ISO 50001

Schneider

Electric

Agenda About Schneider Electric & Dennis Edwards

Why Schneider Electric? Why ISO 50001

The pilot

Where to begin

Resource Requirements

Surprises

Is this right for you

The future for ISO50001 at Schneider Electric

Schneider Electric – the global specialist

in energy management

billion € sales (last twelve months)

of sales in new economies(last twelve months)

people in 100+ countries

of sales devoted to R&DResidential 9%

Utilities & Infrastructure 24%

Industrial & machines 22%

Data centres 16%

Non-residential buildings 29%

Balanced geographies – FY 2011sales

Diversified end markets – FY 2011 sales

North

America

23%Asia Pacific27%Rest of

World18%

Western

Europe

32%

4

70 buildings

53 locations

12 M ft2

105 people

7 Regional

managers

26 facility managers

79 techs

Across North

America

Across all

Businesses

Demographics

Enterprise-wide Facility Management

Our Key Principles

5 Year Capital

5 Year Expense

Critical Equipment List

Contingency Plans

Provide 24-7-365 Operation

Structured Approach Standardization

Process and Formats

Budget Planning

Facility Planning

Customer Focus- Meet Business Needs Survey to Measure

Results

Key Objectives

Reduce Energy Consumption 4% 2012 - 10% 2014

Execute Established Budget for 2012 +/- 2% of Forecast

Drive Internal Business

Customer Expectations

Eliminate Schneider

Electric Product Gaps

Aim to Exceed

Best Practice Manual

• A Standard Practice Manual was published

in 2009 as the guiding document for

energy management for Schneider Electric

in North America. It was adopted in 2010

as the Global guide to energy

management.

• The manual includes:

– a detailed description of the SE

Energy Program

– a listing of best practices pertaining to

several topics, such as HVAC, steam

systems, compressed air, chilled

water, and process heating

– includes preventive maintenance and

continuous commissioning items to

help sustain gains in energy efficient

building operation

• Remote monitoring tools and metering • They allow me to move from energy data to energy information

Remote Monitoring

Energy Operation

Energy Management Information System (EMIS)

• Supply Side Partnership with Summit Energy

• Summit is a global leader in supply side energy services • Provide competitive Energy Procurement, with anticipated savings of $1.2 M in 2012 • Utilize the Summit Resource Advisor to aggregate, check and view energy usage and progress on

supply side projects

Supply Side Management

Resource Advisor

• An Energy Partnership: Development & Implementation of Total Energy Control

• Partnership beginning September 2006 with Energy Solutions to serve as an internal pilot customer for Total Energy Control

• Comprehensive approach to both supply side (see below) and demand side options • Identifies projects that make sense today and those that should be considered in the future • Projects implemented internally or with assistance • Continuous accountability for the success of the partnership

Demand Side Management

•Monthly model review meetings with individual regions •More discussion time per site and increased

