Energy Efficiency in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Dakota's Industrial Pump Systems

  • ID: 4495335
  • Report
  • Region: Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota
  • 73 pages
  • Global Efficiency Intelligence, LLC.
1 of 3
Industrial electric motors account for over 70% of electricity consumption in manufacturing in the U.S. Motors are used to drive pumps, fans, compressed air systems, material handling, processing systems and more. Industrial motor systems represent a largely untapped cost-effective source for energy savings that could be realized with existing commercialized technologies. Pump systems are widely used throughout manufacturing industries. In many industrial facilities, pumps are among the highest electricity consuming equipment. Inefficiencies in pump systems are common.

One of the major barriers to effective policy making and increased action by states and utilities to improve energy efficiency in industrial pump systems is the lack of information and data on the magnitude and cost-effectiveness of the energy savings potential in industrial pump systems in each state. This lack of information creates an obstacle to developing a comprehensive and effective strategy, roadmap, and programs for improving pump systems efficiency cost-effectively. It is far easier to quantify the incremental energy savings of substituting an energy-efficient motor for a standard motor than it is to quantify the energy conservation of applying other energy efficiency and system optimization practices to an existing pump system.

The researchers conducted a large initiative to study industrial motor systems in 30 states from different U.S. regions. This includes the top 20 U.S. states in terms of industrial energy consumption. We focused on industrial pumps, pumps, and compressed-air systems which together account for over 70% of electricity use in U.S. industrial motor systems.

This report focuses on analyzing energy use, energy efficiency, and CO2 emissions-reduction potential in industrial pump systems in selected West North Central U.S. States of Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Dakota. We have also published similar reports for industrial fan systems and compressed air systems for these states.

Now that states have different programs to set targets, including passing legislation to enact formal energy efficiency resource standards, setting long-term energy savings targets through utility commissions tailored to each utility, or incorporating energy efficiency as an eligible resource in renewable portfolio standards (RPS), investment in energy efficiency in industrial pump systems to tap into the huge saving potentials quantified in this report can help utilities to meet their targets, reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, and thereby help with climate change mitigation.

In addition, energy efficiency in industrial motor systems stimulates economic growth and creates jobs in a variety of ways (direct, indirect, and induced jobs creation). Investment in energy efficiency creates more jobs per dollar invested than traditional energy supply investments. Energy efficiency in industrial motor systems also creates more jobs in the local economy, whereas energy supply jobs and investment dollars often flow outside the state.

Key analyses and results included:
  • Electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in each state studied
  • Electricity use for motor systems and pump systems by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in each state studied
  • Electricity use by industrial pump systems by size in each state studied
  • Market barriers to energy efficiency in industrial motor and pump systems
  • Energy Efficiency Cost Curves for industrial pump systems for each state using eight major energy efficiency measures
  • Energy saving potential and cost of conserved energy (US$/MWh-saved) for each efficiency measures in each state studied
  • The cost-effective and total technical energy efficiency potential in industrial pump systems in each state studied
  • Energy saving potential for each energy efficiency measure by system size
  • GHG emissions reduction potential for each efficiency measure in each state
  • Sensitivity of the results with respect to changes in electricity prices and discount rates
  • Implications for markets, utilities, and policy makers
Who should read this report?
  • Utilities
  • Government energy and environmental agencies
  • State regulators and policy makers
  • Energy Service Companies (ESCOs)
  • Demand Response (DR) service and technology providers
  • Energy management service and technology providers
  • Motor, pumps, and pump systems service and technology providers
  • Energy efficiency equipment vendors
  • Climate and environmental NGOs and think tanks
  • Investor community
READ MORE
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
2 of 3
1. Introduction

2. Market Barriers to Energy Efficiency in Motor and Pump Systems

3. Energy Use in Industrial Motor and Pump Systems in each State, by Manufacturing Subsector
3.1. Industrial Electricity Use in each State by Manufacturing Subsector
3.2. Industrial Motor Systems Electricity Use in each State by Manufacturing Subsectors
3.3. Electricity Use in Industrial Pump Systems in each State by Manufacturing Subsectors
3.4. Electricity Use in Pump Systems in each State by System Size

