accelerated up take electric l
Post on 27-Feb-2018
214 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 1/36
REPORT
ACCELERATED REPLACEMENT OF ELECTRIC MOTORS
Jeroen de Beer, Florian Hemmer (Ecofys)
Hugh Falkner (Atkins Global)
September 2013
ECI Publication No Cu0188
Available from www.leonardo-energy.org
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 2/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page i
Document Issue Control Sheet
Document Title: Report - Accelerated replacement of electric motors
Publication No: Cu0188
Issue: 01
Release: Public
Author(s): Jeroen de Beer, Florian Hemmer, Hugh Falkner
Reviewer(s): Hans De Keulenaer
Document History
Issue Date Purpose
1 Sep 2013 Initial public release
2
3
Disclaimer
This publication has been prepared by Ecofys and Atkins Global for European Copper Institute. While this
publication has been prepared with care, European Copper Institute and other contributors provide no
warranty with regards to the content and shall not be liable for any direct, incidental or consequential
damages that may result from the use of the information or the data contained.
Copyright© European Copper Institute.
Reproduction is authorised providing the material is unabridged and the source is acknowledged.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 3/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page ii
CONTENTS
Summary ........................................................................................................................................................ 1
1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 2
2 Benefits of Early Replacement .......................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................................. 4
2.2 Scope ........................................................................................................... ............................................. 4
2.3 Assumptions ........................................................................................................... .................................. 4
2.4 Savings .............................................................. ................................................................. ....................... 5
2.4.1 Electricity Savings ................................................................................................................. .... 6
2.4.2 Avoided CO2 Emissions............................................................................................................. 7
2.4.3 Total Cost of Ownership .............................................................. ............................................. 8
3 Devising programmes and actions to promote early replacement .................................................... 9
3.1 defining programme objectives ............ ................................................................. .................................. 9
3.2 Motor Decision Moments ..................... ................................................................. .................................. 9
3.3 Programmes and action to promote best practice in motor repair and replacement........................... 10
3.3.1 Programmes and actions reviewed ........................................................ ................................ 10
3.3.2 Motor Management Policy .................................................................... ................................ 11
3.3.3 Improving availability of high efficiency motors at local stockists ......................................... 13
3.3.4 Third party “ESCO” type contracts to keep motors running .................................................. 13
3.3.5 Motor selection tools and cost effectiveness of replacement options .................................. 14
3.3.6 over-coming the price premium for more efficient motors by offering financial rebates .... 16
3.3.1 Using a standard to drive forward energy management – ISO50001 ................................. 16
3.3.1 Bringing it together – the Motor Decisions Matter campaign ............................................... 16
3.4 Best practice in selection and design of policy options for encouraging early replacement of motors 17
4 Current EU Policy Frameworks ........................................................................................................ 19
4.1 EcoDesign Directive .......................................................................... ...................................................... 20
4.2 Energy Efficiency Directive ..................................................... .............................................................. .. 22
4.3 Industrial Emissions Directive .... ................................................................. ........................................... 27
4.4 Emission Trading Directive ..................................................... .............................................................. .. 28
4.5 Conclusions............................................................................................................................................. 29
5 Appendix I – Methodology on Estimating Savings .......................................................................... 30
5.1 Assumptions and Data................................................. ................................................................. .......... 30
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 4/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page iii
5.1.1 Motor Data ............................................................. ................................................................ 30
5.1.2 Market Data ........................................................................................................................... 30
5.2 Annual Savings ....................................................................................................................................... 31
5.2.1 Interpolation of annual sales ................................................................................................. 31
5.2.2 Standard motor ......................................................................................................... ............. 31
5.2.3 Electricity savings ................................................................................................................... 31
5.2.4 Avoided CO2 emissions .......................................................................................................... 32
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 5/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 1
SUMMARY
This paper investigates whether opportunities exist to encourage premature replacement of electric motors by
more efficient ones.
By installing efficient motors energy is saved and the emission of CO 2 is reduced. Both contribute to the EUtargets to increase the energy efficiency by 20% in 2020 (compared to projections made in 2007) and to
reduce the emissions of CO2 by 20% in 2020 as compared to 1990.
Companies can also benefit from replacing motors by more efficient types. It will reduce their energy bill and
reduce the risk on unplanned downtime. Furthermore, the life cycle costs are lower. The higher initial
investment costs of high efficiency motors are more than balanced by the lower electricity costs during
operation. Last but not least, it will contribute to obligatory or voluntary improvement of the energy efficiency.
The Ecodesign directive describes that motors sold on the EU market should be of a high efficiency class or be
combined with a variable speed drive. The effects of the directive will only be noticed when actually a new
motor is installed. Premature replacement of electric motors is a rarity despite of the benefits. Important
reasons why this is not done are that the cost of decision are too high, investments and benefits are split over
different budgets, there is aversion to the risks of installing a new motor and uncertainty of returns.
Many programmes and actions have been devised that aim to overcome these barriers. A review of these
programmes is done to distil best practices. Lessons to take into account when designing new programs are:
- be ahead of the market, do not promote what is seen by the market as the ‘standard’ motor;
- reserve enough budget to keep the program running for sufficient time;
- keep things simple, not only in providing information but also in procedures for claiming any financial
rebates;
- adequate publicity by a trustworthy organisation, preferably a Government. Keep promotional
materials up-to-date;
- target those most likely to make the change;
- realise that the savings of individual motors will only give a modest change.
We evaluated the current EU policy framework for energy efficiency in order to identify opportunities to
accelerate the uptake of efficient motors. The relevant directives are:
- Energy Efficiency Directive
- Ecodesign Directive
- Industrial Emissions Directive
- Emission Trading Directive
The Energy Efficiency Directive (EED) offers the best opportunities to encourage premature replacement of
motors. Much will depend on the implementation of the EED by national governments, which should largely
be in place by 2014.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 6/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 2
1 INTRODUCTION
Electric motors are used for a wide range of diverse applications. The variety in power output, the
controllability and the convenience of using electricity make electric motors the ideal driver for many
operations. About 110 million low-voltage AC motors are operational in the European industrial and tertiary
sector and about 10 million are sold every year in Europe. Electric motors account for about two thirds ofelectricity consumption in the industry
1. The associated electricity consumptions amounts to roughly 1119
TWh/a in 2010, or 97.2 billion Euro and 513 Mtonne of CO2 emissions. It has been predicted that the electricity
consumption of motors will increase to 1252 TWh/a in 2020 if no measures to limit the consumption are
taken2.
Motors are grouped into four efficiency classes, IE1 being the standard efficiency and IE4 a super premium
efficiency. The efficiencies depend primarily on the size, as shown in Figure 1.
FIGURE 1: IE EFFIENCY CLASSES OF A 4-POLE MOTOR AT 50 HZ3
Currently, the majority of the electric motors in the EU are still of the class IE1; representing more than 82% of
European market share in 20094. Obviously, there is a considerable potential for energy saving by increasing
the efficiency of operational motors, not just waiting for existing ones to be replaced. Motors are usually run
to failure, and even then it is common to repair rather than replace them. To tap into this energy savings
potential, and associated mitigation of GHG emissions and cost savings, the existing stock of electric motors
should be upgraded to new and more efficiency motors. This will mean encouraging a fresh look at the way
that an organisation takes to maintaining and replacing its stock of motors. Just being satisfied that working
motors are good motors is no longer sufficient if life cycle operating costs are to be be minimised.
1 Wachter, B. de, “White Paper - Electric Motor Asset Management”, ECI, 2001.
2 Implementing Directive 2005/32/EC
3 ABB, Technical note IEC 60034-30 standard on efficiency classes for low voltage AC motors
4 CEMEP, 2010. Energy saving motors result 1998-2009. [online] Available at: http://www.cemep.org/index.php?id=21
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 7/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 3
The Ecodesign directive set standards for the efficiency of new motors sold on the EU market. The
implementation of these standards follows a step wise approach and is shown in table 1.