participation from facilities •Model reviews combined with project tracking

EnPI Tool v3.02 SE r6, © 2011 Georgia Tech Research Corporation

01/01/11

12/01/11 Yes Mnf. Index No Avg. Temp. Yes HDD 60

No CDD 55 No PL ON Hrs. NoY1 X1 X2 X3 X4 No HDD 55 Yes CDD 60

Date

Electricity

(kWh) Mnf. Index CDD 60 HDD 60 Model

Electricity

(kWh) /

Model

1 01/01/2011 1,565,436 73,650 - 981 1,572,990 1.00

2 02/01/2011 1,476,039 74,465 - 601 1,484,781 0.99

3 03/01/2011 1,575,044 79,427 19 455 1,540,800 1.02

4 04/01/2011 1,483,938 72,840 74 126 1,421,002 1.04

5 05/01/2011 1,655,833 74,477 205 87 1,587,929 1.04

6 06/01/2011 1,717,368 76,524 382 - 1,800,620 0.95

7 07/01/2011 2,024,995 73,410 580 - 1,985,054 1.02

8 08/01/2011 1,934,884 79,110 466 - 1,936,339 1.00

9 09/01/2011 1,557,469 79,103 184 25 1,615,021 0.96

10 10/01/2011 1,418,059 71,568 34 206 1,377,004 1.03

11 11/01/2011 1,203,898 66,825 7 311 1,303,550 0.92

12 12/01/2011 1,215,545 55,518 - 592 1,203,417 1.01

X1 X2 X3 X4

Electricity

(kWh) Mnf. Index CDD 60 HDD 60

Std

Deviation

P-Values 0.00185 0.00003 0.0169 3.9%

F-Test 0.00002

r^2 0.95

m 14.72 1162.51 264.24 0.00

b 229732

Round coefficients (m) 3

Round constant (b) 0

Variables to be Included

Regression Model

y = (14.72)*X1+ (1162.511)*X2+ (264.244)*X3+ (0)*X4+ 229732

Model Year Last Row

Model Year First Row

Model OK

Evaluate Model Show All Rows

Reduce Energy Consumption M&V through Energy Modeling

Region Site Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12'12 vs '11

BaselineElec Gas

Central 1 Cedar Rapids -6% 1% -2% -5% -7% -2% 15% 2% -1% -4% 18%

Central 1 Des Plaines -6% -12% -15% -17% -12% -14% 0% -9% -10% -8% -17%

Central 1 Lincoln 9% 4% 8% 3% 6% -4% -7% -3% 2% -5% 30%

Central 1 Missouri -4% -7% -2% -1% -5% -7% -11% 1% -5% -5% 0%

Central 1 Palatine -11% -13% -16% -23% -23% -17% -5% -15% -15% -23% 22%

Central 1 Rockford -2% -5% 13% 6% -16% -34% -33% -36% -12% -9% -17%

Central 1 St. Louis -15% -4% -15% -19% -14% -15% -10% -18% -13% -13% -38%

Central 1 Total -1% -2% 3% -1% -5% -12% -9% -10% -5% -7% 4%

Central 2 Dayton -4% -4% 5% -4% 17% 19% 50% 45% 11% 3% 20%

Central 2 Fishers 22% 18% -2% -11% -20% -23% -23% -22% -5% -12% 16%

Central 2 Huntington -11% -3% -1% -6% -8% -1% -2% 1% -4% -7% 0%

Central 2 Lexington -10% -15% -10% -9% -5% -9% -5% -9% -9% -3% -15%

Central 2 Oxford 9% 1% -6% -3% -6% -13% -9% 11% -1% -2% -1%

Central 2 Peru -1% 2% 9% -5% -2% -2% 4% 2% 1% 1% 1%

Central 2 West Chester -10% -4% 9% -18% 3% 2% 0% 0% -3% 1% -14%

Central 2 Total -4% -7% -5% -7% -5% -8% -3% -2% -5% -3% -8%

Northeast Billerica 5% 10% 7% 9% 18% 13% 13% 16% 11% 17% -6%

Northeast Brossard -8% -4% -13% -15% 12% -21% -25% -19% -10% 8% -20%

Northeast Leesport 3% 7% 2% -3% -4% -4% -5% 1% 0% -1% 1%

Northeast Marlborough 11% 9% 5% -1% -6% 12% 18% 6% 7% 7%

Northeast Mechanicsburg 9% 8% 8% -13% -6% -2% -10% -1% 1% 1% 3%

Northeast Middletown -9% -7% 0% -1% -3% 4% 15% 15% -1% 8% -19%

Northeast North Andover 11% -5% 6% -3% -1% 2% 4% 3% 2% 4% -3%

