Summer 2004

ISSUE FOCUS:

Plant-Wide Assessments

Plant-wide energy assessments identify 

opportunities to improve overall operations and the efficiency of plant processes 

and utility systems. Only 40% of industry’s 

primary energy requirements is delivered to 

manufacturing processes. Losses inside the 

plant are substantial and companies can realize significant energy efficiency gains from 

improvements in the operations of in-plant 

energy generation and distribution systems, 

process equipment, and other plant utility 

systems. Plant-wide assessments investigate 

energy use in energy-intensive industrial 

facilities—which can account for 10% or 

more of a plant’s total operating cost—and 

highlight opportunities for best practices in 

energy management, including the adoption of 

new energy-efficient technologies and process 

and equipment improvements. To date, many 

companies have identified energy savings of 

between 10% and 15% from just one plantwide assessment. Average payback period is 

usually less than 18 months.

Replication of the findings can also be 

very beneficial. Many of the energy-efficiency strategies and findings can be 

replicated in other plants that have similar 

process lines; such plants may be within the 

same company or in the same industrial sector. This strategy substantially increases the 

potential for energy savings, productivity 

improvements, emissions reductions, and 

other benefits.

Since 1999, a total of 43 plant-wide assessments have been awarded in six rounds of 

competitive solicitations. This issue of Energy 

Matters is devoted to highlighting some of the 

exciting results that plant-wide assessments 

have achieved for industry to date. 

Find out which companies have been 

awarded plant-wide assessments over the 

course of six competitive solicitations, learn 

about the solicitation, and see how savings 

identified at one plant may be replicated at 

your facilities. 

(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

Identifying Savings Opportunities 

through Plant-Wide Assessments 1

What Can a Plant-Wide Assessment 

Do for You? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Cost-Share Awards for Plant-Wide 

Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

By the Numbers: Plant-Wide 

Assessments Generate Significant 

Cost Savings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Industry Leaders Talk About PlantWide Assessment Benefi ts . . . . . .5

Alcoa Teams with DOE to Reduce 

Energy Consumption . . . . . . . . . 5

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

 Alcoa has identified more than 

$60 million in savings opportunities, and 

has reduced its operating costs by more 

than $15 million (page 6)

Identifying Savings Opportunities through Plant-Wide 

Assessments

Energy Matters

What Can a Plant-Wide Assessment Do for You?

Plant-wide energy assessments investigate overall energy use in industrial facilities—which can account for 10% or more of 

a plant’s total operating cost—and identify 

cost-effective measures for best practices in 

energy management, including the adoption of 

new energy-efficient technologies and process 

and equipment improvements.

Plant-wide assessment teams characterize findings and document savings. Plants 

that participate in assessments and implement identified savings can expect a 10% to 

15% improvement in energy costs and also 

improvements in productivity and waste 

reduction. Average payback period is usually 

less than 18 months. In addition, the findings 

from a single assessment may be replicated in 

other corporate facilities with similar process 

systems, utility systems, or equipment, and 

with comparable energy use. 

Interested companies are invited to submit proposals in response to a competitive 

solicitation, usually offered by DOE once 

a year. Specifically, proposals are sought 

where industry-developed teams consider 

the adoption of best available and emerging technology using state-of-the-art tools, 

information, process engineering techniques, 

and best practices in energy management. 

Industrial plants that fall within the Industrial Technologies Program’s initiatives are 

considered for an award. These include, but 

are not limited to, the agriculture, aluminum, 

chemicals, forest products, glass, metal casting, mining, petroleum, and steel industries. 

Funding of up to $100,000 is available for 

each project selected, with matching funds or 

more required from industry. The solicitation 

is normally announced during the first quarter 

of the calendar year. Companies are strongly 

encouraged to develop and work closely with 
2 Energy	Matters,	Summer	2004 

teams that could include their resource and equipment suppliers, engineering/consulting firms, 

academia, and other third-party entities who have expertise in plant assessments. 