TABLE 1: ECODESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ELECTRIC MOTORS5
Rated output: From 16 June 2011 From 1 Jan 2015 From 1 Jan 2017
0.75 – 7.5 kW IE2 IE2 IE3 or IE2 + VSD
7.5 – 375 kW IE2 IE3 or IE2 + VSD IE3 or IE2 + VSD
It is estimated that the electricity savings by Ecodesign amount to 135 TWh in 20206. This estimate is based on
a stock turnover rate assuming average lifetimes of motors per size. Electric motors have an average lifetime
of 10 – 20 years, but in most companies are run to failure, which can be much longer. Although a harmful
operational environment, e.g. abrasive dust or high temperatures, can severely reduce a motors lifetime a
majority of motors operate beyond its technical lifetime. Some motors will be repaired or rewound multiple
times, extending the lifetime beyond the 10 – 20 years. As rewinding of motors usually also results in an
efficiency loss, it will take much longer before the minimum efficiency requirements on new equipment lead to
a substantially more efficient stock.
This paper investigates the opportunities to enforce or stimulate the early replacement of motors by more
efficient ones. First, we will have a more detailed look at the benefits of early replacement in terms of energy
saved, costs and CO2-emissions avoided. We will also estimate the additional copper demand. Second, we will
explore the factors that hinder replacement of motors. Third, we will evaluate what we can learn from past
programmes directed at motor efficiencies. Where are these programmes successful in taking away the
barriers to implementation? Finally, we will analyse what room current EU policy frameworks offer to
accelerate electric motor stock turnover.
5 COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 640/2009
6 EC, 2009. Full Impact Assessment (regard to ecodesign requirements for electric motors). SEC(2009)1014
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 8/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 4
2 BENEFITS OF EARLY REPLACEMENT
2.1 INTRODUCTION
The preparatory study for the EcoDesign directive on electric motors7 shows that the vast majority of both the
lifecycle costs and environmental impact are during the use phase of an electric motor. Notably electrical
energy typically takes up more than 95% of the lifecycle costs, based on an assumed lifetime of twelve to
twenty years, and typical load factors. A higher energy efficiency of the electric motor stock will therefore
greatly reduce the electricity consumption and related environmental impacts.
In this section we will present scenarios for early replacement of electric motors and calculate the benefits in
terms of energy savings, avoided CO2-emission and costs.
2.2 SCOPE
The scope of this study entails low voltage AC motors within the European Union (EU-27), and is the same
scope as used for the EcoDesign Directive on electric motors. This scope has been chosen for the followingreasons:
More than 96% of EU25 integral horsepower motors sold are AC motors, the remainder are DC
motors.
87% of the number of AC motors sold in the EU25 are 3phase induction motors, the remainder are
single phase (4%), synchronous (5%) and universal (4%).
The EcoDesign Directive imposes minimum requirements on newly sold motors and is therefore an
important factor in determining the baseline.
In line with the EU’s 2020 targets and reported EcoDesign savings the estimated savings of e.g. stimulating
early replacement or reducing motor rewinding are calculated up till 2020 or 2025.
2.3 ASSUMPTIONS
The European EcoDesign directive includes minimum efficiency requirements for newly sold electric motors.
First minimum requirements took effect in mid-2011 and further minimum requirements will come into effect
in 2015 and 2017. According to the EC impact assessment of 20098 the imposed minimum requirements will
result in annual savings of 135-139 TWh in 2020 and cumulative savings of 657 TWh by 2020. These savings
account for an avoided 301 Mt CO2 and monetary savings of € 84 billion in the period 2010-2020. Specifics on
the EcoDesign Directive, like the phased implementation of minimum requirements, can be found in section
4.1
There are three moment in the working life of a motor that a decision can be taken to replace the motor.
These moments are: (1) when the motor fails; (2) when the motor comes to the end of its technical lifetime;
(3) when it is worthwhile to replace the motor before the end of its lifetime. An alternative to replacement is
repair of the motor. We will explain more about the life time of a motor in chapter 3.
7 de Alemeida, et al., 2008. EUP Lot 11 Motors. ISR – University of Coimbra
8 EC, 2009. Full Impact Assessment (regard to ecodesign requirements for electric motors). SEC(2009)1014
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 9/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 5
In estimating potential savings by rewinding/repairing or replacing an electric motor the following assumption
are made:
A repair/rewind reduces motor efficiency by 0.5-2.0%pt9. High quality rewinding can restore a motor’s
original efficiency but is uncommon due to time pressure constraints.
Three motor ‘sizes’ are used to represent the full spectrum: 1.1, 11 and 110 kW. The market shares ofthese sizes are respectively 87, 12 and 1%, specified as the share of total units.
These motors have an assumed planned/technical lifetime of respectively 12, 15 and 20 years.
For all motors a total of 4,000 operating hours per year and a load factor of 60% is used in the
calculations. This is in line with the assumptions underpinning the EcoDesign directive and represents
average operational characteristics in the market.
Application of a variable speed drive (VSD) increases the efficiency of the total stock with 20% by
reducing losses in the application systems.
The figure below gives an indicative overview of the change in motor efficiency as a result of repair/rewind or
replacement upon decision moments. The figure indicates that the repair/rewind of an electric motor, no
matter the decision moment, will generally result in a slight loss of efficiency. Opposed to the loss of efficiencyby a repair/rewind is the installation of a new motor, which in general has a significantly higher efficiency.
Note that a motor replacement in this figure implies a replacement with a new high efficiency motor and not
replacing the motor with exactly the same model.
FIGURE 2: CHANGES IN MOTOR EFFIENCY BY REPAIR OR REPLACE BY MORE EFFICIENCT MOTOR UPON DECISION MOMENTS
2.4 SAVINGS
The savings associated with the implementation of the EcoDesign directive for electric motors are estimated at
135-139 TWh per year in 2020. Assumptions underlying these savings are for example a motor lifetime of 12 to
20 years for small to large motors, running hours of 4,000hpa and a load factor of 60%. These assumptions
have been used to estimate savings as a result of shorter and longer motor lifetimes. Changes of the assumed
motor lifetime are used to estimate the impact of a slower or faster dissemination of high efficient motors in
the market.
9 EASA/AEMT, 2003. The Effect of Repair/Rewinding on Motor Efficiency.
M o t o r E f f i c i e n c y - - >
Motor Life -->
Failure: Replace Planned: Replace Shortened: ReplaceShortened: Rewind Planned: Rewind Failure: RewindMotor Base Efficiency
Shortened Lifetime
Planned End of Life
Motor Failure
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 10/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 6
2.4.1 ELECTRICITY SAVINGS
Electricity savings by setting minimum requirements on newly bought motors according to the EcoDesign
directive results in annual savings of 136 TWh in 2020. If average motor lifetimes10
are in fact longer than
assumed in the EcoDesign preparatory study and impact assessment these annual savings, in 2020, would drop
to an estimated 114 TWh at +2 years and 82 TWh at +5 years. This equates to a decrease of 16% or 40%
respectively as opposed to the calculated EcoDesign savings.
Incentivising earlier replacement of existing motors by more efficient motors, shortening the lifetime of
existing low efficient motors, leads to an increase in potential savings. Annual energy savings amount to an
estimated 158 TWh at -2 years and 191 TWh at -5 years in 2020. These savings are an increase of 16 to 40% as
opposed to the calculated EcoDesign savings.
FIGURE 3: ESTIMATED ANNUAL ELECTRICTY SAVINGS
The cumulative savings by 2020 based on the EcoDesign assumptions and phased implementation are
estimated at 574 TWh. Note that these cumulative savings are counted starting 2011, when the first minimum
requirements of EcoDesign were implemented. Savings by a slower or faster pace of high efficiency motor
dissemination result in a decrease or increase of 16 to 40% for 2 to 5 years respectively.
10 In Ecodesign average lifetimes are taken into accout, whereas actual lifetimes may be longer. To show this effect we
have also calculated saving potentials with longer lifetimes.
136
158
191
114
82
0
50
100
150
200
250
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
A n n u a l S a v i n g s [ T W h / a ]
EcoDesign EcoDesign -2yr EcoDesign -5yr EcoDesign +2yr EcoDesign +5yr
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 11/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 7
FIGURE 4: ESTIMATED CUMULATIVE ELECTRICITY SAVINGS
2.4.2 AVOIDED CO2 EMISSIONS
Avoided CO2 emissions are calculated by applying an EU average emission factor of 0.465 tCO 2 per MWhe.
Estimated annual savings by the implementation of EcoDesign are 63 MtCO2 in 2020. Increasing or decreasing
the pace of dissemination leads to an increase or decrease of 16 to 40% for increasing or decreasing motor
lifetime with 2 to 5 years respectively.