Northeast West Kingston -13% -21% -11% -15% -13% -17% -13% -15% -15% -11% -25%

Northeast Total 0% -4% -1% -7% -5% -5% -3% -2% -3% -1% -8%

South Centro Logistico 0% -9% -15% -29% -7% -10% -12% -10% -11% -11%

South Monterrey P2 -10% -17% -8% -1% -9% -3% -4% -10% -8% -12% 4%

South Monterrey P3 -8% -1% -12% -8% 6% 3% 4% 1% -1% -1% -8%

South Monterrey P4 1% 2% -7% -7% 1% 4% -9% 8% -1% -1%

South Monterrey P5 -14% -13% -22% -32% -30% -22% -14% 8% -18% -18%

South Pacifico -6% -6% -1% -7% -8% -5% -6% -1% -5% -5%

South Rojo Gomez -9% -13% -8% -14% -7% -13% -5% -8% -10% -10%

South Tlaxcala -9% -16% -15% -14% -12% -11% -13% -10% -12% -13% -11%

South Total -8% -11% -11% -12% -7% -7% -6% -3% -8% -8% -7%

Southeast Columbia -3% -5% 1% -8% -3% -9% -4% -1% -4% -4% -4%

Southeast Greensboro 6% 2% -5% -6% -12% -9% -6% -5% -4% -5% 2%

Southeast LaVergne LifeSpace -5% -17% -5% -2% 14% 17% 30% 24% 5% 11% -14%

Southeast LaVergne PMO 5% -10% -8% -17% -12% -13% -10% -13% -10% -11% 5%

Southeast Nashville 20% 12% 6% 7% -2% -5% 4% 1% 5% 0% 42%

Southeast Raleigh 12% 3% 4% 0% -10% -8% -8% -4% -1% -7% 41%

Southeast Salisbury -15% -9% 12% -23% -14% -6% -17% -13% -11% -12% -10%

Southeast Seneca -10% -11% -2% -13% -8% -11% -8% -12% -10% -13% -5%

Southeast Smyrna -18% -19% -29% -25% -24% -31% -31% -23% -25% -40% -8%

Southeast Total -5% -9% -6% -12% -10% -14% -11% -10% -9% -12% -3%

West Athens -20% -36% -9% -6% -7% -3% -2% -4% -12% -5% -55%

West Burnaby 6% 1% 15% 7% 12% 4% 2% 5% 6% 8% 5%

West Carrollton 15% 8% 4% 0% 0% -3% 6% 1% 4% 2% 111%

West Chino 0% -6% 1% -9% -11% -15% -10% -14% -8% -8%

West Clovis 4% 5% -1% -1% -2% -10% -10% -18% -4% -6% -1%

West El Paso 23% -1% -7% -9% -2% -14% 7% -2% 1% -1% 8%

West Portland 3% 0% 3% -2% -3% -7% 9% 20% 3% 6% -6%

West Richmond -12% -10% -8% -10% -19% -33% -37% -41% -16% -11% -20%

West Salt Lake City -16% -33% -32% -33% -23% -32% -22% -25% -26% -14% -40%

West Victoria -39% -40% -37% -41% -40% -37% -41% -43% -40% -17% -75%

West Total -1% -4% -3% -6% -6% -12% -10% -14% -7% -5% -11%

Grand Total -3% -6% -3% -7% -6% -10% -7% -7% -6% -6% -6%

Reduce Energy Consumption

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Cumulative Energy Savings 2005 – 2012 - 4%

- 8% - 11% - 18%

- 25% - 25% - 26% - 30%

Reduce Energy Consumption

•Equivalent cost savings of more than $30 million

•More than 500 million kWh of energy (combined) saved

through 2012

•Over 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions since 2004

Electric Gas Supply Total

'12 vs. '11 Actual -12% -20%

'12 vs. '11 Mnf. Index 8% 16%

'12 vs. '11 HDD -30% -32%

'12 vs. '11 CDD 5% 3%

'12 vs. '11 Baseline -7% -7% -7%

Savings YTD $1,176,626 $148,837 $1,208,154 $2,533,617

• ISO 50001 is intended to

Improve Energy Performance

through activities like: – Creation and achievement of

energy performance goals

– Tracking key performance

indicators

• ISO 50001 officially launched in

June of 2011 with Schneider

Electric’s World Headquarters

“The Hive” as the first certified

site, globally.

Why ISO 50001?

