September/October 2000

IN THIS ISSUE

BestPractices Partnership Gives Mill 

an “Instant Efficiency Improvement” . . .1

Guest Column: Get It Done by Sharing

the Benefits of Energy Projects . . . . . . .3

Select the Best Motor Repair 

Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

Ask the Clearinghouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Looking for a Few Good Lessons

Learned . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

Performance Optimization Tips: 

The Vital Few . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

Apply Now for OIT ‘s Plant-Wide

Opportunity Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Letters to the Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

EM Extra Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

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

ISSUE FOCUS: 

How to Choose 

Contracting Services

T OF ENERGY

DEPARTMEN

U

E

NITED STAT S OFA

ERICA

M

A BestPractices PUBLICATION ON IMPROVING INDUSTRIAL ENERGY EFFICIENCY

OFFICE OF INDUSTRIAL 

TECHNOLOGIES • 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY 

www.oit.doe.gov 

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpratices

When Lashway Logging partnered with a

team of companies to make a major equipment upgrade, the results were remarkable—mill efficiency increased by 33%,

downtime for repair and maintenance decreased substantially, and energy costs were

reduced by more than $2,000 per year.

Lashway Logging is a single-mill forest

products supplier in Williamsburg, Massachusetts, producing between 2.5 million

and 3 million board feet of lumber per

year. It currently employs 25 people. Lashway’s livelihood depends on reliable and

efficient performance, specifically from the

log carriage that moves the logs through

the saw. 

In 1995, Lashway began to reexamine

the motor system that drives the log carriage. Company officer Brian Lashway said

that because the company planned to replace its 5,000-pound carriage with a new

7,500-pound unit, it made sense to consider replacing the drive system as well.

Lashway enlisted McKenney Electric,

based in Holyoke, Massachusetts, to research new drive systems. McKenney developed a plan to use a mechanically

simpler but technologically advanced variable-speed regenerative vector drive, and

used Baldor Motors and Drives of Fort

Smith, Arkansas, a BestPractices Allied

Partner, to help create the system.

The motor system for a log carriage is

built for repeated accelerating and braking.

Constant acceleration, slowing, and reverses put a great deal of pressure and

stress on a drive system. The old system’s

overall efficiency was low—around 60%.

BestPractices Partnership Gives Mill an 

“Instant Efficiency Improvement”

(continued on page 2) ©

Editor’s Note: The Process Heating Supplement

scheduled for this issue will appear in a future

issue of Energy Matters.

Previously, other parts of Lashway’s sawing system were upgraded; now, the

mill has implemented new technology to improve the vital carriage drive.

Photo courtesy of Baldor

Send us your maintenance lessons

learned, see page 5.
2 Energy Matters, September/October 2000

ENERGY MATTERS

is published bimonthly by the

U.S. Department of Energy’s

(DOE) Office of Industrial 

Technologies. 

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

Rob Boteler, representing 

National Electrical Manufacturers

Association

Lynda Butek, representing 

Electrical Apparatus Service 

Association

Don Casada, OIT BestPractices

Program

Keith Davidson, Onsite Sycom

Energy

Bob Gemmer, U.S. DOE,

Process Heat

Glenn Hahn, Spirax Sarco

Fred Hart, U.S. DOE, Steam 

Challenge

Chris Hunter, Johnson & Johnson

Roy Jones, representing

Compressed Air and Gas Institute

Aimee McKane, OIT

BestPractices Program

Rick Payton, Rockwell 

Automation/Reliance Electric

Bill Stafford, Technical 

Association of the Pulp and 

Paper Industry

Chuck Whelan, DuPont

■

COMMENTS? 

Contact: 

Julia Oliver, DOE, at 

(510) 637-1952, or e-mail

julia.oliver@oak.doe.gov

Michelle Mallory, 

Energy Matters Editor, at 

(303) 275-3627, or e-mail 

michelle_sosa-mallory@nrel.gov

1617 Cole Blvd., MS 1713

Golden, CO 80401

Furthermore, the hydraulic system often

broke down. “We blew apart three hydraulic systems during cold weather operation due to stress on the system,” Brian

Lashway said.