FIGURE 5: ESTIMATED ANNUAL AVOIDED CO2 EMISSIONS
574
666
804
481
343
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
C u m u l a t i v e S a v i n g s [
T W h ]
EcoDesign EcoDesign -2yr EcoDesign -5yr EcoDesign +2yr EcoDesign +5yr
63
74
89
53
38
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
A n n u a l S a v i n g s [ M t C O 2 ]
EcoDesign EcoDesign -2yr EcoDesign -5yr
EcoDesign +2yr EcoDesign +5yr
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 12/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 8
The cumulative amount of avoided CO2 emissions by 2020 based on the EcoDesign assumptions and phased
implementation is estimated at 267 MtCO2. Note that these cumulative savings are counted starting 2011,
when the first minimum requirements of EcoDesign were implemented. Savings by a slower or faster pace of
high efficiency motor dissemination result in a decrease or increase of 16 to 40% for 2 to 5 years respectively.
FIGURE 6: ESTIMATED CUMULATIVE AVOIDED CO2 EMISSIONS
2.4.3 TOTAL COST OF OWNERSHIP
Total cost of ownership (TCO) include both investment costs and operation costs during the lifetime of the
motor. As the energy costs dominate and not the investment costs, it is fair to take the TCO into account when
evaluating early replacement of a motor.
The question is, however, which costs should be taken into account. When looking to decide whether to
replace or repair a motor, it is the difference in costs that is important. But when looking to prematurely
replace a working motor, it might be considered that it is the whole price of the new motor that is
important. This will usually be considerably larger, often several times larger than the cost difference between
repair and replace. However, this approach is simplistic and does not take account of the whole situation.
Premature replacement of a working motor not only saves money by avoiding the costs of unplanned
downtime, but also gives the opportunity to select the optimum motor for replacement. However, if we look
more carefully at the actual financial consequences of the decision simply in terms of expenditure and energy
savings, the situation actually becomes quite favourable. The real question (ignoring for now the benefits of
using a more efficient motor, and of the reduction in capital expenditure by possibly repairing rather than
replacing), is the difference between buying a new now, or buying the same new motor at a time in the
future. So if for example it is known that statistically a particular motor will fail in two years’ time, then the
difference in expenditure is simply the cost of borrowing for that time. This should be then compared to the
energy savings accruing through premature replacement. The overall picture will vary according to the
individual company circumstances and motor application, but in many cases it will represent a positive cash
flow.
267
310
374
224
160
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
C u m
u l a t i v e S a v i n g s [ M t C O 2 ]
EcoDesign EcoDesign -2yr EcoDesign -5yr
EcoDesign +2yr EcoDesign +5yr
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 13/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 9
Let us consider the following simplified example:
11kW motor with an IE1 efficiency (87.6%) or IE3 efficiency (91.4%)
Motor is to be replaced after 15 years
4000 operating hours per year, no load factor compensation
IE1 motor cost of €450, IE3 motor cost of €675, electricity price of €0.09/kWh
The first approach we use is taking into account the full cost difference between the IE1 and IE3 motor. Annual
energy costs of the IE1 motor amount to €4520 and €4332 for the IE3 motor, saving €188 a year. The
difference in motor costs is a mere €225, implying that the higher investment costs are compensated by a
reduction in energy costs within two years.
The second approach is that we consider is bringing forward the investment in a new motor for two years. We
can use the net present value to calculate this. We assume that the motor will be linearly depreciated over five
years, so after two years the motor still has a value of € 405. The net present value with a discount rate of 10%
is € 582. The costs for bringing forward this investment are € 675 - € 582 = € 93. This cost difference is
compensated by the savings on electricity costs within half a year. Obviously, this outcome depends stronglyon the assumptions of the discount rate and the depreciation method.
Another case we need to consider is comparison of rewinding and replacing. Motor rewinding generally
reduces motor efficiency and comes at two thirds of the costs of a new motor. In the above case, with a
rewind caused efficiency loss of 0.5%pt, the difference in annual energy costs would rise to €214 a year. The
difference in investment costs would be €350 (rewind vs new more efficient motor), resulting in a less than
two year simple payback period. The assumed 0.5% efficiency loss is based on a high quality rewind. Usually
motor rewinds are carried out under time-pressure and therefore generally result in typical winding loss of
efficiency of about 2%pt. Such a loss in efficiency would further reduce the simple payback period..
3 DEVISING PROGRAMMES AND ACTIONS TO PROMOTE EARLY REPLACEMENT
3.1 DEFINING PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES
We have shown that early replacement of motors has benefits for both society and the company that uses the
motor. In the past, several actions and programs have been directed at increasing the efficiency of motors and
motor systems. Still it is a fact that early replacement of motors is a rarity. That raises the question as to what
barriers hamper a faster substitution of motors by more efficient ones, and hence what actions can be taken
to help overcome these? The aim is that from the lessons learned from looking at the impact of actions
already tried, we can distil the best practices to stimulate the enhanced uptake of more efficient motors.
3.2 MOTOR DECISION MOMENTS
We distinguish three moments in the working life time of a motor on which it can be decided to replace a
motor by a more efficient one or repair the old one:
1. Motor Failure
Replacing a motor upon motor failure can be undesirable as it is often associated with an additional downtime
of production or auxiliary processes, or at the least the risk that this might happen. As downtime can be costly,
a quick solution is preferred and depending on motor size and characteristics a new motor can be supplied
quickly or a repair/rewind can be carried out on short notice. Alternatively replacement motors can be kept in
stock to ensure a swift replacement. The vast majority of operational motors are however considerably lessefficient than high efficiency motors currently available. Replacing a failed motor with a newer more efficient
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 14/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 10
motor can therefore lead to considerable savings on operational costs. Fitting a not-identical motor can
however require (minor) adjustments to the motor system, requirements which are not necessary if replaced
with an identical motor or repaired/rewound.
2. Planned End of Life
Instead of running a motor up to the moment of failure a planned or technical end of life can be applied.
Planning a motor’s end of life enables the coordination of motor replacement or repair. This enables
replacements or repairs to be scheduled at times of low production or during major overall maintenance, and
above all facilitates optimisation of motor replacement in general. This optimisation can include an adjustment
of requirements based upon actual operations and observing total cost of ownership as opposed to only initial
investment costs.
3. Shortened Lifetime/Premature replacement
As the energy consumption of an electric motor makes up more than 95% of its lifecycle costs an early
replacement by a more efficient motor, despite the investment cost, can reduce total costs. This premature
replacement is in fact a planned end of life taking into account the efficiency gains, and energy savings, of a
new more efficient motor.
At each of these critical instances, the following considerations will dictate which option is selected.
1. Cost of decision: An option that costs more than the cheapest possible option will be likely to require
higher level authorisation. This is exacerbated in instances where the decision maker only pays for
the initial expense, but does not benefit from the reduction in electricity consumption.
2. Risk aversion: The cost of early failure or additional delay in the plant recommencing operation may
be so high that there will be an imperative to “play safe”. This might mean for example repairing the
old motor because of the certainty it will fit.
3. Uncertainty of the returns: While the energy savings from more efficient motors may be understood
in a general way, it can be hard to understand what this might mean for the fleet of motors at a
particular site.
Many programmes and actions have been devised that aim to overcome these barriers to behaviour change,
which are reviewed in the following section.
3.3 PROGRAMMES AND ACTION TO PROMOTE BEST PRACTICE IN MOTOR REPAIR AND
REPLACEMENT
3.3.1 PROGRAMMES AND ACTIONS REVIEWED
The following programmes and actions are critically reviewed, with a focus on the barriers they are attempting
to overcome:
- Motor management policy.
- Improving availability of high efficiency motors at local stockists.
- Third party “ESCO” type contracts to keep motors running.
- Motor selection tools to identify candidate motors and cost effectiveness of replacement options.
- Over-coming the price premium for more efficient motors by offering financial rebates.
- Using a standard to drive forward energy management – ISO50001.
- Bringing it together – the Motor Decisions Matter campaign.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 15/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 11
3.3.2 MOTOR MANAGEMENT POLICY
Motor Management Policy is the term used to describe a formalised procedure for deciding what actions to
take when a new motor is to be purchased or an existing motor fails. They were originally devised and
promoted by motor manufacturers in order to sell higher efficiency motors, and have since also been
promoted by many independent energy saving organisations. The primary objectives of this are to:
- Ensure that all new motors are purchased to the agreed procurement specification. This will include
the motors that are bought as part of OEM equipment, which typically comprise the bulk of motors
bought;
- Ensure that on failure, the optimum action is taken to maximise reliability and minimise lifetime
energy costs;
At the heart of a Motor Management Policy is usually a simple payback analysis that develops a simple policy
tailored for each site.
