ISO 50001 and other management systems (e.g., ISO 9001 and ISO 14001) allow for implementation and certification at the enterprise level. The "Central Office" concept, which allows a small group of employees to manage and facilitate the organization's energy management system (EnMS) at the enterprise level, was introduced within the ISO 50003 standard to provide guidance to ISO 50001 certification bodies.Four industrial companies have partnered with the United States Department of Energy to pilot the enterprise-wide ISO 50001/SEP concept under the Better Buildings Superior Energy Performance (SEP) Enterprise-wide Accelerator. Each organization developed a Central Office to host their EnMS while implementing ISO 50001/SEP at multiple physically separated sites. The four corporate partners tailored their Central Office implementation model to meet their own specific circumstances and needs. This paper reviews the commonalities, differences, and benefits of each of these enterprise-wide implementation models, including organizational structures, Central Office staff responsibilities, and key strategies.The cost savings and benefits of using the enterprise-wide approach were assessed, including the cost per site compared with that of a conventional, single-site ISO 50001/SEP implementation approach. This paper also discusses the drivers for the cost reductions realized through these enterprise-wide approaches.The four partner companies worked with 30 total sites. On average, these 30 sites improved energy performance by 5% annually over their SEP achievement periods, saved more than $600,000 annually in energy costs and reduced implementation cost for ISO 50001 and SEP by $19,000 and 0.8 Full Time Equivalent × years (FTE-yr) of staff time per site. The results can inform other organizations seeking to implement enterprise-wide ISO 50001/SEP, as well as energy efficiency organizations seeking to promote wider adoption of ISO 50001 implementation.

No abstract

ES-1. INTRODUCTION In the wake of Hurricane Katrina and other severe storms in 2005, natural gas supplies were restricted, prices rose, and industry sought ways to reduce its natural gas use and costs. In October 2005, U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Energy Secretary Bodman launched his Easy Ways to Save Energy campaign with a promise to provide energy assessments to 200 of the largest U.S. manufacturing plants. A major thrust of the campaign was to ensure that the nation's natural gas supplies would be adequate for all Americans, especially during home heating seasons. In a presentation to the National Press Club on October 3, 2005, Secretary Bodman said:-America's businesses, factories, and manufacturing facilities use massive amounts of energy. To help them during this period of tightening supply and rising costs, our Department is sending teams of qualified efficiency experts to 200 of the nation's most energy-intensive factories. Our Energy Saving Teams will work with on-site managers on ways to conserve energy and use it more efficiently.‖ DOE's Industrial Technologies Program (ITP) responded to the Secretary's campaign with its Save Energy Now initiative, featuring a new and highly cost-effective form of energy assessments. The approach for these assessments drew heavily on the existing resources of ITP's Technology Delivery component. Over the years, ITP-Technology Delivery had worked with industry partners to assemble a suite of respected software decision tools, proven assessment protocols, training curricula, certified experts, and strong partnerships for deployment. Because of the program's earlier activities and the resources that had been developed, ITP was prepared to respond swiftly and effectively to the sudden need to promote improved industrial energy efficiency. Because of anticipated supply issues in the natural gas sector, the Save Energy Now initiative strategically focused on natural gas savings and targeted the nation's largest manufacturing plants-those that consume a total of 1 trillion British thermal units (Btu) or more annually. The approximately 6800 U.S. facilities that fall into this category collectively account for about 53% of all energy consumed by industry in the United States.

Full scale laboratory tests were performed by the Combustion Turbine Systems Division of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation to explore the feasibility of using catalytic burners in industrial combustion turbines to reduce emissions. Catalytic elements were provided by the Engelhard Industries Division of Engelhard Corporation, and No. 2 distillate fuel was burned in single combustor rig tests at the pressure, airflow, and inlet temperature equivalent to those in a large combustion turbine. Variations of a concept that employed a conventional preburner upstream of a catalytic secondary, and sidewall fuel injection were tested and evaluated for fuel/air presentation to the catalyst. Results indicated ultra-low NOx emissions and that, with development in secondary fuel/air preparation, the concept is technically feasible.

No abstract