To address both issues, McKenny and

Baldor supplied a 50 hp vector drive motor

and line regenerative vector control for

Lashway’s log carriage. The new system involved an electronically based regenerative

control coupled with a premium efficiency

motor, which drove the new cable drums.

The system’s big advantage is that it uses

regenerative braking to recapture the moving carriage’s kinetic energy. The vector

drive not only recycles the energy, but also

responds faster to the sawyer’s commands,

making the entire sawing process faster,

and more efficient. 

“The sawyer makes or breaks the saw

mill. Providing a system that gives the

sawyer more control over the carriage and

the logs has a huge impact on the company,” said Ed Cowern, who was a district

manager for Baldor at the time of the 

transition.

There were a few glitches getting the

system installed. It had to be reconfigured

early on and Lashway had to construct a

room to control the temperature and environment around the electronic controller. 

“We had some problems, but that was

due more to a lack of education than anything else. Even with that, we were quite

thrilled when it was installed,” said 

Lashway. 

The elements of the system run at an 

efficiency of about 95%, offering a total efficiency in the mid-80s, a 33% improvement over the old system. Despite using a

carriage that was 33% heavier than the

old, Lashway actually saw energy costs go

down by $2,000 to $3,000 per year. The

local electrical utility also provided incentive, paying for $9,000 of the $20,000 bill.

Furthermore, Lashway avoids the oil

changes and breakdowns all too common

to the old hydraulic system.

Overall, Lashway is very pleased. Brian

Lashway said, “This upgrade has provided

us with an instant efficiency improvement.

We’ve also seen substantial energy savings—because each time we’re braking

we’re saving.” ●

BestPractices Partnership Gives Mill an

“Instant Efficiency Improvement”

continued from page 1

Lashway Logging’s new regenerative vector drive allows energy to be 

recycled back into the power system.

Photo courtesy of Baldor
Energy Matters, September/October 2000 3

Guest Column

Get It Done by Sharing the

Benefits of Energy Projects

By Jay Raggio, Manager, 

Energy Services, Global Energy Services

(ges), Danville, CA, a member company of

Emerson Performance Solutions

Imagine your facility

sits directly on top of

an underground deposit of valuable

minerals. You would

like to tap into the

value the minerals

represent, but you

don’t know anything about mining and recovery. What if you offered to “share the

wealth” with an experienced mining company if it will take on the necessary steps to

recover the minerals?

This scenario may actually exist at many

commercial and industrial facilities. Not that

they literally sit on top of valuable mineral

deposits, but they often do have substantial

recurring expenses for the various forms of

energy that they consume. These energy expenses can be “mined” for technically and

economically feasible opportunities to reduce energy costs or be more profitable

while using the same or less energy. 

Explore the Opportunities

The values that may be gleaned from the

current energy expenses and process and

production metrics can be explored by a

qualified energy services company, or ESCO.

They will work closely with facility operators, turning over every rock to look for

meaningful opportunities. ESCOs will accept

compensation for performing such work

through an arrangement to share the resulting financial gains with the facility owner.

Opportunities may take many forms, 

including:

■ Changing energy price conditions by

negotiating more favorable rates with

current suppliers. For example, a time

of use (TOU) rate may save on energy

costs, depending on the facility load

profile.

■ Changing energy price conditions by selecting alternate, lower cost energy service providers (ESPs) rather than the

traditional utility being the electric energy supplier.

■ Changing price conditions by modifying

the energy service conditions with current suppliers—for example, taking electrical service at primary voltage instead

of secondary voltage. Service at primary

voltage often has a lower unit price

($/kWh) than secondary voltage service.

■ Mitigating adverse price conditions

through the use of financial instruments

and hedging strategies. Figure 1 provides an example of hedging. As the

price of a key raw material increases,

energy prices, through a negotiated

contract with an ESP, decrease allowing

the overall costs of production to remain relatively stable.