Plant-wide assessments may address a variety of generic and industry-specific technology 

areas, and a variety of plant/process optimization methods. Proposers should consider best practices in energy management and technology implementation, including the following areas: industry- specific process areas, plant steam delivery and process heating/cooling systems, electric 

motor systems (including motors, drives, pumps, fans, and blowers), compressed air systems, and 

heat exchange optimization. Other areas could include supply-side options using cogeneration, 

combined heat and power system technologies, and so on. 

The results, successes, and experiences from these assessments are published in case studies. 

Confidentiality is protected and no proprietary company information is released. By publicizing 

assessment findings and results, DOE encourages other U.S. manufacturers to adopt and implement similar approaches to increasing energy and process efficiency and reducing environmental 

emissions. Participating plants will be made aware of and provided access to all DOE BestPractices tools and information resources that could assist the plants in implementing the most costeffective solutions.

The following companies have received cost-share funding from DOE’s Industrial Technologies 

Program through the competitive solicitation process to perform plant-wide energy-efficiency 

assessments.

Each company that is awarded a plant-wide assessment developed its own team, including 

energy assessor partners, to perform the assessments. ITP cosponsors this activity to achieve 

improvements in industrial energy efficiency, productivity, and global competitiveness. This list 

includes all awardees since 1999. Many of the companies’ case studies can be accessed online at 

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

And remember, if other companies are able to identify cost-saving projects, maybe your company can too!

Plant-Wide Assessment Awardees

Company Name and 

Plant Location Case Study Web Address

Aluminum

Alcoa, Bauxite, AR http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/mi_cs_alcoa_

world_alumina.pdf

Alcoa, Lafayette, IN http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/alcoa.pdf

Commonwealth Aluminum, 

Urichsville, OH Not Yet Available

Pechiney Rolled Products, 

Ravenswood, WV Not Yet Available

Chemicals

3M, Hutchinson, MN http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/ch_cs_3m_pwa.pdf

Akzo Nobel, Morris, IL http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/ch_cs_akzo.pdf

Bayer, New Martinsville, WV http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/ch_cs_bayer_

polymers.pdf

Formosa Plastics, Point Comfort, TX Not Yet Available

Neville Chemical, Anaheim, CA http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/ch_cs_neville_

chemical_company.pdf

Rohm and Haas, Knoxville, TN http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/ch_cs_

rohmhaas.pdf

W.R. Grace, Baltimore, MD http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/ch_cs_wrgrace.pdf

Solutia, Springfi eld, MA Not Yet Available

What Can a Plant-Wide Assessment Do for You? (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.

Cost-Share Awards for Plant-Wide Assessments
Energy	Matters,	Summer	2004 3

(continued on page 4) 

Forest Products

Appleton Paper, West Carrollton, OH http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/newapple.pdf

Blue Heron Paper, Oregon City, OR http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/fp_cs_blue_

heron.pdf

Boise Cascade, International Falls, 

MN http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/boise.pdf

Caraustar Industries, Rittman, OH http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/caraustar.pdf

Georgia-Pacific, Crossett, AR http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/fp_cs_georgia_pacific_crossett.pdf

Georgia-Pacific, Palatka, FL http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/fp_cs_georgia_pacific.pdf

Inland Paper, Rome, GA http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/inlandpaper.pdf

Weyerhaeuser, Longview, WA http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/fp_cs_

weyerhaeuser.pdf

Weyerhaeuser, Plymouth, NC Not Yet Available

Glass

Anchor Glass, Warner Robbins, GA http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/newanchr.pdf

Corning, Greenville, OH http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/33895.pdf

OSRAM Sylvania, Exeter, NH Not Yet Available

Metal Casting

AMCAST, Wapakoneta, OH http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/amcast.pdf

Ford Motor Company, Cleveland, OH http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/mc_cs_ford_

cleveland.pdf

Mining

Coeur Rochester, Lovelock, NV Not Yet Available

Peabody Energy, Gillette, WY Not Yet Available

Petroleum

Equilon Enterprises, Martinez, 

CA

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/bp_cs_

martinez.pdf

Paramount Refinery, Paramount, 

CA

http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/petrol_cs_

paramount_petroleum.pdf

Steel

Charter Steel, Saukville, WI Not Yet Available

Crucible Specialty Steel, 

Syracuse, NY Not Yet Available

North Star Steel, Wilton, IA Not Yet Available

Sawbrook Steel, Cincinnati, OH Not Yet Available

Supporting Industries

Jernberg Industries, Chicago, IL Not Yet Available

Metaldyne, Royal Oak, MI Not Yet Available

Metlab, Philadelphia, PA http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/metlab.pdf

