies.

Corporate Energy Management

• Alcoa Teams with DOE to Reduce Energy Consumption

Plant-Wide Assessments

• Blue Heron Paper Company: Oregon Mill Uses Model-Based Energy Assessment to Identify 

Energy and Cost Savings Opportunities

• Corning Inc.: Proposed Changes at Glass Plant Indicate $26 Million in Potential Savings

• Weirton Steel: Mill Identifies $1.4 Million in Annual Savings Following Plant-Wide EnergyEfficiency Assessment

• Chevron: Refinery Uses Process Simulation Models to Identify $4.4 Million in Annual Savings

Technical Case Studies:

• Techni-Cast: Foundry Saves Energy with Compressed Air System Retrofit

• Ohio Aluminum Industries: Compressed Air System Improvement Project Saves Energy and 

Improves Product Quality

• American Water Heater Company: Compressed Air System Optimization Project Saves 

Energy and Improves Production at Water Heater Plant

• Lehigh Southwest Cement Company: Compressed Air System Improvement Saves Energy at 

Cement Plant

• Procter & Gamble: Compressed Air System Upgrade Saves Energy and Improves Production 

at a Paper Mill 

Tip Sheets: 

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/technical_publications.shtml#tip

Quick advice on how to keep your systems running at their maximum efficiency.

Steam

• Install Removable Insulation on Uninsulated Valves and Fittings

• Install an Automatic Blowdown Control System 

• Consider Installing Turbulators on Two- and Three-Pass Firetube Boilers 

Software Tools:

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/software_tools.shtml

With the right know-how, you can use these powerful tools to help identify and analyze energy 

system savings opportunities in your plant.

• NOx and Energy Assessment Tool (NxEAT) 

 http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/steam/neat.html

Coming Soon!

Process Heating Sourcebook 

Fan Sourcebook (newly revised and updated)

Waste Heat Reduction & Recovery for Improving Furnace Efficiency, Productivity and 

Emissions Performance Technical Brief

Materials Selection Considerations for Thermal Process Equipment Technical Brief

Energy Matters Extra 

Highlights

Log on to Energy Matters Extra to find 

even more information on the topics covered 

in this issue of Energy Matters. Access the 

new publication Evaluation of the Compressed 

Air Challenge® Training Program, which 

tells of the training programʼs numerous production and cost-saving benefits. Learn about 

the new NxEAT Tool, a software program 

that helps petroleum, refining, and chemical 

plants assess and analyze NOx emissions and 

application of energy efficiency improvements. Youʼll also be able to view an array of 

new BestPractices publications, including fact 

sheets, reports, sourcebooks, case studies, tip 

sheets, technical briefs, and other software 

tools. All these tools and publications can be 

downloaded to your computer. Furthermore, 

we provide links to the Industrial Assessment 

Centers and Plant-Wide Assessments Web 

sites, so you can learn how your plant might 

gain from an energy-efficiency assessment. 

See all this at Energy Matters Extra at http://

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/energymatters/

emextra/.
This document was produced for the Office of Energy 

Efficiency and Renewable Energy at the 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) by the 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory, 

a DOE national laboratory.

DOE/GO-102004-1941 • June 2004

Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing 

at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer 

waste

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Boulevard

Golden, CO 80401-3393

PRSRT STD

U.S. Postage

PAID

Permit No. 258

Golden, Colorado

BestPractices

The Industrial Technologies Program’s 

BestPractices initiative and its Energy 

Matters newsletter introduce industrial end 

users to emerging technologies and wellproven, cost-saving opportunities in motor, 

steam, compressed air, and other plant-wide 

systems. 

INTERNATIONAL MOTOR SELECTION SOFTWARE (MSSA) INTRODUCTORY

TRAINING, WASHINGTON, DC 

■			Jun 21, 2004 For more information, contact Chris Cockrill at 816-873-3299

AIRMASTER+ SPECIALIST QUALIFICATION, FENTON, MO

■ Jun 22-24, 2004 For more information, contact Amanda Dosch at 

 703-748-7099 

STEAM SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT, BOISE, ID

■ Jun 29, 2004 For more information, contact Nate Carpenter at 

 208-384-7434 

STEAM SYSTEM SPECIALIST QUALIFICATION, INDIANAPOLIS, IN 

■ Jul 13-15, 2004 For more information, contact Tony Wright at 865-574-6878

STEAM SYSTEM IMPROVEMENT, ROCHESTER, NY 

■ Aug 12, 2004 For more information, contact Linda Stansberry 

 865-574-0266 

OPTIMIZING STEAM SYSTEM PERFORMANCE, MILWAUKEE, WI 

■ Sep 28, 2004 For more information, contact Adam Hudson at 

 202-530-4356 or Brian Olsen at 312-886-8579

Coming Events

DOE Regional Office Representatives

■ David Godfrey, Atlanta, GA, 

 404-562-0568

■ Scott Hutchins, Boston, MA, 

 617-565-9765

■ Brian Olsen, Chicago, IL, 

 312-886-8479

■ Jamey Evans, Denver, CO, 

 303-275-4813

■ Chris Cockrill, Seattle, WA, 

 816-873-3299

■ Claudia Marchione, Philadelphia, PA, 

 215-656-6967

 EERE INFORMATION CENTER Do you have questions 

about using energy-efficient process 

and utility systems in your industrial 

facility? Call the Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy (EERE) Information 

Center for answers, Monday through 

Friday 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (EST).

HOTLINE: 877-EERE-INF

or 877-337-3463

Energy Matters