FIGURE 7: MOTOR REPLACE:REPAIR CHART, BASED ON LIFECYCLE COSTS OF ENERGY (ABB)
FIGURE 8: EXAMPLE OF DECISION FLOW CHART (ABB MOTORS)
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 16/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 12
A successfully implemented motor management policy can lead to benefits additional to the apparent increase
in efficiency11
:
- Over-Sizing: At failure, there is the opportunity to replace the motor with one that is better sized for
the actual duty. This can both reduce the purchase price and may improve the efficiency, but the
actual new energy consumption depends on the detailed specifications of the motors beingconsidered. As a guide, the existing motor needs to be over-sized by at least a factor of two for this to
be worth considering. Care needs to be taken that the smaller motor can cope with peak loads that
may occur either in normal or abnormal operation, or at start-up.
- Customising of the motor at repair: Motor efficiency or torque can be adjusted to more closely match
the actual duty. But as with over-sizing, this requires measurements to be taken in advance of failure.
Starting torque should be carefully assessed, as this may require a larger motor than steady state
running would indicate.
- TCO minimized: The total costs of ownership for the motor will be reduced. It is not just the
purchasing price and installations costs that must be taken into account, but also the energy
consumption, production efficiency and maintenance costs.
- Predictive and preventative maintenance: Best practice is for predictive and preventative
maintenance to be used as the basis for minimising unplanned downtime and so planning actions in
advance of failure. Linking motor replace/repair actions to maintenance programmes can be very
effective for several reasons:
- Cost savings through the use of the motor maintenance inventory.
- The barrier of needing to make rapid decisions is removed if the action is pre-planned.
- The maintenance staff have a vested interest in minimal unplanned outages, and so will be
supportive of a plan that will also help to improve reliability.
A critical point is that different organisations will have different circumstances that lead to subtly different
policies. Some organisations may embrace the Motor Management Policy in detail, but most will read the
information and do some quick calculations to give their own internal guidance.
The Motor Management Programme adopted by a company can run from maintaining a simple inventory to
more complex systems. An inventory enables decisions to be made in advance of a motor failure, or by
providing quick access to all essential data for specification, enables a speedy decision to be made on failure.
This overcomes the barrier of selecting the repair option as the default if the detailed data to look for an
alternative is not available.
A simple inventory may be no more than the motor maintenance inventory, a more thorough one may include
indicative information on the duty. A detailed specification should include both basic nameplate information
and any special requirements such as starting torque / current requirements. Using this information, the
action at failure can be calculated. Ideally this can be recorded on the motor, or in accompanying
documentation, and might even include the part number for a replacement.
Although a motor management policy is company specific it can be incentivised by policies. An example is the
Swedish program for improving energy efficiency in energy intensive industries (PFE), which aims to increase
11 CEE, 2011. Motor Efficiency, Selection, and Management – A Guidebook for Industrial Efficiency Programs. Consortium
for Energy Efficiency, Washington. Available at: http://www.motorsmatter.org/tools/CEEMotorGuidebook.pdf
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 17/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 13
the energy efficiency in energy intensive industries. The PFE has a focus on electricity consumption and offers
an exemption on taxes raised on industrial process-related electricity as an incentive. Participating companies
are to obtain certification for a standardised energy management system. Results of an energy review include
a list of measures that are to be implemented in the following years. Moreover, companies must introduce
procedures for the purchasing of high consumption electrical equipment. An evaluation12
of the PFE, published
in 2012, indicates that 49% of realised savings are in the category “Production processes: large variety ofmeasures, often involves optimisation of motor-related” . The same study indicates that savings of the category
“Industrial Motors: installation of efficient motors, VSD control” amount to 4% of realised savings.
3.3.3 IMPROVING AVAILABILITY OF HIGH EFFICIENCY MOTORS AT LOCAL STOCKISTS
Many sites will keep a stock of spare critical motors, but not only does this involve an up-front cost, but the
motors require attention even while they are in storage: Occasional turning of the rotor is needed in order to
avoid bearing damage, and they may also require heater windings energising if there is the risk of
condensation. Using a local stockist to instead maintain stocks, which will also have a much higher turnover, is
therefore tempting.
However, a historical barrier was that the availability of high efficiency motors was often poor, and so unlessstocks were held “in house”, an arrangement would be made whereby a local stockist would keep stocks of
motors that a particular site needed. Now that you can only buy high efficiency motors, this is no longer so
important. However, good local stock levels will still make it more tempting to purchase an immediate
replacement rather than waiting for a repair. Even the difference between immediate availability, a 2 hour
courier or next day delivery service can drive the decision.
Motor suppliers may be prepared to undertake a stock review for free, with the intention of better matching
the requirements and hence increasing sales.
3.3.4 THIRD PARTY “ESCO” TYPE CONTRACTS TO KEEP MOTORS RUNNING
This is where an outside organisation has a contract to maintain the company motors, ideally beingincentivised to undertake preventative and predictive maintenance. Where motors are critical to the
organisation, the payments to a third party can be thought of as an insurance policy to avoid unplanned
outages.
In many cases, such an arrangement could also be thought of as an ESCO that keeps the motors turning rather
than supplying energy, as many of the considerations governing performance are similar. For large sites a
contractor may actually be resident on site, ensuring prompt response and the development of a detailed
understanding of the site operation. 13
An important but sometimes hidden advantage of this is that the third party is paid to follow strict guidelines,
and so may suffer financially if it is influenced by other factors. By placing a Motor Management Policy at theheart of the contractual agreement, there is a much higher chance that this will be successfully implemented.
12 Stenqvist & Nilsson, 2012. Energy Efficiency in energy-intensive industries – an evaluation of the Swedish voluntary
agreement PFE.
13 Siemens, 2012. Long Term monitor management for higher plant availability. [Press Release] Available at:
http://www.siemens.com/press/en/pressrelease/?press=/en/pressrelease/2012/industry/drive-
technologies/idt2012034022.htm
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 18/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 14
3.3.5 MOTOR SELECTION TOOLS AND COST EFFECTIVENESS OF REPLACEMENT OPTIONS
Software tools, such as Motormaster14
and Eurodeem15
(see Figure 9), allow the user to look at the total costs
of ownership (TCO) of different motor repair/replace options. They allow for rapid evaluation of different
replace repair options, both for individual motors and even for the installed stock of motors at a site. This gives
the benefit of excellent visibility on the overall situation, and a traceable source of data and robust calculations
when presenting results to management. There are various reasons why these have not been widely used:
- These tools require a huge amount of effort to keep updated, as motor specifications change
continuously.
- It is very hard to put in representative prices, as these vary hugely depending on the buyer.
- Assessing the efficiency of an existing motor is often hard, as the nameplate may be hard to read
(painted over or removed), and if it has been repaired will not represent the true efficiency.
Some variants have a built in inventory where you can add the details of your site motors, so allowing for
optimisation of motor purchases for a whole site. This is powerful, but there is a data collection cost that
some sites will find prohibitive:
- It is very time consuming, and few organisations do this unless it is subsidised.
- All TCO analysis are based on understanding the annual operating load profile and time, the load
profile in particular which is hard to estimate without costly monitoring.
- It is obviously not possible to monitor a motor load when it is burnt out.
While the software may offer motors from a wide selection of sources, in practice organisations will contract
to buy from a single supplier in order to achieve best prices, and so the real life choice for a specifier is less and
hence simpler to comprehend.
In summary, the consensus is possibly that such tools are an interesting introduction for users, but are too
time consuming to use to the maximum of their potential.
14 US Department of Energy, 2010. MotorMaster+ Software. Available at:
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/tech_deployment/software_motormaster.html
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/tech_deployment/software_motormaster.html
15 EC Joint Research Centre – Institute for Energy and Transport, 2013. The EuroDeem Approach. Available at:
http://iet.jrc.ec.europa.eu/energyefficiency/eurodeem/basic-features
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 19/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 15
FIGURE 9 FLOW CHART SHOWING THE OPERATION OF EURODEEM MOTOR SELECTION TOOL, (MOTORMASTER USES IDENTICAL
METHODOLOGY)
In response to these barriers, simpler tools such as the cardboard slide rule have been popular. This tool gives
an estimate of the savings from fitting different motors, but without the flexibility or precision of software
tools. An example is given in Figure 10.
