Pepsi Beverages Company -...

2010

LEEDS SCHOOL of BUSINESS TEAMLee Allaire

Eric Bartram Makenzie BrykDaniel Grant

OPIM 4850 – CapstoneJim Marlatt 12/13/2010

Leeds School of Business: Project Management Team

Pepsi Beverages CompanyElectrical Conservation Project

Pepsi Beverages Company 2010


Table of ContentsProject Participants.....................................................................................................................................1

University of Colorado: Leeds School of Business...................................................................................1Pepsi Beverages Company (PBC).............................................................................................................1Pepsi Beverages Company (PBC) Continued............................................................................................2Mentor Contact Information...................................................................................................................2Energy Consultants..................................................................................................................................2Contractors/Manufacturers/Installers.....................................................................................................2

Project Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................3First Deliverable Updates............................................................................................................................5Swim Lane Diagram.....................................................................................................................................7Key Performance Indicators........................................................................................................................9

PBC’s Existing Indicators..........................................................................................................................9New Proposed Indicators........................................................................................................................9

Requisite Expenditures..............................................................................................................................11Production Awareness Plan - 2.34%......................................................................................................13

Maintenance Shutdown Process - 1.34%...............................................................................................13Motor Replacement Process - 0.10%.....................................................................................................14Ammonia Compressor Replacement.....................................................................................................15Compressed Air Awareness Plan - 0.90%...............................................................................................16Production Training Session..................................................................................................................16

Production Training Agenda..............................................................................................................16Dashboards............................................................................................................................................18

Office Awareness Plan - 0.63%..................................................................................................................19Purpose.................................................................................................................................................19Awareness Plan Outline.........................................................................................................................19Objective of Implementation.................................................................................................................19Establish Awareness Message...............................................................................................................20

Office Computers - 0.31%..................................................................................................................20Office Lights - 0.12%..........................................................................................................................20Office Refrigerators - 0.20%...............................................................................................................21

Distribute the Message..........................................................................................................................22Office Training Objective...................................................................................................................22Office Training Agenda......................................................................................................................22Employee Meetings...........................................................................................................................23Digital Screen Dashboard...................................................................................................................23Monitor Screen-Top Displays.............................................................................................................23Email Newsletter...............................................................................................................................23Create Monitoring Program...............................................................................................................24

Quick Wins – 5.64%...................................................................................................................................25Computer Automation - 0.20%..............................................................................................................25Office Refrigerators - 0.48%...................................................................................................................25Lighting Sensor Changes - 0.20%...........................................................................................................26Office Lighting Efficiency - 0.17%...........................................................................................................26Smart Thermostats - 0.04%...................................................................................................................27EnerNOC Sellback Program - 4.55%.......................................................................................................28

Capital Expenditures – 30.70%..................................................................................................................31


Kilovolt-Ampere- Reactance (KVAR) - 8.79%.........................................................................................31Battery Charger Replacement - 2.42%...................................................................................................32PowerSecure - 8.09%.............................................................................................................................32Variable Frequency Drives - 9.13%........................................................................................................35Indoor Lighting - 0.22%..........................................................................................................................36Outdoor Lighting - 2.05%.......................................................................................................................36

Final Savings Breakdown...........................................................................................................................39Appendices................................................................................................................................................41

Appendices Table of Contents...............................................................................................................41Appendix A: Research............................................................................................................................42Appendix B: Rejected Proposals............................................................................................................45

Appendix C: Meeting Minutes...................................................................................................................50Appendix D: Status Updates..................................................................................................................68Appendix E: Final Presentation..............................................................................................................76


Project Participants

University of Colorado: Leeds School of Business

Lee Allaire Makenzie BrykUniversity of Colorado at Boulder University of Colorado at Boulder720-937-2781 [email protected] [email protected]

Eric Bartram Daniel GrantUniversity of Colorado at Boulder University of Colorado at Boulder303-241-8897 [email protected] [email protected]

Pepsi Beverages Company (PBC)

Dan FrauenfelderPepsi Beverages CompanyFacilities Manager720-641-5346 (Cell)303-299-4315 (Work)

[email protected]

Douglas WaechterPepsi Beverages CompanyProduction [email protected]

Sean CrowellPepsi Beverages CompanyProcess Compliance [email protected]

Jim SheridanPepsi Beverages CompanyProduction Maintenance [email protected]

Matt McLaughlinPepsi Beverages CompanyPlant [email protected]

Sean PowersPepsi Beverages CompanyFacilities Maintenance [email protected]

1 Leeds School of Business: Project Management Team

mailto:[email protected]












Pepsi Beverages Company (PBC) Continued

Doug Frank Bob DunstPepsi Beverages Company Pepsi Beverages CompanyMaintenance Supervisor Production Supervisor303-299-4461 [email protected] [email protected]

Rich GarrimonePepsi Beverages CompanyFleet Maintenance [email protected]

Mentor Contact Information

Jim MarlattUniversity of Colorado at BoulderCourse Instructor720-933-5541 (Cell)[email protected]

Bob Harland Hitachi Consulting720-258-0306 (Work)303-717-6351 (Cell)[email protected]

Energy Consultants

Dave McMillan Jeff RuddXcel Energy, Account Manager CES Industrial303-294-2849 [email protected] [email protected]

Contractors/Manufacturers/Installers

Fletcher McCombie Paul PriepkeEnerNOC, Project Manager Power Secure, Regional Sales Manager415-343-9532 303-653-6608

[email protected]

Mike Smith Roger BinfordColorado KVAR Binford Electric, President303-621-5272 [email protected] [email protected]














Project Executive SummaryThe purpose of the Electrical Conservation Project is to identify points of electrical consumption and create a set of key performance indicators (KPIs), which used in combination with proposed action and awareness plans, will assist the PBC Beverages Company (PBC) Denver bottling plant to reduce its annual electrical consumption from a projected 12,359,900 Kw/H of electrical usage for 2010 by at least 5%.

The caveat: PBC recently announced that it was in the process of adding a new blow molder system that would dramatically increase the amount of electrical consumption the plant would annually consume. While the project team recognizes the addition of the new blow molder as a significant driver of electrical consumption—as it is projected to consume an additional 9.1 million Kw/Hs—the team was not given specific consumption and cost figures associated with the implementation of the new blow molder as it was considered outside the project scope. As such, none of the action plan savings calculations reflect the electrical impact of the new blow molder.

Drive Local Market Success

The team was charged with defining key performance indicators that would (1) measure and track electrical consumption for production processes, and (2) measure and track production process costs. To calculate these KPIs, the team created a color-coded Swim Lane Diagram that summarizes electrical consumption of the various production processes the plant employs. In addition, the team was also asked to develop at least 5 action plans and a separate set of employee awareness plans to facilitate the conservation of electricity within the plant. It was made explicit that none of the action plans could affect production in any way.

Act Now. Do It Today. Get Results

The team recognizes that facility must be willing to implement a number of requisite expenditures—such as installing an updated electrical metering system on all relevant processes—for many of the action plans to be successful. A more detailed list of these requisite expenditures is provided in the body of the deliverable.

Set Targets. Keep Score. Win.

The team developed a number of action plans organized in the deliverable as Quick Wins—which require less than $2000 to implement—and Capital Expenditures which require $2000 or more initial investment to implement. The Quick Wins have the potential to save the plant 5.64% of its annual electrical consumption, and Capital Expenditure plans have the potential to save the plant 30.70% of its annual electrical consumption. The team also created the



framework for an electrical conservation awareness plan aimed at office staff, and various shut-down processes and replacement schedules for production staff. It is our hope that the plant will be able to save an additional 2.97% by implementing the office awareness plan and the updated production-side processes and replacement schedules. Together, the team’s proposed action plans may reduce the plant’s total annual electrical consumption by 39.31%.

Respect Each Other

The Project Team is pleased to present that the Electrical Conservation Project may be able to reduce the bottling plant’s annual electrical consumption by 31.88% overall. The team concludes that this savings would allow the bottling plant to produce 2 more cases of production per Kw/H of electricity used.

Project Total

Adjusted Savings 31.88%

Kw/H-to-Case Ratio

Improvement from 0.3 to 0.2



First Deliverable Updates All changes made as outlined below have been approved by facilities manager Dan

Frauenfelder.

Megawatt (M) vs. Kilowatt Hours (Kw/H)Although the original project charter asked us to express our findings and savings in terms of Megawatts (M), we have chosen to express our findings and savings in terms of Kilowatt Hours (Kw/H). This change was made because Xcel charges are made in terms of Kw/H, therefore expressing our findings and savings in terms of Kw/H made the report more relevant and easier to understand.

Opportunities Synopses It is stated that the best opportunities as identified by the project team will be expressed in no more than one page in the final deliverable. Due to the complexity of several of the opportunities (specifically the PowerSecure opportunity) not all opportunities can be boiled down to a one page synopsis and be sufficiently explained. Some opportunities extend past a single page, however only relevant information is expressed. All secondary information for opportunities can be found in the appendices or the attached data CD.

