Search

Increased global competition and resource scarcity drives industrial companies to cut costs. Energy can be a significant component of such cuts, particularly for energy-intensive companies. Improving energy efficiency in industry is complex, as it pertains to various energy-using processes that are heavily intertwined. One such process is the compressed air system (CAS), which is used in most industrial companies worldwide. Since energy efficiency improvement measures for various types of energy-using processes differ, technology-specific measures might encounter different barriers to and drivers for energy efficiency. The same applies to the non-energy benefits (NEBs) related to energy efficiency improvement measures; since measures vary between various energy-using processes, the perceived NEBs might be different as well. The aim of this paper is to study the barriers to, drivers for and NEBs of CAS energy efficiency improvement measures from the perspectives of three actors. Carried out as an interview study combined with a questionnaire, the paper merges the perspectives of users, audit experts and suppliers of CASs. The results showed that the major barriers are related to the investment, or are of an organisational character, and that organisational and economic factors seemed to be important for making positive decisions on energy efficiency investments and measures in CASs. Major NEBs for CASs include productivity gains and the avoidance of capital expenditures. The results of this study also address the importance of having a comprehensive approach to recognise additional effects of energy efficiency improvements in CASs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the need for increased industrial energy efficiency, studies indicate that cost-effective energy efficiency measures are not always implemented, which is explained by the existence of barriers to energy efficiency. This paper investigates whether this holds for the Swedish pulp and paper industry, and if so, investigates the barriers inhibiting and the driving forces stressing cost-effective energy efficiency investments. By so, this case study covers about 2% of the EU-25 industrial end-use of energy. The overall results from a questionnaire show that there is an energy efficiency gap in the sector and that the largest barriers were technical risks such as risk of production disruptions, cost of production disruption/hassle/inconvenience, technology inappropriate at the mill, lack of time and other priorities, lack of access to capital, and slim organization. As regards the driving forces for energy efficiency, the highest ranked driving forces were cost reductions resulting from lower energy use, people with real ambition, long-term energy strategy, the threat of rising energy prices, the electricity certificate system, the PFE. The results show that many of the barriers and driving forces were not solely market-related, e.g., lack of time or other priorities, slim organization, other priorities for capital investments, lack of staff awareness, and long decision chains indicate that firm-specific barriers plays an important role. These barriers may not be overcome by market-related public policy instruments but is rather a consequence of how the energy issue is organized within the firms. The second and the third largest driving forces, people with real ambition and a long-term energy strategy further support this. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]