FIGURE 10: SIMPLE SLIDE RULE OFFERED AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO SOFTWARE PRODUCTS, PRODUCED FOR THE MOTOR DECISIONS
MATTER CAMPAIGN
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 20/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 16
3.3.6 OVER-COMING THE PRICE PREMIUM FOR MORE EFFICIENT MOTORS BY OFFERING
FINANCIAL REBATES
Rebated for fitting more efficient motors encourage the purchase of new more efficient motors, with the value
only needing to meet the cost premium to be attractive. A variant is a motor scrappage scheme whereby old
motors are scrapped and new higher efficiency motors are installed instead.
These have been used in many countries, first Canada, then USA, and now European countries such as
Denmark and UK.
Key issues:
- Cost to User of claiming rebate should not be excessive.
- For best leverage of funds, the subsidy should be given to the producer rather than buyer.
- Schemes must be changed in line with changing motors regulations.
- All schemes should have a clearly defined duration, and should anyway cease once clear sale levels
have been reached.
These are of decreasing relevance given the high values of efficiency of new motors. However, in US there are
now rebates for the very high NEMA Premium efficiency level.
In addition to the greater marketing effort, a fixed amount of cash has a greater impact through being
magnified through the distributor margin. For example, if there is a 50% mark up between manufacturing cost
and retail price, then 1 euro given to the manufacturer could convert to a 1.5 euros reduction in the retail
price.
3.3.1 USING A STANDARD TO DRIVE FORWARD ENERGY MANAGEMENT – ISO50001
Including the use of a Motor Management Policy as part of a wider Energy Management Policy is a common
measure recommended by consultants, although it is unclear how closely it is followed in practice.
The idea of using this ISO50001 standard to drive forward energy management is a “hot topic”, and so should
be considered carefully. The Dutch programme16
is probably the most advanced in Europe, and explains in
some detail the mechanics of how this works. This gives a solid framework for the introduction of an Energy
Management system, which can include a motor management policy. It therefore raises the profile of Motor
Management policies, but does not automatically overcome the real world barriers to adhering closely to a
plan.
3.3.1 BRINGING IT TOGETHER – THE MOTOR DECISIONS MATTER CAMPAIGN
An example of an concerted approach that attempts to address most of the barriers to adoption, launched by
motor manufacturers and several energy efficiency organisations, is the US-based Motor Decisions Mattercampaign
17. This programme developed a sequence of questions that should be considered when tailoring a
Motor Management Policy to a particular organisation, critically giving flexibility in the approach needed. This
enhances the likelihood of adoption of and adherence to a plan by devising it to match to the particular
16 http://www.motorsummit.ch/data/files/MS_2012/presentation/ms12_van_werkhoven_update.pdf
17 See www.motorsmatter.com
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 21/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 17
circumstances of that organisation. Through a third party being more closely involved, they are themselves in
a position to help influence organisation behaviour to make it more likely that it will work as hoped.
A key aspect of the Motor Decisions Matter Campaign is that it is addressed at motor suppliers or repairers.
This overcomes the difficulty of communicating directly with end users, and gives better value for money by
leveraging effort through an intermediary.
FIGURE 11: MOTOR DECISIONS MATTER CAMPAIGN SUGGESTED SEQUENCE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE SUPPLIER TO ASK WHEN
ESTABLISHING A MOTOR MANAGEMENT POLICY
3.4 BEST PRACTICE IN SELECTION AND DESIGN OF POLICY OPTIONS FOR ENCOURAGING
EARLY REPLACEMENT OF MOTORS
Reviewing the outcomes of examples of the schemes listed, the following points should be considered when
devising new schemes:
Changes in the market. Promotional schemes should be trying to grow the market for products that are
better than the norm. But as soon as the product being promoted becomes popular, or indeed becomes
regulated as a mandatory MEPS, then the programme is no longer needed. So for example, promotions of IE3
motors must end once or just before IE3 becomes the MEPS.
Budget for the programme. Both suppliers and users alike must understand the budget and duration of the
programme. This allows for planning by giving some certainty of the future.
Simplicity of claims. Financial rebates must be made sufficiently simple to complete, otherwise smaller
organisations with only a low total claim may see it as being too much effort to participate.
Adequate publicity. The importance of the credibility that comes from the independence of Government
organisations should not be underestimated. Government publicity also gives confidence to suppliers involved
in the scheme that there is whole-hearted support, and so encourages further supplier engagement.
Targeting of users. Where they are known, limited budget should be used to target those most likely to makethe change, and those who can save the most carbon or money as a result of the changing practices. Giving
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 22/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 18
incentives to the manufacturer or supplier may give better results than giving them direct to the end user. It ’s
easier because there are fewer people to influence, suppliers can subtly alter messages to match the needs of
each user, and the margins that each stage in the route to market makes means there is a gearing effect on the
value of the money to the user.
Keeping things simple. It can be tempting to provide lots of detailed information, but care must be taken toensure a focus is kept on the key messages. If the decision is made too complicated, then people are unlikely
to digest and act on it.
Avoiding unplanned failure. Maintenance and reliability is usually of more interest on a site, and so focusing
on motor repair may be a good option for winning attention.
Keeping materials up to date. Databases and promotional programme web-sites need to be maintained in
order to be up to date and keep their relevance. The ongoing cost of this may be substantial, and so must be
budgeted for at project initiation.
Motor energy savings are invisible in that, even a site wide change out will only give a modest change in
measured power. Furthermore, an individual high efficiency motor may draw more current than the one it
replaces due to the higher speed that it runs at, but if properly controlled then the energy will still be less. So
assessing the actual gain in efficiency may be hard.
Free-riders. Free-riders are those organisations who take some form of benefit from a programme, but who
would actually have undertaken the action anyway without the programme. The proportion of expected free-
riders should be estimated and costed into the programme. As beneficiaries become converted to the new
practices, they too become free-riders, and so over time the programme will attract more and more dead
weight.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 23/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 19
4 CURRENT EU POLICY FRAMEWORKS
In this chapter we will assess whether or not current EU policy framework offer opportunities for energy
efficiency improvement by accelerated uptake of more efficient motors. .
There are a number of current directives that aim directly or indirectly at improving energy efficiency of
operations. These are:
- The Ecodesign Directive
- The Energy Efficiency Directive
- The Industrial Emissions Directive
- The Emissions Trading Directive
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 24/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 20
4.1 ECODESIGN DIRECTIVE
First introduction: 2005, extension to energy related products in 2009.
Demands on Electric Motors starting 2011.
Current status: Ongoing
Expected update:
Geographical scope: EU27
Legislator: EU directive, implementation by national governments
Responsible agency: National competent authorities
Objective: Ecodesign aims to reduce products’ environmental impacts during the complete lifecycle. It
seeks to reach this objective by phasing out non energy efficient products and stimulate
investment in energy efficient technologies. So called ‘implementing measures’ set mandatory
requirements for specific products.
Participation: Mandatory
Electric Motors: Specific requirements for electric motors
Energy Efficiency or Fuel
Switching Targets:
Estimated annual savings by the Implementing Measure on Electric Motors is 135 TWh/a by
2020. Estimated accumulated savings amount to 657 TWh by 2020.
16 June 2011: minimum IE2 efficiency for all motors 0.75 – 375 kW1 January 2015: minimum IE3 efficiency or IE2+VSD for motors 7.5 – 375 kW
1 January 2017: minimum IE3 efficiency or IE2+VSD for motors 0.75 – 375 kW
Demands change of: Motor manufacturers: minimum motor efficiency requirements.
Results of Evaluation: 2012 EcoDesign evaluation:
- About a third of original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) are unaware of
forthcoming requirements
- Seems unlikely that the phasing out of IE1 motors would happen without EcoDesign
requirements.
- US and Canada introduced IE3 requirements in 2010 and IE3 motors have a market
share of 39% in Canada. Implying the EU targets are rather relaxed.
The subject matter and scope of the Ecodesign Directive (2009/125/EC) is described in Article 1. Important forexisting motors is the following:
‘This Directive establishes a framework for the setting of Community Ecodesign requirements for
energy-related products with the aim of ensuring the free movement of such product within the
internal market’ (Art. 1.1).
‘This Directive provides for the setting of requirements which the energy-related products covered by
implementing measures must fulfil in order to be placed on the market and /or put into service.’ (Art.