■ Mitigating high energy cost conditions

by shutting down nonessential equipment during high energy cost periods

(load shedding), changing the time when

energy intensive operations are carried

out (load shifting), or even self-generating during high energy cost periods.

■ Using less energy overall by implementing retrofit energy efficiency measures.

■ Using less energy per unit of production

by modifying process practices and/or

technologies.

There are no givens that an ESCO will

always uncover opportunities worth pursuing. Thus, it is important that all parties understand and accept the risks as well as the

potential rewards of embarking on a program to investigate energy cost savings opportunities. Further, every effort should be

made to manage the risks in any arrangement to share future savings or benefits.

Define Criteria for Sharing Benefits

A facility operator must consider several

important areas in any arrangement to

share future benefits. From the beginning,

define the criteria for success. For example,

what minimum dollar value of savings must

be achieved to make it worthwhile? If investments are likely, what return on investment must be achieved? What maximum

payback period will be considered? What

limitations will there be on disruption of the

facility’s occupants or its operations? By

starting from a solid set of ground rules, you

enable the ESCO to focus on finding the

biggest “bang-for-the-buck” opportunities.

Have a clear and mutual understanding

and quantification of where you are starting

from—that is, identify the current energy

costs and production per unit of energy.

Collect and make available to the ESCO

historical records of energy use, costs, and

production statistics. The variables in past

energy costs must be analyzed and assigned to quantifiable metrics such as cooling degree days, building occupancy

profiles or production throughput. The

ESCO will develop a computer-based energy consumption model for a facility

and/or a process, and will test and verify its

prediction capabilities using the historical

data. 

You must also establish, at the outset, a

clear and mutual understanding and acceptance of how financial gains attributable to the ESCO’s performance will be

measured and quantified. What data will

be monitored and collected, and how will

that data be used? Can a computer model

provide sufficiently valid results on which

to base the sharing of benefits?

Be Assured of Performance

Most leading ESCOs have a level of confidence in their experience and capabilities

to guarantee that their recommendations

will deliver a minimum level of financial

gain. The facility owner should insist on receiving guarantees for performance.

Last, the facility owner and ESCO must

agree on steps to be taken in the event of

disputes over the achieved financial gains. A

prudent approach might be to mutually

agree that an impartial third party would determine the achieved gains, or at least audit

the ESCO’s determination of achieved gains.

The ESCO should employ an underwriting

organization to back up its guarantees, and

the ESCO’s contract should include provisions for arbitrating difficult disputes.

With proper attention to the risks involved, meaningful financial gains can be

mined from existing energy expenses. Get it

done by establishing a win-win relationship

with a qualified energy services company. ●

Contact Jay Raggio by phone at (925) 

824-0330 ext. 305, or e-mail: jay_raggio@

electro-test.com. 

Figure 1. An example of energy price hedging.

Time period

80

30

70

60

50

40

20

10

0

12345

Energy price, $/MWh

Raw material cost, $/ton ($00)
4 Energy Matters, September/October 2000

By Lynda Butek, Brithinee Electric, Colton,

CA, representing the Electrical Apparatus

Service Association (EASA)

There is never a good time for a motor to

fail. But they do fail, and when one does,

you will want to solve the problem as

quickly and effectively as possible. 

For best results, take steps to prequalify

the motor service centers you plan to use

before your motors fail.

Just as motor users differ in terms of the

motors they use and the importance of

those motors to their operation, service

centers differ in terms of their approach,

expertise, and capabilities. What constitutes the “best” shop will vary from end

user to end user, and in some cases, from

motor to motor.

Instead of discussing “good” versus

“bad” repair shops here, we’ll discuss how

you, the motor user, can select the best

motor service center for your work.

Do Your Homework 

The first step in choosing the right motor

service center is to do your homework.

That starts in your own facility. 

First, determine what kinds of motors

you have in your operation. Do an inventory and note:

■ What size are the motors?

■ What are the voltages? 

■ Are they explosion proof? 

■ Are they pump motors? 