Action Plan Timeline and Completion DatesIn the first deliverable, it is stated that each opportunity will have a timeline and completion date. However this project will be passed onto another project team, presenting too many unforeseen variables. Therefore it is unrealistic to give them a timeline and completion date. Timelines and completion dates for the proposed solutions will be the responsibility of the next project team, in conjunction with PBC.

Brainstorming Session Held in NovemberThe brainstorming session was slated to be carried out in late October; however our brainstorming session was carried out on November 12th, 2010, at approximately noon.

Structure of the Final Deliverable The actual structure of the final deliverable will vary from the outline that is presented in the first deliverable. This is due to the fact that predicting the best outline for a document that has not been written yet is difficult. Throughout the course of writing and compiling the paper, it was determined that a different structure than the one outlined would be a better fit for functionality and readability.



Swim Lane Diagram



Key Performance Indicators

PBC’s Existing IndicatorsThe existing indicator that PBC uses to track electrical performance is the very simple comparison of the total Kw/H used across the facility to the total number of cases produced in that time. For the year to date in Period 11, 2010 the Kw/H per case produced is 0.30Kw/H per case. A spreadsheet including the most recent calculations of these indicators can be seen in the KPI folder in the attached data CD.

New Proposed IndicatorsThe intent of developing a new set of indicators is to be able to identify the consumption of each of the main production process identified in the swim lane diagram. Once a line diagram is completed by the electrical contractor, PBC will be able to trace the specific pieces of equipment that comprise each line to better understand their performance and impact on the total system. The next team will be charged with determining the accuracy of these calculations and modifying the indicators as needed.

Key performance indicators were developed for the production processes using a combination of historical production information and electrical consumption readings from the EnerNOC website. The biggest caveat to using this information for decision making is that the data was based on very few data points available and therefore has a very high margin of error. The method of deriving the electrical consumption for each process consists of the following:

Extract number of line hours for each line from the weekly production reports Calculate the average line hours for each production process Calculate the average total number of line hours per day Use the EnerNOC website to extract the total power consumption for each day Determine facility idle power by averaging power for days with lowest consumption Determine total production power per day by subtracting idle power from total power Determine days for which only a single line is not running Use the total and average line hours to determine the day when other production lines

are not compensating for a downed production line Determine the power consumed per day by each process by averaging production

power for each day which that single process is down and not compensated Determine the average kilowatts consumed in typical production with all lines on Subtract the average production power derived from each selected process from the

average production power of a full production day to get the KW savings of a single line Multiply the number of kilowatts saved per line by the cost per KW to get total power

cost per line per day



The values derived below were taken from the period September, 2010 through November, 2010 which constitutes a 65 day analysis, in which production was running 45 days. There may be a significant percent error because as few as two data points were used due to the distribution of the data. Greater accuracy can be achieved using the same method if a larger data set were available. The largest percent error is applicable to can lines one and two. There were no days in the data set in which either can line one or two was not being run. The production power for these lines was derived using days in which bottle line one or two was also down. It must also be noted that construction of a new blow molder process had occurred during the analysis period, seriously affecting the use of bottle line two which made extracting accurate data points difficult and may have skewed the results.

Process Bag In Box Bottle Line 1 Bottle Line 2 Can Line 1 Can Line 2Typical Hrs./Day 8-10 16-20 24 16-20 16-20Avg. Hrs. Anal. 8.45 15.59 12.67 15.70 16.29KW/Line/Day 1,811.27 4,345.65 7,195 5,863 5,338 Cost/Day $143.89 $345.22 $571.55 $465.75 $424.09



Requisite ExpendituresThe team has identified that in order for accurate measurement of benefits and to achieve Xcel rebate incentives there are several expenditures which are necessary but do not return any direct savings.

One-Line DiagramThe completion of an electrical line diagram is one of the most important steps the implementation of the electrical savings plan. A line diagram identifies each load and wire size associated with each panel breaker box in the facility. This is important because it allows for a more complete understanding of the electrical consumption process so that electrical contractors, production and maintenance staff are able identify how the current processes actually function. Understanding the existing system will allow PBC to identify where they may save additional energy or consolidate systems for greater efficiency. The line diagram will also make the process of estimating installation expenses of future savings proposals much easier and more accurate.

Metering Battery ChargersThe metering of battery chargers was identified in the brainstorming session and through discussion with our utility representative as being necessary in order to receive the benefits of a custom rebate program. PBC must install meters on the existing battery charging system before implementation of the new battery chargers capital expenditure. Then PBC must determine the difference in consumption with the new charging system and report the findings to Xcel for a rebate based on Kw/H saved. There are a variety of watt meters available, but the actual implementation options vary. After discussing PBC’s requirements, the team went back to the drawing board but was unsuccessful in identifying a matching product. CES would want to temporarily install meters on various locations, collect data for analysis, then move on to the next location through the use of a portable meter system. Since all the solutions the team identified result in requiring the drilling of a hole through the front of the electrical panel, or sub-panel, this process is difficult to implement and more permanent than desired. The team has tried to research this further, but has not been successful getting in touch with the CES expert on these matters. Pursuit of a solution is still possible, although it will not be included in this CU team’s project report.

Metering Ammonia CompressorsIt has been determined through research that the ammonia compressors are the largest single consumer of electricity in the facility. The team is proposing that due to the high impact of ammonia compressors on the electrical consumption, the facility could benefit significantly from installing meters on the compressors. The ability to understand the consumption process



of these units can ensure the production maintenance staff is able to sequence the compressors more efficiently and consequently save electricity. There is also the potential for future replacement of old compressors. In order to achieve Xcel rebates and to understand the savings from replacement, the compressors must be metered before these units are replaced.

Metering Production LinesThe ability to meter the production lines is a notion which PBC has recently embraced with the implementation of the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system on bottle lines one and two. It has been identified that because of the installation of the new blow molder production process, bottle lines one and two will now have the capability to be monitored. The facility would benefit from monitoring systems being installed on the other major processes including can lines one and two and the Bag in Box (BIB) process.

One-ButtonIn the brainstorming session and discussions with employees, it has been determined that a single switch which will override and shut down all pieces of equipment associated with each production process would be the most effective way to ensure compliance and achieve savings. In order for the awareness plan to be most effective, production and warehouse staff should ideally be able to flip a single switch to eliminate all wasted power consumption of a process. It appears that with the installation of the new monitoring system on bottle lines one and two, the shutdown process has been consolidated, so the focus would be on installing a one-button system on the other processes in such as can lines one and two and the BIB process.

The team recognizes that the history of the plant growing organically presents a major obstacle to the one-button solution. As processes evolve, power to service the lines is pulled from the most convenient location, not the most logical location. In order to plan a scheme for a one-button shutdown, or even a several button shutdown, the plant would need to fully understand the loads. This will be an artifact of the One-Line Diagram outlined above. Once this information is available, a practical approach can be designed and executed.



Production Awareness Plan - 2.34%

Maintenance Shutdown Process - 1.34%We determined through visits to the Denver facility that a significant amount of power is being wasted by the lack of a shutdown process for production. In some cases, lighting and conveyors are left running for the entire night between production shifts. There is substantial potential savings from the implementation of a production shutdown process which can be initiated by the maintenance staff at the end of each production shift. The following production consumption points need to be shut down as part of shift closing:

Conveyor Systems Fillers Blow Molder High Pressure Air Compressor Production Lighting Bottle Line Multi-packer Can Line Warmer Can Line Case Packer Can Palletizers Can De-Palletizers

We determined the cost-benefit of the shutdown process by identifying the likelihood that a particular part of the production process is not shut down, i.e. conveyors. Then we estimated the percentage of total production power that the specified pieces of equipment use. We then used our KPI’s to determine the total power wasted by applying the percentage to the total production power of that line per day. We then aggregated all of the kilowatt savings across all lines to determine total potential savings of the shutdown process.