SIFCO, Cleveland, OH Not Yet Available

Utica Corp., Utica, NY http://www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/factsheets/

newutica.pdf

Other Industries

Cargill Dayton Corn Plant, 

Dayton, OH Not Yet Available

Ford Motor Company, Wayne, MI Not Yet Available

Hawaiian Commercial & Sugar 

Co., Puunene, HI Not Yet Available

Since plant-wide assessments began in 

1999, DOE has supported 43 projects through 

competitive solicitation. To date, industry 

and DOE together have invested $9.4 million in the 43 assessments. A total of 35 

assessments have already been completed, 

identifying total potential annnual savings of 

$186 million. Chart 1 on the following page 

shows the cumulative annual savings identified from plant-wide assessments since the 

first assessments were completed in federal 

fiscal year 2000 (which ended September 30, 

2000). These opportunities have an average 

18-month payback and have been completed 

across a range of industries, including forest products, metal casting, aluminum, steel, 

glass, petroleum, forging, heat treatment, and 

chemicals. The assessments have identified 

savings opportunities in many areas, including 

industry-specific process areas, steam systems, pumps, compressed air systems, process 

heating, process cooling, sensors and controls, 

fans, insulation, and motors and drives.

By the Numbers: 

Plant-Wide Assessments 

Generate Significant Cost 

Savings

�����

������ ��� ����

 The summer issue of Energy Matters Extra 

provides access to more plant-wide assessment 

(PWA) information on the BestPractices Web 

site, including direct links to published case 

studies. These publications describe PWAs in 

industrial facilities and the energy- and cost-savings potential that the assessment teams found. 

Plus, find out what R&D projects in the chemical and forest products industries have been 

awarded funding by DOE. And, learn how an 

independent evaluation has confirmed the effectiveness of the Compressed Air Challenge® 

training program. These features and much 

more are available in the current issue of Energy 

Matters Extra. Get on the Internet and view it at 

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

emextra/.
4 Energy	Matters,	Summer	2004 

Plant-wide assessments identify both 

energy and nonenergy savings potential. 

Nonenergy benefits may include productivity 

improvements, waste reduction, environmental improvements, and maintenance benefits. 

Chart 2 shows that although energy savings 

make up the largest share of identified savings, nonenergy benefits are significant and 

make up about one-third of identified savings.

Recommendations from a single plantwide assessment often can be replicated in 

other plants. Chart 3 shows the impact of 

replication on overall savings potential when 

replication strategies are applied to other corporate facilities where processes, equipment, 

and energy requirements are similar. Note 

the lag time in Chart 3 reflects replication 

of assessments completed in previous years. 

(Read Alcoa’s replication success story in this 

issue of Energy Matters. North Star Steel, 

Rohm and Haas, and Weyerhaeuser have 

also reported replication activities in various 

industry forums.)

Completing a plant-wide assessment is 

just the starting point. Project implementation 

priorities and schedules are determined by 

the company. Expendeture of capital funds 

also requires planning time. Therefore, time 

lags may exist between when a plant-wide 

assessment’s energy efficiency projects are 

identified and when these opportunities can be 

implemented. To date, 21 plants have implemented energy-efficiency projects identified 

during their assessments. These plants identified more than $123 million a year in combined potential cost saving, and almost $72 

million a year worth of savings have already 

been realized (see Chart 4). Chart 4 also 

shows the contribution of replication.

Implementation of plant-wide assessment 

opportunities may also lead to significant 

reductions in carbon and carbon dioxide 

(CO2) emissions. Such reductions can 

enhance a plant or industry’s standing as an 

environmental steward, an important benefit 

for many sectors of U.S. industry.

