In the United States, industry spends over $100 billion annually to power its manufacturing plants. Companies also spend on maintenance, capital outlay, and energy services. Improving energy efficiency is vital to reduce these costs and increase earnings. Many cost-effective opportunities to reduce energy consumption are available, and this Energy Guide discusses energy-efficiency practices and energy-efficient technologies that can be applied over a broad spectrum of companies. Strategies in the guide address hot water and steam, compressed air, pumps, motors, fans, lighting, refrigeration, and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning. This guide includes descriptions of expected energy and cost savings, based on real-world applications, typical payback periods, and references to more detailed information. The information in this Energy Guide is intended to help energy and plant managers achieve cost-effective energy reductions while maintaining product quality. Further research on the economics of all measures--as well as on their applicability to different production practices?is needed to assess their cost effectiveness at individual plants.

Energy is an important cost factor in the U.S iron and steel industry. Energy efficiency improvement is an important way to reduce these costs and to increase predictable earnings, especially in times of high energy price volatility. There are a variety of opportunities available at individual plants in the U.S. iron and steel industry to reduce energy consumption in a cost-effective manner. This Energy Guide discusses energy efficiency practices and energy-efficient technologies that can be implemented at the component, process, facility, and organizational levels. A discussion of the structure, production trends, energy consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions of the iron and steel industry is provided along with a description of the major process technologies used within the industry. Next, a wide variety of energy efficiency measures are described. Many measure descriptions include expected savings in energy and energy-related costs, based on case study data from real-world applications in the steel and related industries worldwide. Typical measure payback periods and references to further information in the technical literature are also provided, when available. The information in this Energy Guide is intended to help energy and plant managers in the U.S. iron and steel industry reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-effective manner while maintaining the quality of products manufactured. Further research on the economics of all measures?and on their applicability to different production practices?is needed to assess their cost effectiveness at individual plants.

This report provides information on the energy savings, costs, and carbon dioxide emissions reductions associated with implementation of a number of technologies and measures applicable to the cement industry. The technologies and measures include both state-of-the-art measures that are currently in use in cement enterprises worldwide as well as advanced measures that are either only in limited use or are near commercialization. This report focuses mainly on retrofit measures using commercially available technologies, but many of these technologies are applicable for new plants as well. Where possible, for each technology or measure, costs and energy savings per tonne of cement produced are estimated and then carbon dioxide emissions reductions are calculated based on the fuels used at the process step to which the technology or measure is applied. The analysis of cement kiln energy-efficiency opportunities is divided into technologies and measures that are applicable to the different stages of production and various kiln types used in China: raw materials (and fuel) preparation; clinker making (applicable to all kilns, rotary kilns only, vertical shaft kilns only); and finish grinding; as well as plant wide measures and product and feedstock changes that will reduce energy consumption for clinker making. Table 1 lists all measures in this report by process to which they apply, including plant wide measures and product or feedstock changes. Tables 2 through 8 provide the following information for each technology: fuel and electricity savings per tonne of cement; annual operating and capital costs per tonne of cement or estimated payback period; and, carbon dioxide emissions reductions for each measure applied to the production of cement. This information was originally collected for a report on the U.S. cement industry (Worrell and Galitsky, 2004) and a report on opportunities for China's cement kilns (Price and Galitsky, in press). The information provided in this report is based on publicly-available reports, journal articles, and case studies from applications of technologies around the world.

The U.S. glass industry is comprised of four primary industry segments--flat glass, container glass, specialty glass, and fiberglass--which together consume $1.6 billion in energy annually. On average, energy costs in the U.S. glass industry account for around 14percent of total glass production costs. Energy efficiency improvement is an important way to reduce these costs and to increase predictable earnings, especially in times of high energy price volatility. There is a variety of opportunities available at individual plants in the U.S. glass industry to reduce energy consumption in a cost-effective manner. This Energy Guide discusses energy efficiency practices and energy-efficient technologies that can be implemented at the component, process, system, and organizational levels. A discussion of the trends, structure, and energy consumption characteristics of the U.S. glass industry is provided along with a description of the major process steps in glass manufacturing. Expected savings in energy and energy-related costs are given for many energy efficiency measures, based on case study data from real-world applications in glass production facilities and related industries worldwide. Typical measure payback periods and references to further information in the technical literature are also provided, when available. The information in this Energy Guide is intended to help energy and plant managers in the U.S. glass industry reduce energy consumption in a cost-effective manner while maintaining the quality of products manufactured. Further research on the economics of the measures--as well on as their applicability to different production practices--is needed to assess potential implementation of selected technologies at individual plants.

We review the relationship between energy efficiency improvement measures and productivity in industry. We review over 70 industrial case studies from widely available published databases, followed by an analysis of the representation of productivity benefits in energy modeling. We propose a method to include productivity benefits in the economic assessment of the potential for energy efficiency improvement. The case-study review suggests that energy efficiency investments can provide a significant boost to overall productivity within industry. If this relationship holds, the description of energy-efficient technologies as opportunities for larger productivity improvements has significant implications for conventional economic assessments. The paper explores the implications this change in perspective on the evaluation of energy-efficient technologies for a study of the iron and steel industry in the US. This examination shows that including productivity benefits explicitly in the modeling parameters would double the cost-effective potential for energy efficiency improvement, compared to an analysis excluding those benefits. We provide suggestions for future research in this important area.

The cost of energy as part of the total production costs in the cement industry is significant, warranting attention for energy efficiency to improve the bottom line. Historically, energy intensity has declined, although more recently energy intensity seems to have stabilized with the gains. Coal and coke are currently the primary fuels for the sector, supplanting the dominance of natural gas in the 1970s. Most recently, there is a slight increase in the use of waste fuels, including tires. Between 1970 and 1999, primary physical energy intensity for cement production dropped 1percent/year from 7.3 MBtu/short ton to 5.3 MBtu/short ton. Carbon dioxide intensity due to fuel consumption and raw material calcination dropped 16percent, from 609 lb. C/ton of cement (0.31 tC/tonne) to 510 lb. C/ton cement (0.26 tC/tonne). Despite the historic progress, there is ample room for energy efficiency improvement. The relatively high share of wet-process plants (25percent of clinker production in 1999 in the U.S.) suggests the existence of a considerable potential, when compared to other industrialized countries. We examined over 40 energy efficient technologies and measures and estimated energy savings, carbon dioxide savings, investment costs, and operation and maintenance costs for each of the measures. The report describes the measures and experiences of cement plants around the wold with these practices and technologies. Substantial potential for energy efficiency improvement exists in the cement industry and in individual plants. A portion of this potential will be achieved as part of (natural) modernization and expansion of existing facilities, as well as construction of new plants in particular regions. Still, a relatively large potential for improved energy management practices exists.