1.2).
‘Ecodesign requirements’ can be
Generic: any Ecodesign requirement based on the ecological profile as a whole of a product without
set limit values for particular environmental aspects’ (Art. 2.25)
Specific: ‘a quantified and measurable Ecodesign requirement relating to a particular aspect of a
product, such as energy consumption during use, calculated for a given unit of output performance’
(Art. 2.26)
Furthermore, conformity to Ecodesign requirements is shown by affixing CE marking before placement of a
product on the market and/or putting it into service and issuing a EC declaration of conformity (Art. 5).
When products are examined for legislation, criteria from Art. 15 are applied. Relevant for our purpose are:
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 25/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 21
The product shall represent a significant volume of sales and trade, indicatively more than 200 000
units a year within the Community (Art. 15.2a).
The product shall represent significant potential for improvement in terms of its environmental
impact without entailing excessive costs (Art. 15.2c).
There shall be no significant negative impact on industry’s competitiveness.
These few articles from the Ecodesign Directive show that the Directive is not designed to cover products
already in place. Even though the word ‘new’ is not explicitly mentioned, the whole framework assumes it to
related to new products that are put on the market with a certain volume. Manufacturers and importers are
responsible for ensuring conformity. It should be noted that any Ecodesign requirements on new motors apply
to all motors manufactured in and imported into the EU, whereas any requirements on existing motors would
apply only in the EU.
Voluntary agreements (VA)
The Ecodesign Directive dictates that ‘priority should be given to alternative courses of action such as self -
regulation by the industry where such action is likely to deliver the policy objectives faster or in a less costly
manner than mandatory requirements.’
Nine criteria for self-regulation are laid down in Annex VIII. The Commission also published the second draft of
its ‘Guidelines on the self-regulation measures concluded by industry under the Ecodesign Directive
2009/125/EC’18
. These guidelines are much more specific than the first draft and than the Directive itself. For
example, the Ecodesign Annex VIII Criterion ‘Industry and their associations taking part in a self-regulatory
action must represent a large majority of the relevant economic sector’ is translated into a requirement of
market coverage of at least 70%.
An Ecodesign VA is a replacement of legislation. It is therefore closely monitored by the Commission and
stakeholders. In case of failure of the VA, legislation will follow after all.
The fact that possible legislation will follow in case of failure is a stick for showing some ambition and
complying to the VA rules by industry. However, many stakeholders are sceptical on the ambitions of the VAs
in development and implemented thus far (a VA on complex settop boxes is endorsed by the Commission, a
VA on imaging equipment is awaiting endorsement). The final word has not been said about this.
Opportunities for accelerated uptake for high efficiency motors
We see no opportunities to use the Ecodesign Directive to enhance the implementation rate of high efficiency
motors, as the Directive is completely designed around products that are available on the market. It doesn’t
offer any possibility to enforce decisions within a company.
18 Draft guidelines from Jan. 22nd. 2013.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 26/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 22
4.2 ENERGY EFFICIENCY DIRECTIVE
First introduction: 2012
Current status: Ongoing
Expected update: June 2014, reporting of EC on whether national energy efficiency targets and implantation
plans are sufficient to reach the EU’s target.
Geographical scope: EU27
Legislator: EU directive stipulating requirements for by national regulation
Responsible agency: National competent authorities
Objective: The directive aims to bridge the gap between current policies and the required policies to
achieve the 20% energy efficiency target as set by the EU. The directive affects the whole
energy system, from supply via transformation and distribution to energy consumption. As
national implementation measures are to be presented by April 2013 the exact implantation is
unknown as of now. Key measures of the directive, potentially related to electric motors, are
an obligation on energy suppliers to deliver an annual 1.5% energy saving among end-users
and a requirement for energy audits and management.
Participation: Mandatory, exact implementation not yet known.
Electric Motors: Not specific
Energy Efficiency or Fuel
Switching Targets:
20% improvement in the EU’s energy efficiency, of which the Energy Efficiency Directive
contributes 15%.
(20% target: EU energy consumption of no more than 1 474 Mtoe of primary energy and/or no
more than 1 078 Mtoe of final energy in 2020)
Demands change of: Industry, Manufactures, Energy supply and other energy consumers.
Results of Evaluation: Evaluation scheduled for
Upcoming Related
Activities/Issues:
April 2013 Member states report on achieved progress on setting national energy
efficiency targets and implementation plans
April 2014 Member states submit national energy efficiency action plans. This occurs
every three years thereafter.
June 2014 Reporting of EC on sufficiency of national targets and implementation plans.
December
2015
EC review of effectiveness of the implementation of Article 6: purchasing of
high energy efficiency products, services, housing by central governments.June 2016 Reporting of EC on the implementation of Article 7: energy efficiency
obligation schemes
June 2018 EC assessment on the progress made by member states on removing the
regulatory and non-regulatory barriers to energy efficiency.
The commission proposed the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED) as it estimated that it would fall short by 11%
for the target of a 20% reduction of energy use of the EU in 2020. The target is defined as a maximum of 1474
Mtoe primary energy of 1078 Mtoe final energy consumption in 2020. The energy savings gap with current
policies is 190 MToe.
Although the EU 2020 target on energy use is the overarching objective of the EED the targets are set atnational levels:
1. National indicative targets. The MS have to set their own national indicative targets for energy
efficiency improvement by April 2014. The Commission will assess whether all national indicative
targets are sufficient to achieve the EU 2020 objective. If not, further legislative actions can be
proposed.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 27/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 23
2. National binding target for end use savings. A general binding target to deliver 1.5% cumulative
annual energy end use savings19
. Cumulative means that in year one 1.5% savings have to be
achieved, in year two 3% and so on. The energy companies must fulfil this target.
These targets are very general and do as such not provide a way to set very specific targets for the
replacement of electric motors. The EED contains several articles that might give an opening for influencingthe rate of uptake of efficient motors. We will review them one by one:
Article 4: Building renovation. This article requires member states to develop a long-term strategy for
mobilizing building renovations, both commercial and public, with the aim to improve the energy performance
of buildings. This is potentially very promising as it can induce a scale up of the market of energy efficient
building renovation. The long term strategy should include, amongst others:
Identification of cost effective approaches to renovation relevant to building type an climate zone
(article 3b);
Polices and measures to stimulate cost-effective deep renovations of buildings, including staged deep
renovations (article 3c).
Those two sub articles offer the opportunity to be very specific about the implementation of efficient motors
and drives used in buildings, mainly for HVAC purposes. The accelerated uptake of motors can go along with
the renovation strategy. However, this article is not specific about energy performance targets or
implementation rate. In fact this article is only asking national governments to give a clear signal to investors
that this market will be scaled up.
The member states shall publish a first version of the strategy by 30 April 2014 and update it every three years.
The strategy is part of the National Energy Efficiency Action Plan (see later).
Article 5: Exemplary role of public bodies’ buildings. This article does set a target and pace for the improvement
of the energy performance of buildings, albeit for a specific sector, namely of buildings owned and occupied by
central government.
The main requirements of this Article are as follows:
From 1 January 2014, 3% of the floor space of buildings owned and occupied by central government
that are over 500m2 must be renovated to meet EPBD minimum energy performance standards.
From 9 July 2015 this expands to cover buildings of this type when they are over 250m2.
The lowest performing buildings must be prioritized where possible.
An inventory of the buildings covered by this obligation and their performance must be published by
1 January 2014, so for each country we will know what the scope of the annual obligation is.
The EPBD minimum energy performance standards don’t articulate what type of motor should be used. The
EPBD gives some flexibility in the type of measures to be implemented as long as the minimum energy
performance is achieved. It is up to the member states to be more specific about standards.
19 It is the first time a binding energy saving target for member states is set. Before that only an indicative energy efficiency
target of 1% per year for the period 2007-2016 had been in place with the Energy Service Directive of 2006.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 28/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 24
Article 6: Purchasing by public bodies. This article enforces that central governments only purchase high-
efficiency products. For motors this has already be ensured by the Ecodesign directive.
Article 7: Energy Efficiency Obligation Schemes. This article states that each Member State shall oblige its
energy distributors and/or energy sales companies to achieve a new energy savings target of 1.5% each year in
the period 1/1/14 to 31/12/20. The member states shall set up an energy efficiency obligation scheme (EEO) todo so. EEO’s have been used in certain EU countries since 2013, so quite some experience has been gained
with it. The key steps to an EEO are to set a target, to set out the rules for determining the energy savings and
to have procedures for monitoring and verifying that these measures have in fact been installed. EEO can
contain a form of trading the energy savings, these are often referred to as white certificates.