Cost-Share Awards for Plant-Wide

Assessments (continued from page 3)

Chart 1. Cumulative Annual Savings Identified from Plant-Wide Assessments

Chart 2. Cumulative Energy vs Nonenergy Annual Savings Identified from 

Plant-Wide Assessments

Chart 3. Additional Annual Savings Identified Through Replication

Chart 4. Cumulative Annual Savings Realized from Plant-Wide Assessments
Energy	Matters,	Summer	2004 5

Alcoa Teams with 

DOE to Reduce Energy 

Consumption

The goal of a plant-wide assessment is to 

identify specific project recommendations and 

their likely effects on costs and production 

efficiency. These projects can have positive 

effects on your plant’s energy use, process 

efficiency, and bottom line. Read these testimonials to learn about some of the benefits 

your plant may see as a result of a plant-wide 

assessment.

Aluminum Permanent Mold Casting

Replication Has Yielded $20 Million 

Annual Savings

“The plant-wide assessment initiated at Amcast’s 

Wapakoneta, Ohio, operation resulted in 12 project 

recommendations that identified annual savings of 

approximately $3.6 million. Actual savings realized 

after implementation were in the $6 million 

range with the opportunity to replicate these 

results at 5 other manufacturing operations in the 

corporation. As a result of the replication, a total 

of approximately $20 million has been captured 

through June 2004 with continuing savings 

expected from 2004 through 2005. Though energy 

savings is the primary driver in the assessment 

process, Amcast focused on process modifications 

to impact performance, which resulted in 

significant cost savings for the plant. The ability to 

identify and quantify savings opportunities would 

not have been achieved without the support of 

DOE and the PWA program.”

--James VanWert, Vice President, Amcast 

Industrial Corp.

Pulp and Paper

Assessment Identifies High-Return 

Projects

“A plant-wide assessment award from the DOE 

provided the seed money to undertake an electrical energy assessment at one of Weyerhaueser’s 

large pulp and paper facilities. This assessment 

identified the potential to reduce annual electrical energy costs by nearly $3 million through 

improved energy management practices and 

high-return capital projects. One of the key lessons learned was that the Pumping System 

Assessment Tool (PSAT), developed by DOE, identified a larger opportunity for energy savings than 

traditional engineering methods.”

--Thomas Dunn, Senior Engineering 

Specialist, Weyerhaeuser

Industry Leaders Talk 

About Plant-Wide 

Assessment Benefits

Steel Castings

“The steps taken by Sawbrook Steel in reaction to 

the findings of the plant-wide assessment team 

have shown an immediate, positive impact on 

our plant costs, efficiencies, machinery performance, and personnel productivity. Being a small 

manufacturing firm we could not have undertaken 

the cost or personnel involvement that the PWA 

allowed. Due to the detail in the team’s study, and 

the calculation of the capital payback time, it is 

an easy decision to make to continue to put into 

effect the energy and cost savings 

recommendations.”

--Mickey Beyersdorfer, President,

 Sawbrook Steel Castings

Aluminum

“We have conducted PWAs with DOE at our plants 

in Lafayette, Indiana, and Bauxite, Arkansas, and 

have replicated the PWA process at Spanish Fork, 

Utah; Cressona, Pennsylvania; and Baltimore, 

Maryland. These assessments, together with 

another PWA at the Plant City, Florida facility, 

identified over $6.5 million in savings opportunities for Alcoa with over $3.7 million being realized 

to date. The PWAs also led to the formation of 

Alcoa’s Energy Efficiency Network with more than 

$60 million in savings opportunities identified, of 

which over $15 million has been captured to date. 

Alcoa has reduced NOx by over 770 metric tons 

per year, SOx by over 1,600 metric tons per year, 

and CO2 by over 420,000 metric tons per year. 

The PWAs have been great for Alcoa and for the 

environment.” 

--Garry L. Goehring, Manager 

 Environmental Engineering, Alcoa

Automotive Casting

“Ford’s 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. And they did uncover some things 

that, honestly, we’d looked at in the past, but kind 

of lost sight of. So it was very beneficial.”