■ What other special characteristics do

they have, if any?

■ Can they be easily replaced? 

You should also know if you have a

spare for any motor that is critical to your

operation and that is not readily available

from a local source. Find out if the service

center has a spare. Consider how a day or

a week of downtime caused by a failed

motor would affect your operation and

your bottom line.

Visit Several Service Centers

Once you have determined your needs,

the next step is to visit several service centers in your area. Most repair facilities welcome customer visits so they can show off

their shop.

On your visit, look at the center’s equipment. Find out:

■ Do they have the necessary handling

equipment for your motors? 

■ Will their ovens and dip tanks accommodate your motors? 

■ Do they have the proper voltage to test

your motors? Most motors should be

run at full voltage as the final test of a

good repair.

■ How much experience do they have in

repairing the types of motors you use? 

Keep in mind that not every shop can

handle every aspect of every motor repair.

If that is the case, ask how they prequalify

the shop or shops they will use to do the

work they don’t handle themselves. 

Compare Customer Service 

In addition to the technical expertise

and services, you will want to choose a

shop with exceptional customer service.

Find out what extra steps the service center

is willing to take for your convenience and

to ensure high-quality work.

For example, pick-up and delivery or installation may be important to you. Some

firms offer these services, some don’t. You

should discuss these services up front before a motor failure occurs. 

Also, find out if the service center has a

quality assurance program in place. Ask

what types of before-and-after testing and

reports they will supply. Ask to see the system they use to keep track of your motor

while it is being repaired.

Look at the shop’s inventory of new motors. Do they stock the types of motors you

use? Do they stock premium efficiency motors for replacement? If not, do they have a

ready source for this equipment to minimize your downtime? 

Make sure the shop gives you repair/replace options every time you send in a

motor for service. 

If your facility runs around the clock,

365 days a year, you may well need the

same kind of service from your motor service center. How do they handle off-hours

service? Can they handle your needs even

on holidays?

Finally, get a list of references, and call

those references to see what their experiences have been with the service center.

Be on the Same Wavelength 

Another benefit of visiting the service

center is the opportunity to meet face-toface with the people who will do your

work. By meeting them, you can assess

how comfortable you will feel working

with them. You should be confident they

understand your motor repair needs and

that they will treat your motor problems

with real concern. If not, keep looking. 

Invest in Good Work 

Once you are satisfied that a service center can do your work, remember that doing

a good repair job takes time. Cutting corners

can result in a poor repair. If you want the

service center to do a good repair job, you

must be willing to let them do that job. 

Taking the time to assess your motor

needs and determining the best shop to fill

those needs will help you get the most

from your repair dollar. This will be time

and money well spent. ●

Contact Lynda Butek by phone at (909)

825-7971 or e-mail: lynda_butek@mail.

brithinee.com. 

Select the Best Motor Repair Services

Make sure the service center’s personnel are

well trained and knowledgeable.

All the points mentioned here, and more,

are in OIT’s 4-page brochure Guidelines

to a Good Motor Repair. Find the brochure

on Energy Matters Extra at www.oit.doe.

gov/bestpractices/explore_library/emextra.

For more detailed information, you can

obtain the new Service Center Evaluation

Guide, which offers end users step-by-step

guidelines for evaluating the quality, competence, and capabilities of motor repair

shops. Get advice on using interviews and

walk-through inspections to evaluate a

shop’s adherence to quality workmanship,

as well as a comprehensive Service Center

Capability Checklist to help you select a

repair shop that uses techniques to optimize reliability and efficiency. 

This new guide is available through the

OIT Clearinghouse at www.oit.doe.gov/

clearinghouse, or (800) 862-2086. Quantities are limited—order today.

David Parsons, NREL/PIX05679
Energy Matters, September/October 2000 5

Ask the

Clearinghouse

This column highlights key

questions from industrial customers. The questions are answered by the

Office of Industrial Technologies (OIT)

Clearinghouse. Through the OIT Clearinghouse, you can access the full portfolio of

OIT resources to help make your industry

more energy efficient, productive, and

competitive. The Clearinghouse can help

you find resources such as publications

and software, or information about working with OIT and cost-sharing opportunities. You can call the Clearinghouse for

technical advice on a variety of topics,

such as motor, steam, and compressed air

systems. 