EEO have been particularly used for promoting energy efficiency for households and small enterprises. As the
potential for energy efficient motors does not lie specifically in these sectors, it might be questioned whether
EEO offer an opportunity for implementing efficient motors. However, a recent Danish evaluation shows that
EEO is not only restricted to the smaller consumers but also that half of the savings are achieved in the
industry and trade sector, see Figure 12.
FIGURE 12: RECORDED ENERGY SAVINGS PER SECTOR IN DENMARK, 2006 TO 200820
EEO can act as a vehicle to deliver energy services. The energy company or third party can provide energy
services to a company in the form of taking away concerns about investment and maintenance risks. In fact,
this is what some motor suppliers already offer. EEOs can be used for the accelerated uptake of efficient
motors, in all sectors. The potential is quite significant and can therefore contribute to a large extent to the
energy savings target of the energy company. For the energy company it can be effective to team up with a
motor supplier so that it doesn’t need to keep the motors in stock itself.
The costs of EEOs have been shown to be relatively low. The Danish evaluation showed that EEOs are one of
the most cost-effective instruments to achieve energy savings. The costs for purchase and implementation of
energy efficiency measures should be in the first place be incurred or subsidized by the energy company. They
20 IEADSM, 2012, Implementing Energy Efficiency Obligation Schemes
Residential
sector
42%
Public sector
8%
Trade and
Industries
50%
Energy Savings in Denmark 2006-2008 (7117 TJ)
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 29/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 25
can earn back these costs by a premium on the electricity price or by specifying electricity savings on the
energy bill. Another option is to install a revolving fund for energy savings.
There are still many hurdles to be overcome for a further roll out of EEOs. These hurdles have to do with
monitoring and verification, ensuring a transparent market, cost allocation and effect on the energy price and
synergies with other energy efficiency policies.
Article 8: Energy audits and energy management systems. MS shall promote the availability of high quality
energy audits21
to all final consumers. The minimum criteria for energy audits are given in Annex VI to the
Directive and include:
Guidelines on the level of detail of the energy consumption data, load profile, the energy
performance and the opportunities for improvement
Guidelines to use life-cycle costs analysis instead of simple pay-back time to calculate the profitability
of measures
Energy audits should allow detailed and validated calculations for the proposed measures so as to
provide clear information on overall savings.
These criteria – although still vague - can make the energy audits to be more favourable for replacement of
electric motors. Since 95% of the costs of electric motors are made during the use phase, the guideline of using
life-cycle costs is particularly advantageous.
There is a difference per sector to what extent energy audits are obligatory:
Large companies must undertake energy audits every 4 years (with their first within 3 years from the
Directive coming into force in spring 2014); and
Audits must be promoted to small and medium sized companies. The benefits of energy management
system should also be promoted.
Audits must also be promoted to households.
Audits should take into account relevant European or International Standards such as EN ISO 50001 (Energy
Management) or EN 16247-1 (Energy Audits) or if including an energy audit EN ISO 14000 (Environmental
Management) and also be in line with the requirements in the technical annexes of the Directive. Training
programmes to ensure there are sufficient expert auditors should also be encouraged.
The International Standards are very much focussed on the organisation of energy management and less on
the specific measures. Compliance with the ISO standards as such does provide little opportunity for
accelerated uptake of electric motors. The risk is that energy audits will not be specific enough to facilitate the
replacement of motors.
Currently the models for calculating the life-cycle costs of motor replacement are not easy-to-use and require
the input of specific data. A motor expert is able to use this model, but an energy auditor, being more general
in training, will in general lack the knowledge. This can be resolved in two ways: (1) provide specific training to
energy auditors to use the models; (2) make the models easier to use. As training all energy auditors is an
expensive operation, the copper institute can better focus on the second option.
21 An Energy Audit is defined as a systematic procedure with the purpose of obtaining adequate knowledge of the existing
energy consumption profile of a building or group of buildings, an industrial or commercial operation or installation or a
private or public service, identifying and quantifying cost-effective energy savings opportunities, and reporting the findings.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 30/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 26
Article 18: Energy services. Delivering energy services – i.e. the useful outcome of using energy – instead of
purely energy is a way to bring energy efficiency to the market. Companies delivering energy services, so-
called ESCO’s, exist already but so far market conditions and the legislative framework were not supportive for
successful business models. Article 18 prompts MS to promote the energy services markets and access for
SME’s to this market . The article stipulates various instruments for MS focussing on how and what kind of
information should be disseminated.
A crucial part of the delivery of an energy service is the energy performance contract (EPC), of which a
definition is given in article 222
. The MS have to provide model contracts and best practices, the minimum
requirements given in Annex XIII to the Directive. The MS are also supposed to remove regulatory and non-
regulatory barriers that impede the uptake of EPC and other energy efficiency service models.
In the previous chapter we have shown that several motor suppliers and local stockists have delivered energy
services in the form of motor management programs but with limited success so far. This might change if the
requirements in this article are successfully implemented by the member states. However, the article still
leaves room for flexibility in actions. For instance, MS can argue that they have taken away barriers to the
uptake of EPC but the non-functioning market is out of their power to influence.
What is required is that EPC models and examples of best practices on energy efficiency improvements by
providing motor services are developed. These models and best practices can be disseminated by the MS as
part of their implementation of article 18.
22 Energy performance contracting is defined as a contractual arrangement, between the beneficiary and the provider of an
energy efficiency improvement measure, verified and monitored during the whole term of the contract, where
investments in that measure are paid in relation to a contractually agreed level of energy efficiency improvement or other
agreed energy performance criterion, such as financial savings.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 31/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 27
4.3 INDUSTRIAL EMISSIONS DIRECTIVE
First introduction: 2010, National implementation by January 2013
Current status: Ongoing
Expected update: The EC has 12 months (until January 2014) to evaluate the national implementation plans and
raise objections.
Geographical scope: EU27
Legislator: EU directive with implementation by national governments
Responsible agency: National competent authorities
Objective: Avoidance or minimisation of polluting emissions to atmosphere, water and soil as well as
waste from industrial and agricultural installations. The directive establishes a permit
procedure and requirements that have to be met by industrial activities with a major pollution
potential. Industrial installations carrying out the activities mentioned in Appendix I of the
directive must meet basic obligations:
- preventive measures are taken against pollution;
- the best available techniques (BAT) are applied;
- no significant pollution is caused;
- waste is reduced, recycled or disposed of in the manner which creates least
pollution;- energy efficiency is maximised;
- accidents are prevented and their impact limited;
- sites are remediated when the activities come to an end.
Participation: Mandatory for activities as defined in Annex I of the directive.
Electric Motors: Not specific
Energy Efficiency or Fuel
Switching Targets:
Best Available Techniques (BATs) are to be applied and energy efficiency is to maximised.
(Reference Document on Best Available Techniques for Energy Efficiency, 2009)
Demands change of: Industrial installations as defined in Annex I of the directive.
Results of Evaluation: Not available
Upcoming Related
Activities/Issues:
The objective of the Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) is to avoid or minimise polluting emissions of industrial
and agricultural installations by establishing a permit procedure, to be implemented by the MS, based on
BREF23
. The IED is a recast of the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) directive.
The IED targets Industrial activities with a major pollution potential (energy industries, production and
processing of metals, mineral industry, chemical industry, waste management etc.). Industrial installations
must use the best available techniques to achieve a high general level of protection of the environment as a
whole, which are developed on a scale which allows implementation in the relevant industrial sector, under
economically and technically viable conditions. The European Commission must adopt BAT conclusions
containing the emission levels associated with the BAT. These conclusions shall serve as a reference for thedrawing up of permit conditions. Industrial activities can only operate if they have a permit. The emission of
greenhouse gases as regulated by the Emission Trading Directive, are excluded from the scope of the IED.
As the IED regulated emissions to the environment and during the use phase of electric motors no substances
are emitted to the environment, this Directive doesn’t provide any prospect to directly influence the
regulation on the implementation of energy efficient motors. Even indirect influence, via the electricity price,
is missing, as the emissions of CO2 of power plants is exempted.