Motor Replacement Process - 0.10%The replacement of motors was identified through the brainstorming session and through discussion with our utility representative as being an opportunity to take advantage of improvements in motor technology as well as an Xcel rebate program. The new motor replacement process consists of the following steps:

Visit http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/software_motormaster.html Consult website for information on system requirements and using the software Download MotorMaster+ software from website to maintenance computers Identify horsepower of motor needing replacement Use MotorMaster+ software to identify best applicable replacement motor Purchase and Install new motor Recycle old motor Apply for Xcel motor replacement rebate

The cost benefit of the motor replacement schedule was calculated by determining the average number of motors replaced each year and an average value for motor horsepower. We determined that four motors with an average of 3/4hp would need to be replaced per year, in addition to one 30hp motor per year. The Xcel rebate average of $30 per horsepower was used to calculate the potential rebate savings of the plan. The dollar amount per year was converted to KW using the average cost per Kw/H of $0.08 in 2010.


http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/software_motormaster.html


Ammonia Compressor ReplacementIt was identified in the brainstorming session that the facility has five old ammonia compressors. While these compressors still function adequately, they do not allow for variable sequencing levels. As such, the team is proposing that VFD’s be installed on these older compressors. Eventually, when it is determined that old compressors are no longer adequate or are inefficient the team created a procedure to calculate applicable rebates for the replacement of these compressors:

Visit http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1828.pdf for Custom Efficiency- Refrigeration Compressor Evaluation Worksheet

Gather information on old compressor for worksheet Determine size needed of replacement compressor Verify that desired compressor is more efficient and rebate applicable Purchase and install new compressor Recycle old compressor Fill out Refrigeration Compressor Evaluation Worksheet to apply for custom efficiency

Xcel rebate

It should be recognized that the cost benefit of this potential savings plan cannot be calculated at this time. When the time comes to consider this option, the benefit may be calculated by metering the existing ammonia compressor system and comparing the change in electrical consumption after the old ammonia compressors have been replaced.


http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1828.pdf


Compressed Air Awareness Plan - 0.90%The team has developed an awareness plan for the compressed air systems. It was identified in the brainstorming session that the greatest benefit to energy savings in the compressed air system is not an upgrade or retrofit, but consistent auditing of the compressed air lines for leaks. The Denver facility maintenance staff has said they currently perform compressed air audits but could not define the frequency of audits or procedure when a leak is identified.

Audits of all compressed air lines, usage points, and compressor equipment should be done by maintenance staff on regularly defined intervals and documented by a Maintenance Supervisor. When a leak is discovered by maintenance staff during an audit, or by production staff in the course of their job, the following procedure should be followed:

Identify location of leak Identify the severity of the escaping air volume If severe- contact maintenance staff immediately Document the leak on the Compressed Air Leak Form [See Data CD]

Production Training SessionThe goal of these sessions is to inform the corresponding production staff about the changes being made to the shutdown processes, as well as motor and ammonia compressor replacement. In addition to this, all staff should be made aware of the compressed air awareness plan. Along with these goals, achieving buy-in from the management and staff will help to make these changes effective and beneficial.

Production Training AgendaIt should be noted that the below outline is broken into topics. Topic 4 [Compressed Air Awareness] is applicable to all members of the production staff. The other topics are only applicable to certain members of the staff. Once these members are identified, a separate training session specific to those people will help to make the training more effective.

Set Date(s) and Time(s) Introduction Roll Call Topic 1 (Shutdown Processes)

o Conveyor Systems Who this affects When this will affect them Why they should care/How it will benefit them

o Fillers



o Blow Moldero Production Lightingo Bottle Line Multi-packero Can Line Warmero Can Line Case Packero Can Palletizerso Can De-palletizerso Q&A

Topic 2 (Motor Replacement)o MotorMaster+

What it is How to use it Who this affects When this will affect them Why they should care/How it will benefit them

o Motor Identificationo Purchase and Installationo Recyclingo Q&A

Topic 3 (Ammonia Compressor Replacement)o Custom Efficiency- Refrigeration Compressor Evaluation Worksheet

What it is How to properly fill it out

Gathering information on old compressor Verifying rebate applicable Who this affects When this will affect them Why they should care/How it will benefit them

o Purchase and Installationo Recyclingo Q&A

Topic 4 (Compressed Air Awareness)o Scheduling Auditso Procedure When Leaks Are Found

Identifying a leak Reporting Who this affects



When this will affect them Why they should care/How it will benefit them

o Literature Q&A

DashboardsVisual dashboards will be placed on televisions in employee break rooms. The first dashboard will include a line graph that will display the general trend of energy usage for each month compared to the energy consumption goal for each month so employees can see their monthly progress. The second dashboard will display three years of consumption by month allowing employees to recognize the comparison to prior years. Examples of these dashboards can be seen in the included data CD.

Production Awareness PlanTotal Savings 2.34%



Office Awareness Plan - 0.63%

PurposeThe purpose of this awareness plan is to inform PBC employees who work in office areas of their roles and responsibilities in helping the plant conserve electricity and reduce costs. The following steps outline what the project team believes to be an appropriate framework for an electrical conservation awareness program for the plant’s office-side employees—office-side employees includes plant management, call-center, and other administrative office staff.

Awareness Plan Outline Set Objective

o Measurable Goalo Targeto Feasible Duration

The objective needs to include 3 main points: (1) a goal that can be measured initially and over time; (2) an achievable target; and (3) a feasible duration for the awareness plan. Including these steps in the framework of the plan will help ensure that progress can be charted and maintained through the life of the plan.

Identify Steps for Implementation o Establish Awareness Message

Office Computers Office Lights Office Refrigerators

o Distribute the Message Digital Screen Dashboards Employee Meetings Monitor Screen-top Placard/Displays Emailed Newsletters

o Create Monitoring Program

Objective of Implementation Objective: Increase awareness of electrical conservation efforts among office-side employees at the Denver bottling plant to 100% from the initial measure point over one year in order to save the plant roughly 0.63% of its annual electrical consumption. Success of the awareness plan will be measured through periodic computer and light audits by managers who work 2nd or 3rd shifts. In addition, manages will update and check the status of all employees during employee



meetings, covered below. The team realizes that awareness plan success cannot be accurately measured without some sort of invasive procedure like a survey or time-consuming manager reviews; however, we feel that the awareness plan is meant to help employees be more aware of whether they are using electricity efficiently or not and is not meant to be enforced in an uncompromising way that detracts from the educational benefit of the plan.

Establish Awareness MessageThe awareness message created should address areas in which office employees can reduce wasted electrical consumption in order to help the plant reduce its overall electrical consumption and its annual electrical bill. The project team has identified 3 broad areas where attentive employees can help the plant reduce wasted electrical consumption. These areas include: (1) office computers; (2) office lights; and (3) office refrigerators.

Office Computers - 0.31%The team estimates that there are around 125 office computers in use at the facility. Upon touring the facility, the team observed that many of these computers were on after-hours. Creation of an office computers section in the office awareness plan required that the team make some assumptions about employee computer use. The team assumed the following: (1) 50% of the computers are powered down overnight during the regular work week, implying that 50% (62.5 computers) are left on during the work week; (2) 80% of the computers are powered down over the weekend, meaning 20% (25 computers) are left on for the entire 48 hour weekend. (3) Office staff is assumed to work a standard 40 hour work week.

The team calculated that the 50% of the computers left on overnight use approximately 46,800 Kw/H per year, and that the 20% left running over the weekend consume an additional 7,488 Kw/H per year. If these 62.5 computers were shut down at night during the work week, and the 25 computers left on over the weekend were powered down the Friday before, the team calculates that the plant could save 38,688 Kw/H of wasted electrical use, equating to 0.31% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption. A detailed breakdown of the savings calculations can be found in the attached data CD. The message for employees should be identified as this: it is important for office employees to shut down their computers before they leave. By doing so, they could help save 0.31% of the plant’s overall electrical consumption.

Office Lights - 0.12%The facility has 220 office light fixtures with three 32-watt bulbs in each, totaling 660 individual bulbs. The project team observed many instances where lights were left on in unoccupied offices and administrative rooms. There are nearly 65 non-production office/administrative areas consuming electricity through lighting. The project team assumes that 30% of the total



220 office light fixtures are left on every day for 24 hours as security lights. These lights must remain on.

That leaves 154 fixtures where lighting awareness strategies may be effective. The project team estimates that of the 65 office/administrative areas, 25% of these office/administrative areas—or about 16 areas—waste light by having the lights on when nobody is occupying the room. It may be assumed that these rooms on average waste approximately 3 hours a day of electricity on lighting an unoccupied room. This means that at an average of 3 fixtures per room, there are 144 bulbs wasting 69.15 Kw/H over the work week, and 3,595.8 Kw/H annually. If these lights are left on over the weekend, they are wasting an additional 221.28 Kw/H of electricity over the weekend, which calculates to 11,506.56 Kw/H waste annually. If this waste time is minimized or eliminated by turning these lights off when the room is not in use and before the weekend, the plant could be saving 15,102.36 Kw/H in electrical consumption over the course of the year, which is a 0.12% savings from the plant’s total annual electrical consumption. A detailed breakdown of the savings calculations can be found on the attached data CD.

The message for employees should be identified as this: it is important that employees shut off non-essential/security lights in unoccupied rooms if applicable. While many rooms may be on timers or sensors, some rooms may not be on sensors and some sensors/timers may be malfunctioning. If this is the case, employees can manually press the button on the bottom of the sensor to physically shut off the lights in an unoccupied room. By doing so, employees can help save 0.12% the plant’s overall electrical consumption.