Clearinghouse engineers and technical

staff expertly answer a wide range of industrial efficiency questions, 11 hours a day,

Monday-Friday. The Clearinghouse also has

access to industry experts around the

country. Call the OIT Clearinghouse at

(800) 862-2086, or go to www.oit.doe.gov/

clearinghouse/ for additional information.

Q: What are “typical” savings from

using an adjustable speed drive

(ASD) with a standard motor?

A: ASD-related energy savings are substantial in situations where an existing centrifugal pump or fan has been

throttled to meet system flow requirements.

However, it is difficult to report “typical”

savings, as the savings potential is extremely dependent upon the load profile

imposed upon a motor by the equipment it

drives. (The load profile is the number of

hours per year the motor spends at each

load point.) 

We’ve reviewed a number of adjustable

speed drive case studies. These are not “average” applications, but are the types of

applications for which a drive is often costeffective. In the table at right are percentages of energy savings. Note: these are not

percentages of total facility energy use;

they are usage reductions for the ASD-controlled motor-driven equipment.

The Wisconsin Center for Demand-Side

Research also completed a review of ASD 

case studies. Energy savings reported by

type of process are:

■ Air conditioners and 20% 

heat pumps 

■ Pumps and compressors 20% to 25% 

■ Central refrigeration 25% to 35%

systems 

■ Blowers and fans 30% to 35% 

■ Boiler fans and 30% to 50% 

feedwater pumps 

The most cost-effective opportunities for

ASDs are in situations where the equipment operates only partially loaded for significant time periods. Even small changes

in speed can result in significant reductions

in energy consumption. For instance, lowering the speed of a fan or pump by 20%

may reduce shaft power requirements by as

much as 50%.

For more about motor-driven systems,

variable speed drive applications, and

motor-drive interactions, visit OIT’s BestPractices Web site at www.oit.doe.gov/

bestpractices/motors/. Here you can access detailed case studies, technical publications, ASD-related software, and a

training and events calendar. ●

Facility Type ASD Application Energy Savings 

Resource Recovery Facility 500 hp induced draft fans 34% 

Tube Company ASD on tube drawing bench 200 hp 34% 

Textile Plant 15 HVAC fan motors 59% 

Injection Molding 60 to 100 hp motors 71% 

Seven Manufacturing Sites Injection molding machines 37% average 

Paper Mill 800 hp and 1,500 hp ID fans 43% 

Paper Mill 100 hp motor driving a stock 39% 

transfer pump 

Pulp and Paper Mill Three 250 hp boiler forced draft fans 68% 

Lumber Drying Facility Small recirculation fan motors 50% 

Dairy Products Plant Two 100 hp feedwater pumps 41% 

Wastewater Treatment Facility Three 50 hp centrifugal pumps used in 20% 

a dissolved air flotation process 

In the January/February 2001 edition of 

Energy Matters, we’ll focus on the important theme of energy system maintenance.

The topics will address issues such as developing a

contingency maintenance

method, equipment rightsizing, and the consequences of improper

maintenance. To emphasize

the need for a reliable

maintenance plan, we think

it would be useful to show by example

what happens when no such plan is in

place. You can help us make the point by

sending Energy Matters your “lessons

learned” from a lack of or improper industrial energy system maintenance. We’ll

publish some of these examples in the January/February issue. Rest assured, no names or

company identities will be

published—just a general

description of what happened and how it could

have been avoided.