4. Energy Efficiency Potential and Cost in Industrial Pump Systems in each State
4.1. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Pump Systems in Iowa
4.2. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Pump Systems in Kansas
4.3. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Pump Systems in Missouri
4.4. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Pump Systems in Nebraska
4.5. Energy-Efficiency Cost Curve for Industrial Pump Systems in South Dakota
4.6. Sensitivity Analyses

5. Summary and Implications for Markets, Utilities, and Policy Makers
5.1. Summary
5.2. Implications for Markets, Utilities, and Policy Makers

Appendices
Appendix 1. List of acronyms
Appendix 2. List of Figures and Tables
Appendix 3. Methodology and Scope of the Study
Appendix 4. Bibliography and References
Appendix 5. Related Reports

List of Figures
Figure 1. Global total final electricity use by end use in 2014
Figure 2. Electric motor systems energy use profile
Figure 3. Final electricity consumption in motor-driven systems in the IEA’s New Policies and 450 Scenarios
Figure 4. Illustration of two industrial electric motor-driven systems: (a) normal and (b) efficient
Figure 5. A typical pump system
Figure 6. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in Iowa in 2015
Figure 7. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in Kansas in 2015
Figure 8. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) in Missouri in 2015
Figure 9. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS code 31-33) in Nebraska in 2015
Figure 10. Industrial electricity use by manufacturing subsector (NAICS 31-33) in South Dakota in 2015
Figure 11. Share of motor systems from total electricity use in manufacturing in Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and South Dakota in 2015
Figure 12. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Iowa in 2015
Figure 13. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Kansas in 2015
Figure 14. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Missouri in 2015
Figure 15. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In Nebraska in 2015
Figure 16. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) In South Dakota in 2015
Figure 17. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by system size in Iowa in 2015
Figure 18. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by system size in Kansas in 2015
Figure 19. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by system size in Missouri in 2015
Figure 20. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by system size in Nebraska in 2015
Figure 21. Estimated industrial pump systems electricity use by system size in South Dakota in 2015
Figure 22. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial pump systems in Iowa
Figure 23. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Iowa when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 24. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial pump systems in Kansas
Figure 25. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Kansas when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 26. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial pump systems in Missouri
Figure 27. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Missouri when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 28. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial pump systems in Nebraska
Figure 29. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in Nebraska when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures
Figure 30. Energy Efficiency Cost Curve for industrial pump systems in South Dakota
Figure 31. Comparison of energy saving potential (GWh/yr) for each efficiency measure in South Dakota when each measure is implemented in isolation or is implemented along with other measures

List of Tables
Table 1. Industrial pump system electricity-savings potential in five West North Central U.S. states in 2015
Table 2. Share of motor systems and pump systems electricity use in each U.S. manufacturing subsector
Table 3. Industrial motor systems electricity use by manufacturing subsectors (NAICS code 31-33) for each state studied in 2015
Table 4. Share of pump systems from total electricity use in manufacturing and from industrial motor systems electricity use in each state in 2015
Table 5. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Iowa ranked by final CCE
Table 6. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial pump systems in Iowa
Table 7. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Iowa by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 8. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Kansas ranked by final CCE 31
Table 9. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial pump systems in Kansas
Table 10. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Kansas by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 11. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Missouri ranked by their final CCE
Table 12. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial pump systems in Missouri
Table 13. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Missouri by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 14. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Nebraska ranked by their final CCE
Table 15. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial pump systems in Nebraska
Table 16. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in Nebraska by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 17. Cumulative annual electricity saving and CO2 emission reduction potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in South Dakota ranked by their final CCE
Table 18. Total annual cost-effective and technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial pump systems in South Dakota
Table 19. Cumulative annual electricity saving potential for efficiency measures in industrial pump systems in South Dakota by system size (GWh/yr)
Table 20. Sensitivity analyses for the cost-effective electricity saving potentials in the industrial pump systems with different discount rates
Table 21. Sensitivity analyses for the cost-effective electricity saving potentials in the industrial pump system with different electricity price
Table 22. Total annual technical energy saving and CO2 emissions reduction potential in industrial pump systems in the studied states
Table 23. Policies driving customer-funded energy-efficiency programs
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
3 of 3

Loading
LOADING...

4 of 3
Note: Product cover images may vary from those shown
Adroll
adroll