Office Refrigerators - 0.20%There are roughly 45 personal and communal refrigerators currently being used in the facility using nearly 300 kilowatt hours of energy per day. Total kilowatt use for the year is approximately 120,705 kilowatt hours. An earlier proposal by the project team identified an area of potential savings by reducing the number of total fridges in the plant. While the team concedes that this proposal is expected to meet massive employee resistance, the project team recommends an alternative strategy that calls for employees to turn down the temperature of their personal fridges by 20%. Doing so would save roughly 24,141 kilowatt hours of electricity annually, comparable to 0.20% of the entire plants annual electrical consumption. A detailed breakdown of the savings calculations can be found in the attached data CD.

The message for employees should be identified as this: you do not need to have your personal refrigerator temperature at its max. By reducing your fridge’s temperature by 20% , for example reducing the fridge temperature by 2 on a 1-10 scale dial in the back of the fridge, employees could help the plant save 0.20% of the plant’s annual electrical consumption.



Distribute the Message

Office Training ObjectiveThe goal of these training session(s) is to inform the office staff of any changes that may be made to their workspace in an effort to conserve electricity. Training sessions are also meant to inform employees of how they can help in the plant-wide effort to conserve electricity. These sessions should help to promote buy-in from the office staff and management in order to make the changes easier and more effective.

Office Training Agenda Set Date and Time Roll Call Establish Overall Reason for Changes

o In Order to Save Electricityo Green is Goodo Establish Staff Buy-Ino Q&A

Literature Introductiono What they will see and whereo Q&A

Office Computerso Sleep vs. Shutdown

When to use each mode How IT may be involved

o Numbers and Benefitso Q&A

Office Lightso Potential removal of bulbso Timer changeso When to shut off lightso Numbers and Benefitso Q&A

Office Refrigeratorso Fridge Changes

Lowering temperatureo Numbers and Benefitso Q&A

Dashboards and Newsletters21 Leeds School of Business: Project Management Team


o Explanation of what they areo When and where they will see themo Q&A

Potential Monitoring Plan (to those applicable)

Employee MeetingsPlant employees are required to attend 1 meeting every 4 weeks for management to update the office staff on company business. Employee meetings will be used maintain ongoing awareness of the plan purpose and process. The project team is aware that incentive programs will not be applicable, so it will be important for management to effectively communicate to the staff the importance and impact of utilizing electrical consumption strategies even though individual employees will not be incentivized to do so. A potential buy-in method of presentation may include promoting “being green” for environmental awareness.

Digital Screen DashboardThe Digital Screen dashboards are designed to generate awareness and provide continual updates on the electrical conservation program in high-traffic areas around the plant. These digital screens already exist in the main employee lounge areas and in other locations around the facility and will be ideal for communicating benchmarks to all employees. While the lounge areas are open to all employees, including office-side and production-side employees, the project team believes that all employees can benefit from being introduced to electrical consumption awareness. These proposed dashboards will display the same content and the dashboard being used in the Production Awareness Plan.

Monitor Screen-Top DisplaysFor a more direct reminder, the project team proposes use of computer monitor screen-top displays to promote awareness of reduced electrical consumption. These displays should be small and unobtrusive, but be able to effectively remind employees who regularly use computers of what actions they can take to help the plant conserve electricity. An example of a potential display is provided in the included data CD.

Email NewsletterThe purpose of the Email Newsletter is to:

Introduce the awareness plan to employees who were not aware of the plan from employee meetings;

Remind employees of the purpose of the awareness plan and remind them of electrical consumption strategies; and

Update employees on electrical consumption reduction progress. A sample newsletter to be released via email to all office staff is provided in the included data CD.



Create Monitoring ProgramTo most accurately monitor the various offices and other administrative areas, an effective metering system will eventually need to be installed. However, for the time being, measurement of electrical consumption will come from extrapolation, through a process similar to deriving the key performance indicators of production, using the EnerNOC website. Once baseline measurements are determined for production, management or maintenance staff may be able to review the EnerNOC website and determine the remaining amount as being attributable primarily to office-side activities. While this method is not 100% accurate, it will give management a general range of electrical consumption being used at the initial starting point of the program through the duration of the program until the goal is met. The Digital Screen Dashboards and Email Newsletters can be utilized to update staff members periodically on the progress of electrical consumption savings.

Office Awareness PlanTotal Savings 0.63%

Quick Wins – 5.64%

Computer Automation - 0.20%The project group identified the need for computer automation when we visited the facility after normal hours and noticed several computers which were not shut down or in sleep mode.



Through the brainstorming session and discussions with our representative from Xcel, we were able to identify a potential computer automation service product called PowerMinder by Integrated Research.

The program is cloud based so it requires no infrastructure improvements. Benefit was determined by calculating the number of computers potentially affected by automation services, calculating amount of electricity used by affected computers, and determining efficiency percentage benefits of using automation.

The requirements for implementation of this proposal include:

Compare PowerMinder with other products Receive estimate for computer automation Propose funding from local facility Implement computer automation Measure effectiveness of automation

Office Refrigerators - 0.48%The team noted many individual office refrigerators while touring the facility. Through meetings with Production Supervisor Doug Waechter and Facilities Manager Dan Frauenfelder, the presence of numerous office fridges was concluded to be problematic for two reasons: (1) many of the fridges are company assets and are not authorized for personal use; and (2) the combined electrical draw of these unauthorized office fridges is significant. The team realizes that the office awareness plan has a similar section regarding office fridges wherein savings may be realized by simply turning down the temperature of the fridges. We would like to qualify that this quick win proposal can be implemented along with the office awareness plan proposal—thereby reducing the overall savings from turning down the temperatures of the fridges—or can be pursued separately. For the purpose of calculating savings, the team treated each plan separately.

There are approximately 45 office fridges of various sizes that consume nearly 120,705 Kw/H of electricity annually. 28 of these fridges are in individual offices leaving 17 remaining in communal areas. The team proposes that the 28 fridges in individual offices be removed or disallowed in order to conserve electricity. Removing these fridges would save nearly 59,838 Kw/H of annual electrical consumption; equivalent to saving nearly 0.48% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption.

The team is aware that proposing to remove the individual fridges will be met with significant resistance from staff. This resistance must either be countered by unanimous management



decision and enforcement—meaning that key managers will have to be role models for the employees. The next project team will need to:

Identify key managers who will sponsor proposal Create an awareness plan that will specifically promote buy-in of fridge removal Verify that fridge reduction is being enforced

Lighting Sensor Changes - 0.20%The team came up with the idea for adjusting light sensors while touring the plant. Production Supervisor Doug Waechter mentioned that numerous sensors are programmed to remain active for an unnecessary amount of time. We inquired deeper and found that office area lights are generally on 10 minute sensors, and warehouse lights are on 20 minute sensors. There are 660 34 watt bulbs in the office areas. 30% of these must remain on at all times as security lights. There are 488 32 watt bulbs in the warehouse area. 10% of these bulbs cannot be on sensors because they are over the dock. We assume that all the sensors are activated 2 times per hour, meaning that over a 40 hour work week, the sensors are activated 80 times.

By shortening the sensor cycle times in the office areas to 2 minutes and the warehouse areas to 2 minutes, the plant will save 7,488.00 Kw/H of electricity per year from the office lights on sensors, and an additional 17,555.20 Kw/H of electricity per year from the warehouse lights on sensors. Together, these sensor changes can help save the plant 0.20% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption. Calculations to determine savings can be referenced in the included data CD in the Lighting Sensor Changes sub-folder.

Steps required for implementation: Locate the sensors Verify the calculations with management Maintenance crew adjusts sensors Test adjusted sensors

Office Lighting Efficiency - 0.17%The team was in a brainstorming session with PBC Denver and multiple members of the PBC Denver staff mentioned that offices were over-lit. It was mentioned that individual bulbs had been taken down in a few offices to reduce to unnecessary lighting that was creating an uncomfortable work environment. The responsible individual for this project will be Sean Crowell.

The lighting in offices is too bright and strong. In an effort to combat this and also save energy consumption we will remove 1 bulb from each fixture. With a single bulb reduction from each



fixture the lighting requirements are still met. The process of removing a light bulb from each fixture will create a more pleasant working environment while reducing electrical consumption. This will save 32 watts per hour per fixture.

The team determined the office lighting efficiency by calculating the Kw/H used per 32w bulb on for an 8 hour day. We then multiplied (.256 Kw/H) per bulb by 220 total bulbs in the offices and by 365 days to determine the total Kw/H consumed by these bulbs per year. The result of the removal of these bulbs will be a savings of 20,556 Kw/H which equates to 0.17% of the facility’s total annual electrical consumption.

