Green means integration, not just energy efficiency

As energy prices head for the stars and American businesses contract green fever, it’s tempting to overly focus on energy savings as a driver for greening your plants.


As energy prices head for the stars and American businesses contract green fever, it’s tempting to overly focus on energy savings as a driver for greening your plants.

Yes, energy provides a tangible, measurable benefit to businesses and the environment when it is wisely consumed and managed. Using less energy (i.e., that which comes from coal, natural gas and oil) reduces emissions and extraction impacts on the environment. Yes, reducing our dependency on oil and natural gas imports increases energy security. And, yes, using less energy reduces operating costs and makes future O&M budgets less sensitive to fuel-price fluctuations.

However, green buildings are more about integrated solutions than single-issue resolution. In a drive to reduce energy, we stand to repeat the mistakes of the 1970s, when fresh-air inlets were jammed shut with 2x4s; when every other light was turned off; when thermostats were turned down so low during the heating season and too high during the cooling season that people got uncomfortable (and unruly). In striving to resolve those energy problems, we created the sick building problem, and as a result we spent much of the 80s and 90s confronting mold, VOCs and comfort complaints.

As green fever spreads deeper into the manufacturing industry, plant engineers are going to be increasingly called to the table when facility decisions are being planned. At least, that’s supposedly the blueprint of green building processes %%MDASSML%% to involve operators and facility engineers earlier in construction and renovation projects to result in more realistic designs and to empower operating staffs with training and resources to maintain high levels of building performance. Therefore, your voice will be critical for averting critical mistakes that could be made for the best of intentions.

So, if a drive for energy savings, under the banner of greening your facility or as a retrocommissioning effort, could result in measures that would result in a sick building, then you need to say something. Productivity could be worsened. Absenteeism could increase. Morale could be impacted, leading to increased churn among workers. And, taken to the extreme, lawsuits could be filed if health or safety is impacted to the point where one or more workers feels justified in pursuing recourse.

In the face of such a situation, plant engineers need to remind project teams that saving energy could save money on one end, but cost a lot more on the other. It’s important to remind them that relevant standards for indoor air quality and comfort need to be maintained. Remind project teams that in some cases, improving a facility could result in higher energy costs. For example, if a system was improperly designed or installed such that required cooling or heating were not being provided, and, when corrected, more energy was consumed. Such instances need to result in new baselines for energy consumption, against which future energy-conservation measures would be compared.

And, of course, when called to the table, it’s important to have your shortlist of energy-saving measures ready. And your list of water-saving measures, IAQ-improvement measures and measures for decreasing liquid and solid wastes, use of pesticides and harsh cleaning agents, etc. Being a model of “integrated solutions” would walk the triple-bottom-line that the greenies talk so much about, i.e., green buildings being good for people, the environment and for business.

Author Information

Michael Ivanovich is chief editor of Consulting-Specifying Engineer, a sister publication of Plant Engineering. A veteran in the buildings industry who focuses on HVAC, green buildings and controls, he served as chief editor of HPAC Engineering for 10 years before joining CSE and also spent time as a research scientist in the fields of indoor-air quality, energy efficiency and information technology for Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and other research institutions.

No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Engineering Leaders Under 40 program identifies and gives recognition to young engineers who...
A cool solution: Collaboration, chemistry leads to foundry coat product development; See the 2015 Product of the Year Finalists
Raising the standard: What's new with NFPA 70E; A global view of manufacturing; Maintenance data; Fit bearings properly
Sister act: Building on their father's legacy, a new generation moves Bales Metal Surface Solutions forward; Meet the 2015 Engineering Leaders Under 40
Cyber security cost-efficient for industrial control systems; Extracting full value from operational data; Managing cyber security risks
Drilling for Big Data: Managing the flow of information; Big data drilldown series: Challenge and opportunity; OT to IT: Creating a circle of improvement; Industry loses best workers, again
Pipeline vulnerabilities? Securing hydrocarbon transit; Predictive analytics hit the mainstream; Dirty pipelines decrease flow, production—pig your line; Ensuring pipeline physical and cyber security
Upgrading secondary control systems; Keeping enclosures conditioned; Diagnostics increase equipment uptime; Mechatronics simplifies machine design
Designing positive-energy buildings; Ensuring power quality; Complying with NFPA 110; Minimizing arc flash hazards
Building high availability into industrial computers; Of key metrics and myth busting; The truth about five common VFD myths

Annual Salary Survey

After almost a decade of uncertainty, the confidence of plant floor managers is soaring. Even with a number of challenges and while implementing new technologies, there is a renewed sense of optimism among plant managers about their business and their future.

The respondents to the 2014 Plant Engineering Salary Survey come from throughout the U.S. and serve a variety of industries, but they are uniform in their optimism about manufacturing. This year’s survey found 79% consider manufacturing a secure career. That’s up from 75% in 2013 and significantly higher than the 63% figure when Plant Engineering first started asking that question a decade ago.

Read more: 2014 Salary Survey: Confidence rises amid the challenges

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.