Mail or e-mail your 

examples to the Energy

Matters Editor: Lessons Learned. Please include your name and phone number (to

verify information only), and send by December 1, 2000. ●

Looking for a Few Good Lessons Learned

Send Energy Matters

your examples of what

happens when no plan

for reliable maintenance

is in place.
6 Energy Matters, September/October 2000

Performance

Optimization Tips

The Vital Few

By Don Casada, OIT BestPractices Program, Knoxville, TN 

In the January/February 2000 issue of Energy Matters, Mac

Smith discussed a 7-

Step Systems Analysis

process for implementing a reliability

centered maintenance program1. The first of his seven steps

was to focus on “bad actor” systems, noting

that 80% of the maintenance and production

problems come from 20% of the systems.

The general rule of 80/20 was given the

name “Pareto principle” in the 1950s by

J.M. Juran, an eminent industrial engineer,

in recognition of work done by Italian

economist Vilfredo Pareto on the distribution of wealth2. Juran coined a phrase—

”the vital few and trivial many”—that

succinctly describes the concept, and he

noted that it has application in many fields. 

Was he ever right! A quick search for Internet references to “Pareto” found the

principle related to the following concerns

(to cite just a few):

■ Time management

■ Evangelism

■ Military logistics

■ Medical expenses

■ Local area network traffic

■ Bacteriological use of genomic data

■ Computer code debugging

The general idea is that a relatively small

fraction of a particular population (the “vital

few”) is responsible for a large fraction of

the results—whether positive or negative,

while the larger population segment (the

“trivial many”) is responsible for a small

fraction. There is nothing magical about the

numbers 80 and 20, by the way—they just

illustrate the commonly observed disproportionality of cause and effect. 

As a common practical application,

consider maintenance of an automobile’s

engine and power train. While there may

be 15 or 20 periodic maintenance items

recommended by the manufacturer, engine

lifetime is most significantly affected by

proper maintenance of two fluids—engine

oil and engine coolant. Careful attention to 

these two items may exceed the benefits of

all the other items combined.

Industrial Energy Opportunities

Does Juran’s principle of the “vital few

and trivial many” apply in industrial energy

consumption? Absolutely.

There are many manifestations of this

principle in DOE’s United States Industrial

Motor Systems Market Opportunities Assessment, published in 19983. One stark

example involved motor size. While almost

60% of the motor population was found to

be in the range of 1 to 5 horsepower (hp),

this segment consumed less than 5% of the

energy. On the other hand, the less than

6% of the population greater than 50 hp

was responsible for 72% of the energy consumption. Table 1 shows population and

energy consumption as a function of size

group from the study; Figure 1 shows the

cumulative population and energy distributions.

Table 1

Horsepower Population, % Energy, % 

1–5 58.8 4.8 

6–20 26.4 10.4 

21–50 9.1 12.7 

51–100 2.9 12.7 

101–200 1.8 14.4 

201–500 0.7 15.8 

501–1000 0.2 13.4 

1000+ 0.1 15.7 

Source: United States Industrial Motor Systems Market 

Opportunities Assessment, December 1998. 

Interesting information, but are there

practical applications? Again, absolutely.

Assume we are tasked with identifying

energy-saving opportunities in the motordriven systems at an industrial facility. Let’s

say the motor population of 10,000 is similar in population and use distribution to

that found in the DOE study. And let’s also

assume that we don’t have a nice database

listing of motors by size and application (a

common situation). Should our first step be

to inventory the entire facility and develop

such a database, including information

such as nameplate horsepower, full load

current, and efficiency? 

To answer that, let’s make a couple

more assumptions: It takes 20 minutes to

locate and tabulate the information for the

average motor; and the work is to be done

by a technician at $25/hr. Given those assumptions, the cost of inventorying all

10,000 motors would be more than

$83,000. Gulp! 

But $71,000 of that cost would be associated with motors that are 20 hp or less. If

we only look at the 570 motors that are

larger than 50 hp, the inventory cost would

be less than $5,000.

So instead of launching into development of a full-blown inventory, a more

common-sense approach might be to simply accompany operators in each section

of the plant during normal rounds. Operators will not only identify the big stuff so

that the technician can do the inventory,

but can give a quick guess as to what fraction of the time the motor is operated, a

critical element in subsequent review. 

Other filters or screens can be used to 

help further reduce the

number of a plant’s “vital

few” pieces of equipment.