Steps required for installation: Get calculations approved by management Set aside a time for maintenance Remove 1 bulb

Smart Thermostats - 0.04%During our tour of the PBC Denver facility the team observed a number of outdated thermostats. Through additional research the team found that there are affordable, easily installable smart thermostats that can be utilized to save on energy consumption. Smart thermostats can be installed anywhere that there is an outdated thermostat. These thermostats can be programmed to maintain a particular temperature or temperature range. The thermostats will ensure at particular times the energy will shut off/turn on automatically. This automated setting function will allow management to efficiently and effectively monitor and adjust the temperature settings. During holidays, thermostats allow management to plan in advance and adjust the temperature to an adequate level for low to zero occupancy. Also, upon return the thermostat can turn on in advance to allow workers to enter into an ideal temperature. Currently, the hand dial thermostats do not allow for these adjustments to be made and are costing electricity. The team identified a possible replacement thermostat, the Luxor Lux TX 1500E Smart Temperature Programmable Thermostat priced at $34.95 per unit. The team calculates that these thermostats save roughly $31.00/2 Fahrenheit degrees for a 1,500 square foot house over the course of a year. We estimate that the plant has roughly 26,000 square feet of office space, which is roughly equivalent to 17.3 1,500 square foot houses. With a savings of $31.00/2 degrees of temperature variance over 1 year, we estimate that the plant can save $536.30 on their annual energy bill. Valued at $0.08 per Kw/H, the plant could generate a savings of 6703.75 Kw/H, which is 0.05% savings of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption. Assuming that we would need roughly 17 smart thermostats to cover this office area, we estimate that the initial investment of $611.16 pretax will have a payback of 1.14 years.26 Leeds School of Business: Project Management Team


Steps for implementation: Verify calculations with management Pick a date maintenance staff can change the thermostats Determine how thermostats should ideally be programmed Change out the thermostats Program the thermostats

EnerNOC Sellback Program - 4.55%Facilities Manager Dan Frauenfelder informed the team that the plant currently has an agreement with EnerNOC that credits the plant for reducing its electrical load during times of peak demand called “events”. The team contacted Key Account Manager Fletcher McCombie for details on the program.

Currently, the plant is nominated to reduce its overall electrical load by 500 kw when contacted by EnerNOC during an “event”. PBC is compensated for this load reduction in two ways: (1) PBC receives a capacity payment of available electrical credits—similar to the Xcel Interruptible Service Option Credit (ISOC) program—valued at $30/Kw. This means that PBC’s annual capacity payment is $15,000. This credit amount, when valued at $0.08/Kw, can cover the cost of 187,500 Kw/H of electrical consumption, or 1.52% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption. (2) PBC also receives $0.07 per Kw actually reduced in load when an “event” is called. This means that if the plant actually reduces its total load by the 500 Kw requested, it will earn $35 per hour during the event. Events may be called at any time and may last between 1 and 8 hours.

The team has currently proposed re-nominating the plant’s energy load reduction commitment to 1.5 Mw (15,000 Kw). Doing so would allow the plant to be eligible for $45,000 of electrical credit per year in capacity payments. The capacity payment alone is equivalent to covering the cost of 562,500 Kw/H of electrical consumption, or 4.55% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption. Additional credits will be available for the number of kilowatts the plant can actually reduce its load by during any given event.

Implementing this program would require:

EnerNOC to do a load assessment to verify that electrical consumption at the plant can be reduced by 1.5 Mw. Production Manager Jim Sheridan expressed concern during the brainstorming session that the plant may face difficulty reducing its load by this amount. More discussion with Fletcher McCombie may be necessary to redefine a new load reduction level should the 1.5 mw reduction level be infeasible.

Verify that Fletcher McCombie has re-nominated PBC for 1.5 Mw



It should be additionally noted that the team is proposing a capital expenditure program similar to the EnerNOC Sell-back program that would allow the plant to earn energy credits through Xcel’s ISOC program in combination with Power Secure’s backup generator system. Only one of these programs may be pursued.

Quick WinsTotal Savings 5.64%



Capital Expenditures – 30.70%

Kilovolt-Ampere- Reactance (KVAR) - 8.79%ConceptThrough research and information gathered from Colorado KVAR, it was discovered that the PBC plant could benefit greatly from a Kilovolt-Ampere-Reactance (KVAR) system. A KVAR system essentially captures excess energy that motors are drawing in, but not using. It then stores this energy, and then runs that captured electricity back through the system, essentially boosting the efficiency of the power factor. The proposed KVAR system would affect the following areas:

Vacuum Pumps Ammonia and Glycol Pumps Cooper Turbo Pump AC Compressors Ice Plant Compressors PH Plant Pumps

Cost-AnalysisAccording to Mike Smith of Colorado KVAR, the proposed system would save 20,889.15 Kw/H/Wk or 1,086,235.8 Kw/H/yr. and would cost $78,646 to purchase and install [data CD]. Based on Kw/H prices of $0.08 in 2011, $0.085 in 2012, and $0.091 in 2013 savings in those years would be $86,898.84, $92,330.04 and $98,847.46 respectively. Based on these numbers, they KVAR system would have a payback period of roughly 11.77 months.

It should also be noted that there is some skepticism as to the true effectiveness of KVAR systems. However, there are several independent studies that support KVAR and its usefulness. Independent studies have been done by NASA [data CD], Honeywell USA [data CD], and Hodges Electrical Enterprises [data CD]. Because of the skepticism present, Colorado KVAR offers a guarantee of 6%-10% reduction in electricity consumption. With it comes a 90-day money back guarantee. It should be stressed that the plant should monitor their electricity costs very closely during the first 90 days after the KVAR is installed to insure that if the system is not working properly, they can get their investment refunded by Colorado KVAR.

ImplementationIn order to implement this proposal the next project team would need to:

Identify additional companies that provide KVAR installation Get estimates from multiple KVAR vendors Compare estimates with Colorado KVAR estimate in attached data CD Contract with vendor for installation



Monitor over period of 90 days to verify savings Initiate money back guarantee if savings not achieved

Battery Charger Replacement - 2.42%ConceptDuring the brainstorming session it was discovered that there are savings to be realized by replacing the battery chargers for pallet jacks and lifts. These battery chargers tend to be a large draw on energy for the plant because the pallet jacks and lifts need to be charged twice daily during a normal work day. This means in a normal workweek, each charger goes through an average of ten charging cycles. Replacing these chargers with more efficient ones could greatly reduce the amount of electricity that the plant consumes. Our contact for this endeavor was Fleet Maintenance Manager, Rich Garrimone at PBC.

Cost-AnalysisThrough Rich Garrimone’s discussions with suppliers, it was determined that replacing 33 existing lift battery chargers with Eagletronic Model AE24-483-3-120 would save the plant $26,957.00 energy dollars per year, or 299,522 Kw/H per year. At a cost of $1650.00 per charger, the total cost is expected to be $54,450.00. Based on these numbers a payback of 24 months may be realized.

ImplementationIn order to realize the benefits from this proposal the next team:

Meter the existing battery chargers for Xcel rebate Identify best model replacement charger Identify companies that install identified charger Get multiple estimates from installers Contract with vendor for installation Determine salvage procedure and execute

PowerSecure - 8.09%During the Project Team’s brainstorming session, Xcel account manager Dave McMillan introduced the team to PowerSecure. According to Dave, PowerSecure is a firm that offers backup power generation services through the leasing of a generator system that is operated remotely and maintained until purchase through PowerSecure. The team contacted Regional Sales Manager Paul Priepke and inquired about the services provided by PowerSecure.

Concept



PowerSecure offers backup power generators capable of generating the plant’s entire electrical load. For the purpose of this project, however, the team inquired about a 2000 Kw generator system that would be financed through PBC using pre-established credit with Xcel’s Interruptible Service Option Credit (ISOC) program. The generator is remotely operated by PowerSecure when there is an Xcel “event”—a time of high demand when Xcel contacts its highest energy draining customers to reduce their load by a pre-specified amount—and when PBC requests use during an unexpected outage. PBC may also contact PowerSecure to run the generator at any time. As such, it is theoretically possible to have the generator running at all times. However, to minimize the probability of the machine breaking down due to overuse, the generator should be used sparsely.

Cost-AnalysisThe PowerSecure 2000 Kw/H generator system has a 3 year payback period. PowerSecure covers its own business costs by sharing a percentage of the available Xcel ISOC program credits with PBC; which was determined by PowerSecure to be equivalent to $200,000 per year for 2000 Kw. PBC would initially be required to pay $400,000 upfront—equivalent to $200/Kw for 2000 Kw. This initial fee would be recouped through predetermined Xcel ISOC program credits over the 3 years. In year 1, 100% of the available credits ($200,000) would go to PBC to cover the cost of the generator. In year 2, 60% ($120,000) of the credits go to the plant, and in year 3, 40% ($80,000) of the credits go to the plant. Once the cost of the generator has been entirely recouped by the plant, the available credits are then split 40% PBC/60% PowerSecure between years 4 and 7. This means that the plant receives $80,000 per year after the cost of the generator has been recovered. At $0.08/Kw/H, the available credits after year 3 can cover the cost of 1,000,000 Kw/H of the plant’s electrical consumption. This amount is equivalent to 8.09% of the plant’s projected annual electrical consumption.