--Bill Ziemba, Supervisor Energy 

 Leadership, Ford Power Train Operations

Chemicals

“At Rohm and Haas’ largest facility in Houston, 

multiple energy projects with various levels of 

DOE support...have resulted in over $18.5 million 

in cost savings per year and 4.25 trillion British 

thermal units per year combined fuel and power 

savings. Rohm and Haas is continuing to conduct 

PWAs on our own to identify and implement 

energy and efficiency savings at our facilities 

around the world.”

--Ray Baker, Energy Manager, Rohm and 

Haas

As the world’s leading producer of aluminum, Alcoa’s long-term strategy for remaining 

competitive includes goals for using energy 

more efficiently. To accomplish this objective, 

Alcoa began working DOE in 1999 to identify 

opportunities for reducing energy consumption at its aluminum processing facilities. By 

performing plant-wide energy assessments, 

conducting employee training, and using DOE 

software tools and technical resources, Alcoa 

has identified more than $60 million in 

savings opportunities, and has reduced its 

operating costs by more than $15 million.

Alcoa’s consumption of nonpotroom 

(smelting process for aluminum) fuel and 

energy as of the end of 2003 was $700 million 

per year. The company’s strategic environmental plan calls for savings of $100 million 

a year through energy efficiency and environmental management. By 2006, Alcoa expects 

savings of $60 million by improving energy 

efficiency and $40 million from environmental management.

Alcoa takes an aggressive approach to its 

energy conservation program, in the same way 

it addresses environmental issues. The company formed an Energy Efficiency Network, 

made up of internal Alcoa experts, outside 

energy consultants, and selected vendors, 

and worked with DOE tools and resources 

to conduct energy assessments at locations 

worldwide identifying potential energy savings opportunities. Alcoa wants to use natural 

resources wisely and leave the neighborhoods 

where it operates better for having Alcoa in 

their communities.

Alcoa has clear goals for measuring progress toward achieving the 2020 strategic plan 

for cleaner air, better use of land and water, 

and the protection of human health. Alcoa’s 

plan calls for ultimately eliminating landfill 

waste, reaching zero discharge of process 

water, and achieving significant reductions in 

emissions. The company has set interim targets on the way to sustainability.

For base year 2000, Alcoa plans to reduce:

• Sulfur dioxide (SO2) production by 60% by 

2010

• Volatile organic compound emissions by 

50% by 2008

• Nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions by 30% 

by 2007

• Mercury emissions by 80% by 2008

• Landfill waste by 50% by 2007

(continued on page 6) 
6 Energy	Matters,	Summer	2004 

• Process water use and discharge by 60% by 

2008.

Additionally, starting from base year 1990, 

the company is working to:

• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions 25% by 

2010

• Implement effective environmental management systems, such as ISO 14001, at all 

locations by 2005

• Achieve zero environmental noncompliance 

incidents

• Save $100 million annually by 2006 by 

eliminating wasteful practices and designing 

facilities for sustainability

• Incorporate environmental targets and community relationship objectives into all Alcoa 

businesses’ annual plans.

Alcoa is making progress in all these areas. 

The company’s annual sustainability report 

and Web site at www.Alcoa.com provide 

updated information.

DOE and Alcoa Partnership

To help achieve its aggressive goals, Alcoa 

teamed with DOE in 1999 and began identifying energy reduction opportunities. Since 

then, Alcoa has successfully used DOE tools 

and resources to improve energy efficiency. 

For example, the company has conducted 

energy assessments at individual Alcoa plants, 

hosted training to educate Alcoa employees 

about energy conservation, showcased and 

demonstrated technologies, and worked with 

DOE to establish an Energy Efficiency Network within the company.

Plant-Wide Assessments

Alcoa has participated in several costshared and other DOE energy assessments. 

By identifying areas of potential improvement 

and implementing projects, these plants have 

achieved impressive energy and cost savings. 

Through replication, 35 other Alcoa facilities 

have also reaped the benefits.