For example, in many

plants, focusing on centrifugal loads such as pumps,

fans, and compressors will

pay the greatest dividends.

The DOE study found that

more than 60% of all potential energy savings were

in such systems.

The Pumping System Assessment Tool (PSAT) software program developed by

DOE can be downloaded

free of charge. Included with

the PSAT download is a prescreening document that, although focused on pumps,

includes some simple, primary screening

guidance, which applies generically and directs the user toward the “vital few” ma-

(continued on page 7) ©

Figure 1. Cumulative motor population and energy versus 

motor size.

Horsepower range

100

50

90

80

70

60

40

30

20

10

0

1–5 ≤ 20 ≤ 50 ≤ 100 ≤ 200 ≤ 500 ≤ 1000 All

Cumulative population, energy (%)

Population

Energy

90% of the 

population

uses just 20%

of the energy
Energy Matters, September/October 2000 7

chines. The program can be downloaded

from the BestPractices Web site at

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/

software_databases. Alternatively, a CD that

includes both PSAT and MotorMaster+

motor selection and management tool can

be requested from the OIT Clearinghouse at

(800) 862-2086.

Not a Cure-All, But Still Good for 

What Ails Ye

The “vital few and trivial many” principle is not universal, and its application

won’t solve all our problems. But it is a

great first step, not only in reliability centered maintenance efforts, but in prescreening for potential energy reductions.

And it is no coincidence that the big stuff

that runs a lot is high on the list for potential energy reduction review and is likely to

be a high reliability priority.

Don’t make your energy program a

game of Trivial Pursuit—make it a search

for The Few, The Proud, The Machines (the

big ones, that is). ●

E-mail Don Casada at doncasada@icx.net.

1 RCM—Gateway to a World Class Maintenance Program, Anthony M. (Mac) Smith.

2 Juran later regretted so naming the principle

(www.juran.com/research/articles/SP7518.html), since it

is universal in nature; he noted that Pareto’s observation

was simply application to one particular field of many.

3 The publication is available for download at

www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/explore_library/pdfs/

mtrmkt.pdf.

continued from page 6

Letters to the Editor 

Energy Matters welcomes

your typewritten letters and

e-mails. Please include your

full name, address, organization, and

phone number, and limit comments to 200

words. Address correspondence to:

Michelle Mallory, Letters to the Editor

NREL, MS 1713

1617 Cole Blvd.

Golden, CO 80401

E-mail: michelle_sosa-mallory@nrel.gov

We publish letters of interest to our readers

on related topics, comments, or criticisms/corrections of a technical nature.

Preference is given to letters relating to articles that appeared in the previous two issues. Letters may be edited for clarity,

length, and style.

To the Editor: 

Thank you for the July/August issue of

Energy Matters. The Guest Column by

Steve Bolles and “Selling with Humility” by

Don Casada were both excellent, interesting, and thought provoking. I am saving

this issue in a special file so that I can

reread it periodically!

Cal Broomhead

Bureau of Energy Conservation

San Francisco, CA 

Editor’s Note: 

The July/August issue was a popular one

with readers! We appreciate your feedback. Find the issue online at www.oit.

doe.gov/bestpractices/exlpore_library.

DOE’s Office of Industrial Technologies

(OIT) recently announced the third round

of solicitations for Plant-Wide Opportunity

Assessments. If your company has a plan to

enhance productivity and energy efficiency

throughout your facility, take advantage of

this opportunity for cost-shared funding

and technical assistance from OIT. Through

the BestPractices program, OIT will share

up to half the cost, or up to $100,000, for

companies to evaluate energy efficiency

potential in areas, such as:

■ Electric motor systems 

■ Steam systems

■ Compressed air systems

■ Combined heat and power systems

■ Process heating systems

■ Process modifications

■ Adoption of emerging technologies

Other benefits include national recognition and access to a whole range of OIT’s

emerging technologies, tools, and resources. 