At any point after the end of year 7, PBC would have the option to purchase the generator for $400,000. At this time, if the plant decides to purchase the generator from PowerSecure, 100% of the Xcel ISOC program credits would be available for use. This means that the system purchase cost could be recovered in 2 years and the plant would receive all $200,000 in available Xcel credit each year after the 2 year recovery. Thus, from the beginning of year 10, the plant could be covering the cost of 2,500,000 Kw/H of electrical use, or 20.23% of its total annual electrical consumption.

Caveat and Recommendation



It should be noted that if the plant chooses to install a PowerSecure generator system compatible with the Xcel ISOC program, it can no longer be a client of EnerNOC’s energy sell-back program. This means that the plant would forego its current 500 Kw/H reduction program during Xcel “events” and would not receive the annual $15,000 credit payment. At $0.08/Kw, this capacity payment covers the cost of 187,500 Kw/H of electrical consumption, or 1.52% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption.

It is clear that the most favorable program is the PowerSecure 2000 Kw generator system in combination with the Xcel ISOC program—which has the potential to save at least 8.09% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption—over the EnerNOC Energy Sell-back program which saves only 1.52% of the plant’s total annual electrical consumption.

ImplementationThere are several important steps that must be taken in order to implement the PowerSecure generator program:

PowerSecure would need to assess the plant’s overall electrical load Appropriate floor or ground space for the generator would need to be identified Initiate contracts with Power Secure and Xcel



Variable Frequency Drives - 9.13%Concept

The concept for installing variable frequency drives (VFD’s) came from a variety of sources including internet research and discussions with HVAC experts. Production Maintenance Supervisor Jim Sheridan expressed in the brainstorming session that he felt VFD’s would provide savings as well as more control of his compressor loads. It was determined that VFD’s could be beneficial if installed on older ammonia compressors and warehouse exhaust fans.

Cost-AnalysisThe cost savings of variable frequency drives was determined by getting an estimate from CES for the installation of VFD’s on ammonia compressors and warehouse fans. We then used an online savings calculator which can be found at: http://www.catpumps.com/vfd-calculator.html to determine the energy savings of each VFD. We determined the horsepower of each affected motor, included the price of energy at $.08 per Kw/H, and determined ammonia compressors and warehouse fans would run 16 hours per day for 275 days a year on a 75% load. Once we determined the total power saved per motor, we added all the motor savings and divided by our total projected annual consumption to get the power savings in Kw/H.

CaveatIt must be recognized that the potential for savings through implementation of the variable frequency drives may conflict with the potential savings of KVAR. There are many of the pieces of equipment slated to be impacted by both systems. Although they save energy in different ways, the introduction of VFD’s on these pieces of equipment will likely result in less effective KVAR, though we still believe KVAR will achieve significant and measurable savings even with VFD’s installed.

ImplementationThe responsible party for the implementation of this plan is Facilities Manager Dan Frauenfelder. The steps to implementation include:

Install meter to on a single piece of equipment Determine consumption of motor over a fixed period of time Initiate installation of one VFD on said motor Compare use before and after installation to see whether savings is achieved If savings achieved, scale installation to other motors


http://www.catpumps.com/vfd-calculator.html


Indoor Lighting - 0.22%The idea for changing the light bulbs in the building came from an initial brainstorming session that took place with Production Supervisor Doug Waechter. The initial research was comprised of assessing compact fluorescent lamps and LED’s to light the indoors. It was determined that LED‘s would not require ballasts. This saves on energy, but requires a large amount of time to remove the ballasts, thus reduces the benefit of LED conversion. As a result a low wattage fluorescent bulb is being considered for replacement of indoor lighting.

ConceptFor indoor lighting there is a need to change the bulbs (Phillips f32t8/tL735 high vision) to a lower wattage (f28t8 bulbs) to save on energy costs. The bulbs in the warehouse area must have a shatter proof coat to eliminate the hazardous waste that is contained inside of the bulbs. These light bulbs must have enough lumens to adequately light the area. Process Compliance Supervisor Sean Crowell of the PBC Denver team was able to verify the ROI and energy savings associated with a lower wattage bulb.

Cost-AnalysisThe implementation of new bulbs will reduce the wattage consumed by 6 Watts per bulb. There are 660 office bulbs on for 8 hours per day and 448 warehouse bulbs which are normally on for an average of 16 hours. This savings results in a total a Kw/H reduction for the facility of 27,560. This results in a total annual potential savings of .22%. This plan was created specifically from information garnered from Process Compliance Supervisor Sean Crowell.

ImplementationProcess Compliance Supervisor Sean Crowell has made the necessary calculations to determine that this project meets the necessary requirements to implement this action plan.

Contact the supplier and receive the new bulbs Allot a 48 hour period of time for installation when production will not be effected Install bulbs and test the output lumens of the bulbs to verify their output capacity

meets standards

Outdoor Lighting - 2.05%After a meeting with Production Supervisor Doug Waechter and Facilities Manager Dan Frauenfelder it became clear that outdoor lighting is an area of the facility that could provide energy reduction.

ConceptOutdoor lighting was initially investigated by examining florescent tube bulbs. These bulbs do not have the same amount of kilowatt hour savings that can be provided by LEDs in the long



run. LEDs currently are the lowest wattage bulbs that can be used. The electrical savings have been verified for both the solar paneled parking lights, as well as the bulbs as well. The solar paneled lighting structures use zero kilowatt hours because of the energy supplied by the solar panels. The low kilowatt hours used is the key savings for the other bulb. The necessary lumen output lighting requirements have been met by these bulbs. They both also meet the necessary temperature requirements. As such, the team is proposing two changes to the outdoor lights: (1) all outdoor lights are to be replaced with LED bulbs; and (2) solar panels should be affixed to all existing light poles.

Cost-AnalysisThe total electrical consumption savings for installing solar powered LED fixtures was calculated by multiplying the total savings per fixture per day of 10 Kw/H and multiplying by 52 fixtures and then by 365 days to achieve the total energy savings per year across the facility. The total potential savings was divided by the projected annual consumption in 2010 to find the percentage savings of this action plan.

The total electrical consumption savings for the flush-mount outdoor light fixtures was calculated by multiplying the total savings per fixture per day of 2.13 Kw/H and multiplying by 83 fixtures and then by 365 days to achieve the total energy savings per year across the facility. The total potential savings was divided by the projected annual consumption in 2010 to find the percentage of this action plan.

Implementation Verify calculations with management Contact the bulb supplier Set aside 48 hours that production will not be effected Assemble team for installation Install bulbs Test bulbs for lumen output

Capital Expenditures

Total Savings 30.70%



Final Savings Breakdown

Awareness Plans – 2.97%o Production Awareness Plan – 2.34%

Maintenance Shutdown Process – 1.34% Motor Replacement Process – 0.10% Compressed Air Awareness Plan – 0.90%

o Office Awareness Plan – 0.63% Office Computers – 0.31% Office Lights – 0.12% Office Refrigerators – 0.20%

Quick Wins – 5.64%o Computer Automation – 0.20%o Office Refrigerators – 0.48%o Lighting Sensor Changes – 0.20%o Lighting Office Efficiency – 0.17%o Smart Thermostats – 0.04%o EnerNOC Sellback Program – 4.55%

Capital Expenditures – 30.70%o Kilovolt-Ampere-Reactance (KVAR) – 8.79%o Battery Charger Replacement – 2.42%o PowerSecure – 8.09%o Variable Frequency Drives – 9.13%o Indoor Lighting – 0.22%o Outdoor Lighting – 2.05%

Total Potential Savings Before Adjustments- 39.31%



CaveatPowerSecure and the EnerNOC sellback Program cannot be used in unison. It will be the decision of PBC which opportunity to pursue between PowerSecure and EnerNOC based on which program best fits their needs. For purposes of our project and our final calculations, we will use the 8.09% savings achieved by PowerSecure, but disregard the 4.55% achieved by EnerNOC.

The KVAR systems and the VFDs would affect many of the same pieces of equipment. Because of this the team believes that the numbers for KVAR and VFDs, while correct independently of each other, will not maintain the same level if implemented in conjunction. Our method for calculating the effectiveness of the two proposals is as follows.

VFDs achieve roughly 30% savings in electrical consumption of motors. If the VFDs save 1,128,458 Kw/H, then it is safe to assume the affected motors consumed 3,761,526 Kw/H before VFDs (1,128,458/.3 = 3,761,526)

KVAR would achieve 1,086,435 Kw/H savings on the same motors if VFDs were not installed. Thusly, if we assume the same usage from the motors as we did for the VFDs we see a 28.9% improvement in the motors electrical usage (1,086,435/3,761,526 = 0.289)

With the above information, we can also assume that the consumption of the motors after the installation of the VDFs will be 2,633,068 Kw/H (3,761,526-1,128,458 = 2,633,068)

If we then apply the KVAR percentage improvement to the remaining consumption of the motors, we can see another overall reduction in consumption of 760,957 Kw/H (2,633,068*0.289 = 760,957)

Lastly, if we apply this reduction to overall consumption assumed for 2010, we achieve the number we will assume for KVAR- 6.16%, if used in conjunction with VFDs (760,957/12,359,900 = 6.16%)

The team recognizes that the fundamental outcome of the office awareness plan computer shutdown procedure will be similar to the computer automation quick win. Conclusively, in order to more accurately calculate the potential savings that can ensue without inflating our results due to repetition, we weighted the savings from the computer section of the office awareness plan by 50%, meaning that we count 0.16% savings for this plan, and weighted the computer automation quick win savings by 50% and count 0.10% savings for this plan.