Lafayette Plant—In 2000, the Alcoa 

Lafayette Operations facility in Lafayette, 

Indiana, was the site of a plant-wide energy 

assessment. The project identified annual savings of more than $1.9 million, with an estimated capital investment requirement of $2.3 

million. So far, the Lafayette Operations has 

realized more than $1.5 million in annual savings after an investment of $1.8 million.

Bauxite Plant—In 2002, the Alcoa Arkansas Operations facility, in Bauxite, Arkansas, 

conducted a plant-wide energy assessment. 

The project identified annual savings of $1.07 

million with an estimated capital investment 

requirement of $649,000. The majority of the 

savings were identified with the compressed 

air system. To achieve these results, the 

plant improved the system, which reduced 

air demand and improved electrical load 

management.

Plant City—In 2001, Alcoa’s Plant City 

Operation, in Plant City, Florida, also conducted a plant-wide energy assessment. This 

project identified annual savings of $740,000, 

with an estimated capital investment requirement of $1.3 million. To date, the plant has 

realized $185,000 of these savings.

DOE Showcase in Salt Lake City

In 2001, Alcoa’s Spanish Fork Operations, 

in Spanish Fork, Utah, agreed to be a sponsor 

of the DOE Showcase event in Salt Lake City, 

Utah. DOE funded various energy efficiency 

projects that identified $3.3 million in potential savings throughout Alcoa with a capital 

investment of $4.8 million. To date, Alcoa 

has realized $1 million of these savings from 

showcase activities.

Spanish Fork IAC Assessment—In conjunction with the Salt Lake City Showcase, 

Spanish Fork was the site of an assessment by 

Colorado State University’s Industrial Assessment Center (IAC). The university-based team 

helped the plant identify annual savings of 

$740,000 with an estimated capital investment 

requirement of $576,000. To date, Spanish 

Fork has achieved savings of $740,000.

DOE Collaborative Targeted Assessments—Also in conjunction with the Salt 

Lake City Showcase, DOE performed Collaborative Targeted Assessments (CTA) at the 

following Alcoa plants to identify energy savings opportunities for specific operations:

• Cressona, Pennsylvania: conducted a pumping system assessment

• Plant City, Florida: conducted a process 

heating assessment

• Elizabethton, Tennessee: conducted a compressed air assessment.

Training—Alcoa has also helped its 

employees become more proficient in managing energy systems, by hosting DOE’s BestPractices training sessions. A training seminar 

for the Alcoa Engineered Products Business 

Unit in Baltimore, Maryland, focused on compressed air, motors and pumping systems, and 

variable speed drives. The potential savings 

from 30 Alcoa employees attending the training is estimated at $165,000.

DOE-Developed Technology Demonstrations—Alcoa evaluated the following DOEdeveloped technologies as part of the DOE 

Salt Lake City Showcase:

• Air/Oxy-Fuel Burners: This is burner technology for aluminum melters. The energy 

savings are offset by the cost of oxygen. The 

potential benefit is improved productivity, 

and Alcoa will review the project as product 

demand changes.

• Vertical Floatation Meter: This is a scrap 

melting technology. The return on investment (ROI) for this technology was 

evaluated; however, it does not meet Alcoa 

requirements.

• Oscillating Combustion: This combustion 

technology reduces energy consumption and 

decreases emissions of nitrogen oxides. The 

technology is being evaluated for possible 

use at Alcoa Cressona Operations and is 

being compared to alternative technologies 

so that optimal combustion technology can 

be selected for this application.

Allied Partner Agreement

An Allied Partner agreement between the 

DOE’s Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) 

and Alcoa was executed in 2001. This agreement represents a shared, voluntary commitment to promote industrial energy efficiency. 

Since this agreement was established, Alcoa 

has used and applied BestPractices programs 

and services throughout its extensive network 

of aluminum processing facilities.

Allied Partners are industrial associates, manufacturers, industrial service and 

equipment suppliers, utilities, and other 

organizations that voluntarily work with DOE. 

Partners seek to promote increased energy 

efficiency and productivity for industries that 

participate with ITP. The Allied Partner initiative began in 1995 under ITP’s BestPractices, 

and today, more than 200 companies are 

Allied Partners.