– Continuous Improvement

– Usage Tracking

– Energy Review

– Recommendations for

Improvement

– Action Plans for Improvement

– Periodic Maintenance

– Documentation of Operational

Procedures

– Communication Protocol

– Training Program

ISO 50001 Main Requirements

– Sets up a robust management and documentation system

that can be highly leveraged for other benefits

– Requires a detailed study of significant energy consumers

• Uncovers far more than a traditional energy audit

• Encourages process experts to reevaluate process in

detail

• Guides the energy expert (i.e. SE) and process experts

to reach optimal process parameters

– Reinforces corporate brand as one that is sustainable and

environmentally responsible

ISO 50001 Benefits

• Jump Ahead of Competitors

• Realizing Deeper Energy Savings

Benefits of ISO 50001!

• We have a world class energy management

system.

• We have a comprehensive Best Practice Manual.

• We are already down 30% on energy

consumptions.

There was some skepticism

• US DOE Pilot Program for SEP and ISO 50001

• ISO 50001 Certified EnMS

Smyrna, TN Plant

• We found more savings where we had already

looked before

• Employee engagement went up

• Increase awareness of the ‘energy action” story

Surprise!

• Paintline Results (SEU)

– IR ovens only required 25% of their current used

capacity

– Hook burn-off temperature set to 1,500 degrees

when 1,200 degrees would suffice

• Other Benefits

– Drying ovens were being left on at night

– New HVAC units were not commissioned properly

– Procurement specifications did not require high

efficient equipment

Smyrna, TN Plant

Smyrna, TN Plant

Smyrna Electricity Use

2004-2012

(improvement compared to 2004)

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

7,000,000

8,000,000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Year

KW

H

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

% I

mp

rovem

en

t

Kwh % Change

PROCESS OVERVIEW

Site selection?

Other factors:

Nature of the business at that location

Resource allocations

Current site objectives

GSC North America Top Energy Consumers

-

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

30,000,000

35,000,000

40,000,000

Lexing

ton

Linc

oln

Clo

vis

Sen

eca

Rock

ford

Per

u

Oxford

Colu

mbia

Ceda

r Rapi

ds

Lees

port

North

And

over

Tlaxc

ala

St.

Louis SETC

West

Kings

ton

Sm

yrna

Facility

KW

H

Equivilant KWH

We chose to select sites based on energy consumption!

• Divided into 5 phases

– Gap Analysis

– Facility Energy Review

– E nMS Construction

– Readiness Review and Internal Audit

– ISO Certification Preparation

Schneider Electric’s Process

• Identify how current practices meet the

standard

• Determine which current practices can be

adopted to meet the standard

• Develop an implementation plan

– Determine Phase 3 required effort

Phase 1 – Gap Analysis

• Conduct utilities analysis

• Identify Significant Energy Users (SEUs)

• For each SEU

– Develop Energy Conservation Measures

– Create metering plan

– Identify operating parameters

Phase 2 – Energy Review

• Phase 3 – EnMS Construction

– Build procedures for a fully functional system

– Ensure energy efficiency targets have a plan for

achievement

• Phase 4 – Readiness Review and Internal

Audit

• Phase 5 – ISO Certification Preparation

Phases 3, 4, 5

• Initial Investment

– Dedication of internal resources

to enable and maintain

– Investment for certification

• Difficult to Communicate

Value

– Not mandated

– Too new to show case studies for

savings

Challenges

• Leaders are the Facility Managers

• Cross functional teams, all internal resources

• Approximately 5 on a team, FM, MGMT Sys

expert, Environmental Manager, Production

Representative, Plant Manager

• About 800 hrs resource cost per location

• Audits were $30k

• It takes 6 to 9 months

Resources

• Is the bottom line important

• Are other management systems in place

• Is energy management important beyond cost

for instance “environmental impact”

• Is your customer base “environmentally aware”

Is this right for you?

• Include Superior Energy Performance

• Certify 9 more locations in North America by end

of 2014

Where do we go now?

Questions Comments