After taking out the 4.55% achieved by EnerNOC, and reducing the effectiveness of KVAR by 2.36%, we then applied a 50% weight to each the computer awareness and computer automation plans. This resulted in the project team’s total expected savings of 31.88%; the 39 Leeds School of Business: Project Management Team


equivalent of 3,940,336 Kw/H. This savings will allow the plant to improve its Kw/H-to-Case ratio from 0.30 Kw/H per case to 0.20 Kw/H per case.

Project Total

Adjusted Savings 31.88%

Appendices

Appendices Table of Contents

Appendix A: Research………………………………………………………………………………………………………………42

Appendix B: Rejected Proposals……………………………………………………………………………………………….45

Appendix C: Meeting Minutes………………………………………………………………………………………………….50

Appendix D: Status Reports…………………………………………………………………………………………………..…68

Appendix E: Final Presentation…………………………………………………………………………………………………76



Appendix A: Research

In an effort to conserve paper, all relevant research materials cited in the body of the deliverable have been included in a data CD located at the end of the document. The data disk will have a folder titled “Research” that will have numerous sub-folders titled with their relevant topics (i.e. KVAR, OFFICE AWARENESS PLAN, etc.).

Production Awareness PlanAir CompressorSee attached Data CD for Compressed Air Leak Form http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/10-10-502.pdf

http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/10-10-503.pdf

http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/retail/busmrkts/COCompressedAirStudy.pdf

http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/COCompressedAirVendors.pdf

http://www.compressedairchallenge.org/

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/compressed_air.html

Production ShutdownSee attached Data CD for KPI-calculation worksheet

Motor Replacementhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/software_motormaster.htmlhttp://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CRS-1970.pdf http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1899.pdf http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-0612.pdfhttp://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/10-09-200.pdfhttp://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1758.pdfhttp://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1759.pdfhttp://www.nema.org/gov/energy/efficiency/premium/

Ammonia Compressorhttp://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1726.pdf http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1727.pdf http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1728.pdf

Office Awareness PlanSee attached Data CD for Small Office Appliance worksheet

Quick Wins





http://www.nema.org/gov/energy/efficiency/premium/






http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CRS-1970.pdf

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/software_motormaster.html

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/industry/bestpractices/compressed_air.html

http://www.compressedairchallenge.org/

http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/COCompressedAirVendors.pdf

http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/retail/busmrkts/COCompressedAirStudy.pdf




Lighting Sensorshttp://www.1000bulbs.com/product/8079/LEV-ODS15IDT.html?utm_source=SmartFeedNexTag&utm_medium=Shopping&utm_term=LevitonDecoraODS15IDTSinglePolePassiveInfraredSelfAdjustingOccupancySensor1800WattLightAlmond&utm_content=LevitonDecoraODS15IDTSinglePolePassiveInfraredSelfAdjustingOccupancySensor1800WattLightAlmond&utm_campaign=SmartFeedNexTag&thissku=LEV777dash777ODS15IDT&site=www.nextag.com

Smart Thermostatshttp://www.nextag.com/luxor-Lux-TX1500E-Smart-659325576/prices-htmlComputer Automation

http://www.powerminder.com/Office FridgesSee attached Data CD for Small Office Appliance worksheet

Capital ExpendituresKVARSee attached Data CD for Colorado KVAR estimate See attached Data CD for KVAR savings worksheet See attached Data CD for related KVAR cases

VFD’shttp://www.catpumps.com/vfd-calculator.htmlhttp://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CRS-1981.pdf http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1726.pdf http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CSS-1727.pdf

Outdoor lightingOutdoor LEDhttp://www.ledlight.com/spot-flood-led-lights.aspxLED Streetlamp http://www.oksolar.com/n_cart/product_details.asp?ProductID=160330&cat=Lighting&subcat=Solar%20LED%20Lighting Light Intensity Converterhttp://www.unitconversion.org/illumination/foot-candles-to-lux-conversion.htmlKw/H Calculator http://www.paystolivegreen.com/2008/09/energy-savings-calculator/Existing Bulbshttp://www.lightbulbsurplus.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=6_39&products_id=464http://www.greenelectricalsupply.com/mvr250-c-u.aspxhttp://www.greenelectricalsupply.com/mvr1000-u.aspxLighting Case Studies42 Leeds School of Business: Project Management Team

http://www.greenelectricalsupply.com/mvr1000-u.aspx

http://www.greenelectricalsupply.com/mvr250-c-u.aspx

http://www.lightbulbsurplus.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=6_39&products_id=464

http://www.paystolivegreen.com/2008/09/energy-savings-calculator/

http://www.unitconversion.org/illumination/foot-candles-to-lux-conversion.html

http://www.oksolar.com/n_cart/product_details.asp?ProductID=160330&cat=Lighting&subcat=Solar%20LED%20Lighting

http://www.oksolar.com/n_cart/product_details.asp?ProductID=160330&cat=Lighting&subcat=Solar%20LED%20Lighting



http://www.xcelenergy.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/docs/CRS-1981.pdf

http://www.catpumps.com/vfd-calculator.html

http://www.powerminder.com/

http://www.nextag.com/luxor-Lux-TX1500E-Smart-659325576/prices-html

http://www.1000bulbs.com/product/8079/LEV-ODS15IDT.html?utm_source=SmartFeedNexTag&utm_medium=Shopping&utm_term=LevitonDecoraODS15IDTSinglePolePassiveInfraredSelfAdjustingOccupancySensor1800WattLightAlmond&utm_content=LevitonDecoraODS15IDTSinglePolePassiveInfraredSelfAdjustingOccupancySensor1800WattLightAlmond&utm_campaign=SmartFeedNexTag&thissku=LEV777dash777ODS15IDT&site=www.nextag.com




http://www.betaled.com/us-en/LEDApplications/RetailAndGrocery/cub-foods.aspxhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/etcs_ledparking.pdfhttp://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/etcs_ledparking.pdfhttp://www.betaled.com/RuudBetaLed/media/RuudBetaLedMediaLibrary/PDF%20Files/Emerging-Technology-Report-for-LED-Street-Lighting.pdfLighting RequirementsSee attached Data CD for 16520_Exterior_Lighting.txtSee attached Data CD for 16510_Interior_Bldg_Lighting.txt


http://www.betaled.com/RuudBetaLed/media/RuudBetaLedMediaLibrary/PDF%20Files/Emerging-Technology-Report-for-LED-Street-Lighting.pdf

http://www.betaled.com/RuudBetaLed/media/RuudBetaLedMediaLibrary/PDF%20Files/Emerging-Technology-Report-for-LED-Street-Lighting.pdf

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/etcs_ledparking.pdf

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/pdfs/etcs_ledparking.pdf

http://www.betaled.com/us-en/LEDApplications/RetailAndGrocery/cub-foods.aspx


Appendix B: Rejected Proposals

Removal of Aerator PumpThe removal of one aerator pump was identified by the maintenance staff during the brainstorming session as being a potential opportunity for savings. The removal of the pump would involve the disconnection and sale of the existing pump as well as pipe fitting to cap or bypass the third pump plumbing configuration. Upon discussing the proposal with maintenance and production managers it has been determined that the removal of one aeration pump would impact production. Additional studies may need to be done by the subsequent project team to determine the extent to which removal of a pump would have an effect on production.

TransformersThe team learned about the potential savings that could be achieved through transformer replacement when an environmental consultant mentioned the concept to Facilities Manager Dan Frauenfelder during a meeting they had at the facility. The team contacted Jeff Rudd from CES to determine how or if the transformer replacement would achieve significant savings or the desired payback. Jeff informed the team that the most likely application of new transformers would be to replace those which are being under-utilized. During the brainstorming session, it was identified that the cost of replacing under-utilized transformers would most likely not justify the savings that would result. It was also determined that re-routing power lines to optimize use of a minimal number of transformers would also be costly.Resource(s): Jeff Rudd, CES

Ice MakingThe team has decided not to pursue a potential opportunity to save electricity through an analysis of the ice-making production and storage schedule. The team was informed that ice Making is generally managed under Special Events and does not fall within the scope of the project. The team recognizes that there may be significant potential from reducing the ice-storage temperature, making ice during off-peak electrical consumption hours, or turning up freezer temperature significantly during periods of low or no ice demand. However, due to the challenges in making changes that effect a separate division of PBC, the team is not proposing this change but requests PBC to acknowledge the potential savings.