To date, OIT has awarded funding to 13

companies that successfully conveyed a

comprehensive, plant-wide approach to

implementing state-of-the-art tools and information, process engineering techniques,

and best practices for operational, plant

support, and process systems.

Your plant, too, could be on its way to

improved performance. Submit a plant-wide

assessment proposal before November 22,

2000 for consideration in this solicitation. To

see the Request for Proposals, visit Energy

Matters Extra at www.oit.doe.gov/

explore_library/emextra, or contact Mitch

Olszewski by e-mail at zmo@ornl.gov or fax

(865) 576-0493 (e-mail is preferred). ●

Apply Now for OIT’s Plant-Wide Opportunity Assessments

Send OIT your plan to assess systems and

processes in your plant.

On page 2 of this issue, read an overview

on selecting the right motor service center.

Look to Energy Matters Extra for more details on working with a center to ensure the

best service for your motor repair needs.

Download Guidelines to Good Motor Repair, and refer to this brochure for helpful

tips on this topic. 

Be sure to review the latest Request for

Proposals for OIT’s Plant-Wide Opportunity Assessment solicitation. Find all the information you need to prepare and submit

a proposal to conduct a plant-wide assessment in your facility. The solicitation closes

November 22, 2000—so don’t delay. 

You can also connect to details about

OIT’s 4th Industrial Energy Efficiency Symposium and Exposition, which is set for

February 19-21, 2001, in Washington, DC.

Register for the conference online and be

ready to learn about the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for U.S. industry.

Visit Energy Matters Extra at www.oit.

doe.gov/explore_library/emextra. ●

EXTRA 

Jeff Urlaub, NREL/PIX01774
INFORMATION

CLEARINGHOUSE

Do you have questions about 

using energy-efficient process

and utility systems in your industrial 

facility? Call the OIT Information Clearinghouse for answers, Monday through

Friday 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. (EST).

Fax: (360) 586-8303, or access our 

homepage at www.oit.doe.gov/

clearinghouse.

HOTLINE: (800) 862-2086

DOE Regional Support Office 

Representatives

■ Tim Eastling, Atlanta, GA, 

(404) 347-7141

■ Scott Hutchins, Boston, MA, 

(617) 565-9765

■ Brian Olsen, Chicago, IL, 

(312) 886-8579

■ Gibson Asuquo, Denver, CO, 

(303) 275-4841

■ Julia Oliver, Seattle, WA, 

(510) 637-1952

■ Maryanne Daniel, Philadelphia, PA, 

(215) 656-6964

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-102000-1122 • September/October 2000

T OF ENERGY

DEPARTMEN

U

E

NITED STAT S OFA ERICA

M

Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper

containing at least 50% wastepaper, including

20% postconsumer waste

OIT EXPO TO ADDRESS INDUSTRY’S COMPETITIVE CHALLENGES AND SOLUTIONS

The 4th Industrial Energy Efficiency Symposium and Exposition, “Global Competition:

Challenges and Solutions,” is set for February 19-21, 2001, in Washington, DC. OIT is

cosponsoring the event in partnership with some of the nation’s leading manufacturing and

materials companies. Plan to attend this national conference to find out what challenges

face the most energy-intensive industries and to learn about new technological and marketing opportunities to address these challenges. To find out more about the conference, visit

the Web site at www.oitexpo4.com, or call (877) 648-7967. Watch for more about the

event in coming issues of Energy Matters.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

1617 Cole Boulevard

Golden, CO 80401-3393

Bulk Rate

U.S. Postage

PAID

Permit No. 258

Golden, Colorado

BestPractices

The Office of Industrial Technologies (OIT)

BestPractices initiative and its Energy Matters newsletter introduces industrial end

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

steam, compressed air, and other plantwide systems. For overview information

and to keep current on what is happening

office wide, check out the newsletter—The

OIT Times—at www.oit.doe.gov/oit-times.

Coming Events

To keep up-to-date on OIT training and other events, check the calendar regularly on

Energy Matters Extra at www.oit.doe.gov/bestpractices/explore_library/emextra.