ITP encourages energy-intensive industries to work together to create broad, industry-wide goals, identify specific needs and 

priorities through industry-led roadmaps, and 

form alliances to help achieve those goals. 

DOE’s Allied Partner network exists ultimately to provide information and assistance 

to industrial manufacturers to improve the 

energy efficiency of their operations. Successful efforts of Allied Partners are publicized 

to promote their energy savings accomplishments.

Alcoa Energy Efficiency Network

Alcoa Energy Group has the task of managing the supply side of Alcoa’s energy usage 

through the Alcoa Trustee Program. Alcoa 

Energy realized that Alcoa was missing a 

significant opportunity by not focusing on 

Alcoa Teams with DOE to Reduce Energy Consumption (continued from page 5)
Energy	Matters,	Summer	2004 7

the demand side as well. Early in 2002, Alcoa 

formed a team with Alcoa Energy, Alcoa 

Engineered Products, and Alcoa Primary Metals to develop a comprehensive program that 

focuses on the demand side of Alcoa’s energy 

usage. With lessons learned from Alcoa’s 

involvement with DOE, guidance provided 

by Sara Dillich of DOE, the expertise of 

knowledgeable energy consultants, and benchmarking of other company programs (such 

as Ford, Johnson Controls, Kodak, and 3M), 

Alcoa created a company-wide Energy Efficiency Network. The Network includes tools 

and resources for identifying energy savings 

opportunities.

Alcoa’s energy conservation program 

began with North American locations, but is 

expanding worldwide, broadening the knowledge base to grow the program.

Key Factors for the Network

Alcoa’s Energy Efficiency Network 

includes several key components to help 

ensure its success and accessibility. These 

include:

• A roadmap for success

• A voluntary network that allows locations to 

request their own assessments

• Top-level commitment to energy efficiency 

improvements

• Good communication through an Intranet 

Web site

• An approach that is consistent with the 

company’s Continuous Improvements ABS 

(Alcoa Business System) Principles

• A focus on DOE’s BestPractices replications 

approach

• A program to train internal Alcoa energy 

efficiency experts

• Local commitment to energy projects

• A tracking system to report project results 

company wide

• Recognition of achievements.

How the Energy Efficiency Network 

Works

Individual Alcoa plants can access the 

Energy Efficiency Network following this 

approach:

• An Alcoa location requests an energy efficiency assessment.

• Alcoa Energy conducts a pre-assessment 

on location to determine the extent and 

resources needed for the assessment.

• Alcoa Energy and the plant jointly develop 

a specific plan and identify resources for the 

assessment. The plan includes training, if 

the location requests it.

• Internal and external (as needed) resources 

conduct a 2- to 5-day assessment of the 

location. The plant covers the costs for 

external resources, but Alcoa Energy’s 

resources are free to the location.

• The plant reviews and approves assessment 

findings, and then the Alcoa Energy assessment team issues a final report.

• Energy projects are entered in the Intranet 

database. The plants update information as 

projects progress.

• Findings are communicated throughout 

Alcoa best practices, case studies, assessment findings, and actual results of completed projects.

Network Results as of 2003

In its first 18 months, the Alcoa Energy 

Efficiency Network has helped the company 

achieve significant energy and cost savings, 

and has helped reduce emissions. As of the 

end of 2003, the Network reports:

• A total of 35 Alcoa facilities have received 

assessments

• Approximately 40 best practices were identified

• More than $60 million in savings opportunities have been identified. Of these potential 

savings:

o Alcoa plants have committed $40 million to pursue the energy savings opportunities

o 20% of the opportunities can achieve 

savings through “no-cost” projects

o 80% of the opportunities could be realized through projects with less than 2-

year paybacks

• More than $15 million has been captured to 

date.

• An Intranet Web site was developed for easy 

access by all within Alcoa

• Biannual Energy Summits are being conducted by Alcoa Energy to provide updates 

on the program, recognize achievement, and 

present case studies and training.

In addition to saving energy, Alcoa has 

also reduced emissions of NOx, SOx, and carbon dioxide (CO2).

