Posted by Robert Holdsworth on Jan 28, 2010 in
blogging Hospitals and Medical Centers have many opportunities to significantly reduce and manage their energy costs while maintaining or even improving patient care and comfort.
Healthcare facilities are significant energy consumers, typically using an average of 28 kWh and 110 cubic feet of gas per square foot. HVAC (including cooling and space heating) represents about 62% of hospital energy use with lighting comprising 13% more. Focusing on these two areas with their combined 75% of total energy usage is very useful for developing an energy efficiency plan.
However, knowing where to focus does not mean it is always clear exactly where to start. By taking a carefully planned “whole facility” approach, it is easier to feel confident that you are making the best, most financially and operationally prudent energy efficiency choices for your unique facility. In today’s industry there are proven and recommended engineering approaches and technologies available that can guarantee results. And by working with an experienced, energy services company or engineering firm, choosing the right options does not need to be complicated.
The best first step is always to focus on quick, low cost or no cost solutions. This can include training staff to turn lights off when they leave unoccupied rooms, using sleep mode settings for computers when not in use, shutting off AHUs that serve unoccupied areas at night such as cafeterias, offices, conference rooms, etc, using programmable thermostats in rooms and areas not occupied 24 Hrs / day to turn up or down temperatures in different seasons, and having the HVAC systems serviced and cleaned on a regular basis.
After you’ve addressed the “low hanging fruit”, next steps can involve choosing from a variety of longer term options that are designed to deliver much greater energy savings. Options should be considered based on their proven track record of success, whether they are “Approved” or “recommended” by organizations such as Energy Star, US DOE, USGBC, IEEE, etc., their cost effectiveness and return on investment as well as consistency with your hospital’s goals and culture
Experience has shown that some of the better programs for hospitals include lighting upgrades to high efficiency fluorescent, CFL and/ or LED, use of occupancy sensors and day-lighting opportunities , sine wave modification for lighting circuits, liquid pressure amplification for central chiller plants, energy management based on occupancy, anti-compressor short cycling for roof top units, demand controlled ventilation, use of variable frequency drives and possibly equipment replacement for older systems that are approaching the end of their useful life.
As you move forward with this, it helps to know that you don’t have to do it alone. There are experienced firms who can help make recommendations and provide turnkey services for you. In choosing a partner to guide this type of “whole facility” approach for you, it is important to look at a number of factors. You may want to ask the following: What is their level of experience using these various technologies, do they use proven and recommended approaches, what are the credentials of their staff, are they members of key industry organizations, what is their level of knowledge of your industry, do they offer a free initial evaluation and do they offer guarantees at each step of their process.
And remember that the sooner you begin, the sooner you start saving your hospital’s valuable and limited resources.
Save Money On Your Company’s Energy Bill, visit Energy Edge Technologies site for strategies on saving a tremendous amount of capital on your Corporate Energy Bill or call 888-729-5722 Ext. 100.
Tags: blogging, Carl Baer, energy edge, energy edge technologies, energy edge technologies corp, energy edge technologies corporation, John Glorioso, John J. Gerace, Kevin Corrigan, Robert Holdsworth, sales, Scott Brown, William Poulos, William Thiessen
Posted by Robert Holdsworth on Jan 5, 2010 in
blogging Buyer Beware – Using Power Factor Correction and Transient Voltage Surge Suppression to Reduce Energy Costs.
Today’s energy conscious climate has motivated many to do what they can to become more efficient and conserve energy and money. Unfortunately this same climate has prompted others to take advantage of unsuspecting consumers’ wishes to save energy and reduce expenses.
Companies that tout power factor improvement (kVAR correction) and transient voltage suppression are a good example of this bad trend. Lately we are seeing more and more of these companies cropping up and feel it is time to set the record straight.
First, transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS) plays a valuable role in improving power quality to protect sensitive equipment inside a facility. However, TVSS does not save energy. TVSS’s are only active a tiny fraction of a second to protect against voltage surges which only last for less than a millisecond. To actually reduce energy consumption the TVSS would need to actually cut power consumption for an extended period of time which is not what they are designed to do. Again, TVSS is important to protect sensitive electrical equipment but buyers should avoid vendors promising, or even guaranteeing, that they will reduce energy consumption.
Now what about vendors who claim that improving power factor will save 15% or 20% or 30% of energy consumption and corresponding cost? This one is a little trickier.
For residential applications, power factor does nothing to save energy because the typical home already has an average power factor of about 0.97 which is almost the perfect power factor of 1 or unity. In addition, the device (called a capacitor) is placed at the main circuit breaker. According to IEEE 5.5.3.3 capacitors must be situated at or near the respective inductive loads to reduce power system losses by reducing heat and distribution losses known as I2R losses.
So what about commercial and industrial facilities using power factor correction to reduce energy costs? It is perfectly appropriate for a company that is incurring penalties or a kVA billing structure from the utility company to improve the facility’s overall power factor by employing a capacitor bank at the main service entrance or individual capacitors at or near the respective motor loads. Doing so will eliminate the power factor penalties and/or reduce the kVA demand charges on the utility bill which can save significant money and provide a significant ROI on the investment.
But what about power factor correction reducing kWh consumption? IEEE also tells us that I2R losses only account for 2 to 5% of the total load in a facility. Simple math tells us that it would be against the laws of physics to get the 15% to 30% energy reduction claimed by some vendors. Think about it. Even if your facility had 5% distribution losses and you could correct 100% of the problem via power factor correction at every load (which can’t be done) you would still only save 5% at the most. No where near the claims of some capacitor vendors and manufacturers.
All that said, power factor correction when done properly will eliminate utility penalties and kVA demand charges, improve facility power quality, increase electrical system capacity, and save a little energy when applied to the appropriate motor loads.
So make an investment in transient voltage surge suppression and power factor correction when appropriate and necessary. But caveat emptor!
Save Money On Your Company’s Energy Bill, visit Energy Edge Technologies site for strategies on saving a tremendous amount of capital on your Corporate Energy Bill or call 888-729-5722 Ext. 100.
categories: Robert Holdsworth,John J. Gerace,Scott Brown,John Glorioso,William Poulos,William Thiessen,Carl Baer,Kevin Corrigan,Sales,energy edge,energy edge technologies,energy edge technologies corp,energy edge technologies corporation,energyet.com
Tags: blogging, Carl Baer, energy edge, energy edge technologies, energy edge technologies corp, energy edge technologies corporation, energyet.com, John Glorioso, John J. Gerace, Kevin Corrigan, Robert Holdsworth, sales, Scott Brown, William Poulos, William Thiessen
Posted by Robert Holdsworth on Dec 30, 2009 in
blogging In today’s energy climate more and more people have become motivated to accomplish what they can to become more energy efficient to conserve energy and money. Regrettably this same climate has encouraged some to take advantage of innocent consumers’ desires to save energy and reduce operating expenses.
Vendors that advertise power factor improvement (kVAR correction) and transient voltage suppression to save energy are a good case in point of this bad trend. Recently we are seeing more and more of these businesses cropping up and we believe it is time to set the record straight.
First off, transient voltage surge suppression (TVSS) plays an important part in improving power quality to guard sensitive equipment inside a facility. However, TVSS does not save energy. TVSS’s are barely active an infinitesimal portion of a second to defend against voltage surges which only last for less than a millisecond. To actually decrease energy use the TVSS would need to essentially cut power consumption for an extended amount of time which is not what they are designed to do. Again, TVSS is essential to protect susceptible electrical equipment but consumers should steer clear of vendors promising, or even guaranteeing, a reduction in energy consumption.
And what about salespeople who maintain that increasing power factor will save 15% or 20% or 30% of energy consumption and resultant costs? This is false but also a bit trickier.