23 BREF= Best Available Technologies Reference reports.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 32/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 28
Member States have the possibility to set regulations on energy efficiency in the environmental permit for
non-ETS installations. Improving the efficiency of motor systems can be part of the permit. It should be
realised, however, monitoring and verification of these permits is costly and requires specific knowledge of the
auditor.
Emission Trading Directive
First introduction: 2008,
Current status: Ongoing
Expected update: Currently a discussion on the reform is ongoing as the carbon market price is too low to drive
investments. Opponents to the reform argue that the systems is exactly doing what it should,
since emissions are below the cap. Current trading period runs until 2020 after which an
update is required anyhow.
Geographical scope: EU27
Legislator: EU directive with implementation by national governments
Responsible agency: National competent authorities
Objective: Reduce the CO2-emissions by putting a cap at CO2 emissions of large industrial installations.
Emissions above benchmarks should be avoided by reduction measures or be compensated bybuying allowances on the market.
Participation: Mandatory for activities as defined in Annex I of the directive.
Electric Motors: Not specific
Energy Efficiency or Fuel
Switching Targets:
No specific targets. It is left to the companies to decide whether to buy allowances or reduce
GHG emissions reduction by e.g. improving energy efficiency or fuel switching.
Demands change of: Industrial installations as defined in Annex I of the directive.
Results of Evaluation: Not available
Upcoming Related
Activities/Issues:
See expected update
The EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) is one of the most important building blocks of the European climate
policy. The intention is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions cost-effectively by capping the total emissions and
allowing trading under this cap between the participants. By tightening the gap over the years the total
emissions will be 21% lower than in 2005. The market would determine a price for carbon, bringing investment
decisions on GHG abatement to the board rooms, at least that was the idea.
However, currently the number of allowances exceeds the actual emissions. One of the reasons for this is the
falling production of many industrial sectors due to the economic crisis. The current price is so low that it
doesn’t induce additional low carbon technologies to be implemented. The EC has proposed a number of
measures to reform the carbon market and is consulting stakeholders about this right now. The debate
between allies and opponents is polarized and an outcome is not to be expected soon. That will probably
mean that the carbon price stays low for a while.
As ETS is the regulatory framework to encourage investments in energy efficiency in a large part of the
industry, including energy efficient motors, the low carbon price means this industry has no extra impetus to
invest in energy efficiency. Some MS, like the UK, have circumvented this by setting a floor price for carbon, to
be levied as a carbon tax for instance.
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 33/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 29
4.4 CONCLUSIONS
Table 2 summarizes the conclusions of this chapter. In the next chapter we will elaborate on the actions.
TABLE 2: REVIEW OF THE EU DIRECTIVES THAT MIGHT GIVE A FRAMEWORK TO ACCELERATE THE UPTAKE OF EFFICIENT MOTORS
EcoDesignDirective
Energy EfficiencyDirective
Industrial EmissionDirective
Emission TradingDirective
Objective
To reduce
products’
environmental
impacts during the
complete lifecycle.
The directive aims
to bridge the gap
between current
policies and the
required policies
to achieve the 20%
energy efficiency
target as set by the
EU.
Avoidance or
minimisation of
polluting emissions
to atmosphere,
water and soil as
well as waste from
industrial and
agricultural
installations.
Reduce the CO2-
emissions by
putting a cap at
CO2 emissions of
large industrial
installations.
Type of instruments
Minimum energy
performancerequirements of
products
Mix of
instruments,implementation
left to member
states
Best Available
Technologiesrequirements for
emissions
reduction
Market based
mechanism
Potential direct effect
on the efficiency of
motors
Large for new
motors, limited for
early replacement
Via energy audits,
energy efficiency
obligation schemes
and energy
services
Energy efficiency
can be an integral
part of the
environmental
permit issued by
the MS
No direct effect.
Carbon price
should induce
investments in
energy efficiency
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 34/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 30
5 APPENDIX I – METHODOLOGY ON ESTIMATING SAVINGS
The estimated savings are based upon the assumptions and implementation of the EcoDesign Directive. This
directive puts minimum efficiency requirement on newly sold electric motors and is thus defining a baseline onmotor efficiency within Europe in the coming years. The preparatory study
24 and impact assessment
25 contain
the assumptions, market data and methodology used to estimate the impact and potential savings of the
EcoDesign directive. Most of the underlying assumptions and market data have been used to estimate the
savings as incorporated in this report.
5.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND DATA
5.1.1 MOTOR DATA
TABLE 5-1: MOTOR SIZE, LIFETIME AND EFFICIENCY (SOURCES: IEC 60023-20, CEMEP, EUP LOT 11 MOTORS)
Motor Size LifetimeEfficiency
IE1
Efficiency
IE2
Efficiency
IE3
Efficiency
EFF3
Efficiency
EFF2
Efficiency
EFF1
1.1 kW 12 years 75.0% 81.4% 84.1% 72.0% 76.2% 83.8%
11 kW 15 years 87.6% 89.8% 91.4% 84.0% 88.4% 91.0%
110 kW 20 years 93.3% 94.3% 95.4% 89.0% 93.9% 95.0%
Operating characteristics:
Load factor of 60%
Operating hours of 4000h/annum
Variable Speed Drive (VSD) characteristics:
Efficiency: 95%
Efficiency gains on motor stock: 20% (assuming applicability to 2/3 of motors, savings achieved in
motor(driven) systems)
Source of VSD characteristics: EUP Lot 11 Motors, EC ecodesign impact assessment electric motors)
5.1.2 MARKET DATA
TABLE 5-2: EU MOTOR PARK AND ANNUAL SALES (SOURCE: EC ECODESIGN IMPACT ASSESSMENT ELECTRIC MOTORS)
1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025
EU Motor Park[1000 units]
72,282 79,868 87,455 96,173 106,468 116,446 123,933 130,344
24 de Alemeida, et al., 2008. EUP Lot 11 Motors. ISR – University of Coimbra
25 EC, 2009. Full Impact Assessment (regard to ecodesign requirements for electric motors). SEC(2009)1014
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 35/36
Publication No Cu0188
Issue Date: September 2013
Page 31
EU Sales[1000 units]
6,719 7,351 7,983 8,993 9,899 10,394 10,850 11,540
5.2 ANNUAL SAVINGS
5.2.1 INTERPOLATION OF ANNUAL SALES
Annual electric motor sales were given for every 5 years in the period 1990 to 2025. The growth in motor sales
over 2010-2025 has been used to interpolate sales to a yearly bases.
( )
5.2.2 STANDARD MOTOR
A standard motor is derived from the motor data and market share of both efficiency and motor size classes,
this is based upon the EUP Lot 11 motor study. The efficiency of a standard motor with an IE1 class efficiency is
for example 76.7% and has a lifetime of 12.44 years. Such a standard motor is derived by the summing up the
multiplication of motor characteristics with the applicable market share, see Table 5-3 for an example on an
IE1 efficiency motor.
TABLE 5-3: EXAMPLE, DERIVING A STANDARD MOTOR
Motor 1.1 kW 11 kW 110 kW3. (standard
motor)
IE1 Efficiency 75.0% 87.6% 93.3% 76.7%
Lifetime 12 years 15 years 20 years 12.44 years
Market Share 87.0% 12.0% 1.0%
5.2.3 ELECTRICITY SAVINGS
The electricity consumption is calculated for the standard motor, taking motor efficiency class into account.
Total annual electricity consumption is calculated by multiplying the standard motor’s annual electricityconsumption with the amount of motors. To estimate the savings of the dissemination of more efficient
motors the annual electricity consumption of newly sold motors is calculated for the standard efficiency and
high efficiency. The difference between these are the estimated savings as the amount of sold motors
determines the replacement rate of electric motors.
To account for a slower or faster pace of high efficiency motor dissemination in the market, motor lifetimes
can be varied. In the estimations this factor is accounted for by increasing or decreasing the annual motor
sales for shorter or longer motor lifetimes respectively. The increase or decrease of annual sales is achieved
by:
() ()
7/25/2019 Accelerated Up Take Electric l
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/accelerated-up-take-electric-l 36/36
As an example: if motor lifetimes are prolonged by two years this will decrease annual sales by 16%, which in
turn reduces the amount of high efficient motors replacing existing stock.
5.2.4 AVOIDED CO2 EMISSIONS
The amount of avoided CO2 emissions are estimated by multiplying the electricity savings with an EU average
emission factor on electricity generation. The used emission factor is 0.465 tCO2 per MWhe consumed.
top related