Energy Management: A Corporate 

Commitment

Alcoa finds many benefits to its corporate 

energy management approach. These include 

reduced energy use, energy costs, and emissions. In addition, the company-wide philosophy encourages employee involvement 

in process improvement, and boosts Alcoa’s 

image locally, regionally, and globally.

Several elements combine to make the 

strategy work for Alcoa. They are:

ALCOA PUBLISHED CASE STUDIES

To recognize Alcoa’s success in identifying 

energy savings, DOE has published the following case studies:

• Corporate Energy Conservation Program for 

Alcoa North American Extrusions (Management Case Study)

• IAC Energy Assessment of Spanish Fork 

Plant (Assessment Case Study)

• Alcoa North American Extrusion Implements 

Energy Use Assessments at Multiple Facilities (Assessment Case Study)

• Power Factor Study Reduces Energy Costs 

at Aluminum Extrusion Plant (Technical Case 

Study)

• Plant-Wide Energy Assessment Finds Potential Savings at Aluminum Extrusion Facility 

(Assessment Case Study for Plant City, 

Florida)

• Alcoa Lafayette Operations Energy Efficiency 

Assessment (Assessment Case Study)

• Alcoa World Alumina: Plant-Wide Assessment at Arkansas Operations Reveals More 

than $900,000 in Potential Annual Savings 

(Assessment Case Study)

These case studies are available online at 

www.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices, 

or order copies by calling the EERE Information 

Center at 1-877-337-3463.

• An energy policy endorsed by management 

and a plan to launch this effort.

• Employee and plant-level involvement as 

a foundation. Plants participate voluntarily 

and have sole responsibility for decision 

making to implement their own projects. 

• Network participants who are energy champions at their sites. These energy champions 

take part in assessments. They buy in to the 

process, which leads to “ownership” and 

drives implementation of projects.

• Carefully selected consultants and vendors. 

They recognize that individual locations 

receive the credit for savings opportunities 

and understand the goals and objects of the 

Energy Efficiency Network.

In its search for stable, long-term energy 

supplies, Alcoa is committed to energy conservation and decreased reliance on fossil 

fuels. Where possible, Alcoa will increase use 

of natural, renewable energy sources to help 

lower CO2 emissions and address global climate change.

Following Alcoa’s example, other industrial companies can develop their own 

strategies to meet corporate goals, such as 

improving energy efficiency, cost efficiency, 

and productivity. In doing so, they can 

strengthen employee commitment and 

corporate identity and enhance environmental 

performance.
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-102004-1982 • August 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. 

PROCESS HEATING ASSESSMENT, CLEVELAND, OH 

■			Sep 21, 2004 For more information, contact Deborah Oates at 

 doates@steel.org or 202-452-7205

PUMPING SYSTEM ASSESSMENT, IRWINDALE, CA

■ Sep 28, 2004 For more information, contact Chris Lydoff at

 chris.lydoff@sce.com or 626-812-7370 

OPTIMIZING STEAM SYSTEM PERFORMANCE, MILWAUKEE, WI

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

 ahudson@ase.org or 202-530-4356 

FUNDAMENTALS OF COMPRESSED AIR SYSTEMS (LEVEL 1), ARLINGTON, TX 

■ Oct 5, 2004 For more information, contact Kathey Ferland at

 kferland@mail.utexas.edu or 512-232-4823 

PUMP SYSTEM SPECIALIST QUALIFICATION, CHARLOTTE, NC 

■ Oct 19–20, 2004 For more information, contact Cheryl Mead at 

 cmead@pumps.org 

STEAM SYSTEM ASSESSMENT, ATLANTA, GA 

■ Oct 31, 2004 For more information, contact Martha Quinlin at 

 mquinlin@tappi.org or 770-209-7399

Coming Events

DOE Regional Office Representatives

■ David Godfrey, Atlanta, GA, 

 404-562-0568

■ Stephen Costa, Boston, MA, 

 617-565-1811

■ 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

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. Depart- ment of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy invests in a diverse portfolio of 

energy technologies.