Office buildings are significant energy consumers using an average of 17 kWh of electricity and 32 cubic feet of gas per square foot. Moreover, industry data indicates that energy costs are 20% of the typical facility’s annual operating budget.

As energy costs continue to increase, businesses are discovering the tremendous financial, operational and competitive value of energy cost reduction and improved energy efficiency.

Because HVAC and lighting comprise 65% of combined energy use in office buildings (47% and 18% respectively), they are where you should initially focus your energy reduction efforts. By centering on these key areas, companies have significantly improved energy efficiency while maintaining or improving occupant / employee comfort and productivity.

Because each facility is relatively unique, using a carefully planned “whole facility” approach, allows you to be confident that you are making the best, most financially and operationally prudent energy efficiency choices. You will find 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.
Deciding where and how to begin can be fairly straightforward. 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 occupancy sensors in offices, conference rooms, etc., using sleep mode settings for computers and other electronics when not in use, setting back thermostats during overnight and closed hours 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 their consistency with your company’s goals and culture.
Some of the best options for office buildings include lighting upgrades to high efficiency fluorescent, CFL and/ or LED, use of occupancy sensors and day-lighting opportunities, sine wave modification for outdoor lighting circuits, liquid pressure amplification for central chiller plants, anti-compressor short cycling for roof top units, use of variable frequency drives, building management systems, reflective roof coatings and possibly equipment replacement for older equipment that is approaching the end of its useful life.

As you proceed with implementing energy efficiency measures, know that you don’t have to do it alone. There are experienced firms that 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 the process.
Remember, the sooner you begin, the sooner you start saving your organization’s valuable and limited resources and improving your company’s profitability!

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.

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.