For homes, power factor correction does zero to save energy because the average home already has an average power factor of approximately 0.97 which is nearly the perfect power factor of 1 or unity. Additionally, the unit (called a capacitor) is installed at the homes main circuit breaker. According to IEEE 5.5.3.3 capacitors must be located at or near the individual inductive motor loads to decrease power system losses by reducing heat and distribution losses known as I2R losses.
So what about commercial and industrial facilities looking to use power factor correction to shrink energy expenditures? It is completely appropriate for a business that is incurring penalties or a kVA billing structure from the utility company to improve the facility’s overall power factor by installing a capacitor bank at the main electrical service entrance or individual capacitors at or near the particular motor loads. Doing so will do away with the power factor penalties and/or reduce the kVA demand charges on the electric bill which can save considerable money and provide a significant ROI on the investment.
But what about power factor correction reducing kWh consumption? IEEE also tells us that at most I2R losses only account for 2 to 5% of the total load in a facility. Simple arithmetic tells us that it would be in opposition to the laws of physics to obtain the 15% to 30% energy reduction claimed by some vendors. Consider it. Even if your facility had 5% distribution losses and you could correct 100% of the predicament via power factor correction at every load (which can’t be done) you would still save no more than 5% at most. No where close to the claims of some capacitor reps and manufacturers.
All that said, power factor correction when done appropriately will eliminate utility penalties and kVA demand charges, improve facility power quality, increase electrical system capacity, and save a modicum of energy when applied at the proper motor loads in an industrial facility.
So make an investment in transient voltage surge suppression and power factor correction when appropriate and necessary. But caveat emptor!
Save Money On Your Company’s Energy Bill, visit Energy Edge Technologies site for strategies on saving a tremendous amount of capital on your Corporate Energy Bill or call 888-729-5722 Ext. 100.
Tags: blogging, John J. Gerace, Robert Holdsworth, Scott Brown
Posted by Robert Holdsworth on Dec 24, 2009 in
blogging Most people realize that reducing the utility cost center for a business or organization is a good thing for the bottom line but there are several other financial benefits to reducing energy consumption.
The US Green Building Council says that on average a “green building” enjoys, 30-50% reduced energy use, 35% reduced carbon emissions, 40% reduced water use and 70% reduced solid waste.
But does that truly translate into real value to a building owner or company in terms of value beyond simply lower utility costs? Following are some facts that detail the additional, verifiable benefits of “going green”. Public Relations Opportunities: Improving the efficiency of your facility, conserves natural resources, reduces pollution and emissions generated via energy production, protects the environment, and reduces solid waste accumulation. By accomplishing the above, improving the efficiency of your facility gives you the perfect opportunity to garner constructive, free publicity and allows you to portray your company in a positive light and gives the local and global community a picture of your company as a responsible corporate citizen and steward of the environment. Significant Financial Benefits:
In addition to reducing your utility bills, “going green” reducer maintenance, replacement and production downtime costs due to greater longevity of everything from lighting systems to HVAC systems to production equipment. It also improves the asset value of your property and increases profitability. In addition it improves tenant attraction and retention for building owners and leads to higher premium tenants and higher end leases. Furthermore shows the strength and astuteness of your executive management and attracts customers and investors. Lastly it improves worker productivity and safety and reduces absenteeism and turnover via improved comfort, lighting and indoor air quality. According to the US Green Building Counsel, “green buildings” save $58 billion of sick time and add $180 billion in increased worker productivity annually.
Ultimately a go / no go decision by a company or organization regarding improving energy efficiency should be based largely on cost effectiveness measures and rate of return on the initial investment. However, it would be a mistake not to acknowledge and consider these other significant benefits of “going green” as part of the decision making process.
Save Money On Your Company’s Energy Bill, visit Energy Edge Technologies site for strategies on saving a tremendous amount of capital on your Corporate Energy Bill or call 888-729-5722 Ext. 100.
Tags: blogging, Carl Baer, energy edge, John Glorioso, John J. Gerace, Kevin Corrigan, Robert Holdsworth, sales, Scott Brown, William Poulos, William Thiessen