Refurbishment CenterThere is also a large potential savings opportunity that can be achieved through implementing several new procedures and equipment in the refurbishment center. The challenges faced by the team in implementing any proposed changes in the refurbishment center are too difficult to



achieve with the level of authority the team was allowed. As such, the team decided to abandon this opportunity.

Anaerobic Digestion System (Bio Energy Recovery System-BERS)The idea behind implementing an anaerobic digestion system was to use the facility’s spoiled liquid waste to produce methane gas to power a gas turbine in order to generate more electricity. Unfortunately, after much research the Project Team has concluded that this option is not feasible for the plant for multiple reasons: (1) the bottling plant does not have enough room to accommodate such a system; (2) there are few companies in the United States that install these systems; (3) these types of systems are extremely costly; and finally, (4) the Project Team was informed that the current spoilage tank can hold 500 gallons of liquid. It was determined that the less-expensive, smaller-scale anaerobic digestion systems would not be cost-effective with such a small amount of waste product in general. Conclusively, given the above circumstances, implementing an anaerobic digestion system did not appear to be an optimal action plan for the facility.Resource(s):http://www.mk2eng.com/portfolio_WN_ABI.htmlhttp://www.pureprocesssystems.com/contactus.html http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103-90162000000400013&script=sci_arttext http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_digestion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_biological_treatment http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasification http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste-to-energy ABInBev “Beer & a Better World” Global Citizenship Report 2008-2009http://www.cleanenergyresourceteams.org/files/CERTsManualCh7.pdfhttp://www.mnproject.org/http://www.mnproject.org/pdf/agstar%20report%20full%20update.pdf

Organic Rankine Cycle (ORC) Waste-Heat Turbine Generator SystemSimilar to the concept of a Bio-Energy Recovery System (BERS), an ORC Waste-Heat Turbine Generator system uses recaptured industrial waste heat to produce electricity through a generator. The Project Team researched and consulted with Infinity Turbine, Inc. on their 250 Kw/H IT250 ORC Turbine-Generator system. While the concept itself was an attractive solution considering that the bottling process in the plant does produce waste heat, the installation of an ORC Turbine-Generator system was ruled out due to the following circumstances: (1) the heat produced in cooling the product with ammonia does not generate a sufficiently high temperature to boil the glycol in the ORC system; (2) the ORC system requires a thermal liquid


http://www.mnproject.org/pdf/agstar%20report%20full%20update.pdf

http://www.mnproject.org/

http://www.cleanenergyresourceteams.org/files/CERTsManualCh7.pdf

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste-to-energy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasification

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mechanical_biological_treatment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anaerobic_digestion

http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?pid=S0103-90162000000400013&script=sci_arttext

http://www.pureprocesssystems.com/contactus.html

http://www.mk2eng.com/portfolio_WN_ABI.html


to be used as the waste heat source. The glycol that the plant runs through the heat exchanger is not hot enough to power the ORC system; (3) the only area in which the plant produces a high enough temperature waste heat is above the heat tunnel. Since the waste heat is heated air and not a thermal liquid, the ORC system cannot be used at this location; (4) the IT250 model would generally be too large to fit on the production floor anywhere near the heat tunnel; and finally, (5) the IT250 model turbine-generator system costs $300,000. For this system to have a 2 year payback period, the ORC system would need to be run 24 hours each day for the entire duration of the 2 years which is entirely infeasible.Resource(s):http://algaloildiesel.wetpaint.com/page/COMBINED+HEAT+AND+POWERhttp://www.powerverdesolar.com/technology.php http://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/Pub10841.pdf http://infinityturbine.com

Micro-Turbines on Wastewater PipesThe team wanted to try and utilize the plant’s wasted water to generate electricity by using water-powered micro-turbine. After much research, use of micro-turbines was discontinued from the list of potential action plans for the following reasons: (1) an investigation of the pipes found that no area existed along the length of the pipes where micro-turbines could be feasibly installed; (2) cost estimates could not be determined without having extremely accurate measures of water pressure to calculate cost. We were advised that the cost of turbine systems would be high and generally would not fit within our 2 year payback; (3) the team was adivsed that upper management did not want the project results to affect the water going to the pH treatment facility. For these reasons, the team decided to stop pursuit of micro-turbine systems as an optimal way to generate in-house electricity.Resource(s):http://www.hydro.org/100826%20statement%20on%20FERC-CO%20MOU.pdf http://www.canyonhydro.com/guide/HydroGuide7.htmlhttp://www.canyonhydro.com/micro/microfaq.html#FAQ_Feasiblehttp://www.absak.com/library/micro-hydro-power-systems#1http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_hydro.htmlhttp://www.pioneer-sys.net/microhydro.htm

Solar TubesSolar tubes were looked into as a potential solution to help reduce the amount of electricity the PBC Plant-Denver uses. Solar tubes are essentially the next generation of the skylight. On top of the roof is a spherical shape that takes in light from all directions, then funnels that light down a


http://www.pioneer-sys.net/microhydro.htm

http://www.otherpower.com/otherpower_hydro.html

http://www.absak.com/library/micro-hydro-power-systems#1

http://www.canyonhydro.com/micro/microfaq.html#FAQ_Feasible

http://www.canyonhydro.com/guide/HydroGuide7.html

http://www.hydro.org/100826%20statement%20on%20FERC-CO%20MOU.pdf

http://infinityturbine.com/

http://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/Pub10841.pdf

http://www.powerverdesolar.com/technology.php

http://algaloildiesel.wetpaint.com/page/COMBINED+HEAT+AND+POWER


highly polished metal tube, and disperses it into an area indoors. This essentially makes indirect light into an effective and efficient alternative to traditional lighting. This idea was abandoned because according to experts at SolaTube and Sun Dome a 3 year payback period could not be realized because of the efficiency of the current bulbs that the PBC Plant-Denver uses on both the production/warehouse side, and the office side. However a savings could be realized, it will not fit within the payback period outlined because the model of the bulbs being used is T8 (Ref. Meeting Min. Sept 12th). In order to realize a 3 year payback the bulbs would need to be T12.Resource(s):http://www.solatube.com/commercial/daylighting/top-lighting-vs-side-lighting.phpCindy Clark, [email protected], 303-242-9487

Wind PowerWind power was looked into as an option to help reduce the plant’s electrical usage and cost. Case studies revealed that micro wind turbines, while possibly effective, at this point cannot reach a payback small enough to warrant a proposal by the project team. In the case of Anaba Winery the payback period was found to be eight to twelve years. According to the Federal – Business Energy Investment Tax Credit (ITC) the credit for small wind is 30% of the system cost. Maximum incentive for small wind turbines placed after 12/31/08 has no limit. However the system is only eligible if it is 100 Kw/H or less. The Denver PBC bottling plant is located at approximately (39.7751-104.97497), in addition to this one can reference the wind map of Colorado and see that the plant does not have the average wind speed required to warrant installing a wind turbine, regardless of cost.Resource(s):http://skystreamcommercial.com/will-skystream-work/case_study_anaba.php


http://skystreamcommercial.com/will-skystream-work/case_study_anaba.php


http://www.solatube.com/commercial/daylighting/top-lighting-vs-side-lighting.php


Geothermal WellsSimilar to the Anaerobic Digestion System, the team briefly spoke with Facilities Manager Dan Frauenfelder about possible use of geothermal wells. However, it was determined that the cost of such an endeavor would be extremely high due to construction costs and generator installation costs. It was also deemed infeasible because the wells would need to be considerably deep to generate enough of a temperature differential to generate energy from the Earth’s crust; as such, the plant would not have a viable location for the wells.Resource(s): Dan Frauenfelderhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_electricityhttp://www.consrv.ca.gov/dog/geothermal/general_info/pages/production_wells.aspx

SolarThe team was enthusiastic about the potential of Solar Energy. Through research, the team contacted Chris Hamilton, and Elston Howard of Vibrant Solar, Inc. for details and cost-benefit analysis. Unfortunately, the team had to reject the proposal because the project did not meet the required 2-3 year payback. In addition, had the solar panels met the proposed payback period, the initial investment would have still been a hefty $1.6 million for installation. There was also dissent about whether the facility’s roof could handle the added weight load. Because of these factors, the team reluctantly decided to discontinue pursuit of solar power.Resource(s): Chris Hamilton and Elston Howard of Vibrant Solar

SkylightsThe team considered changing the opacity of the skylights. The team contacted a vendor who consulted the team regarding the nearly 172 skylights observed on the roof of the facility. The vendor advised the team that the existing opacity of the skylights might already maximize the available light dispersion as is and switching to more transparent skylights would be a waste of money. As such, the team concluded to discontinue changing the skylights.


http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dog/geothermal/general_info/pages/production_wells.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_electricity


Appendix C: Meeting Minutes

Meeting Minutes

PBC Beverages Company- Electrical Conservation ProjectOct. 2, 20101:00 PM –2:00 PM Meeting called by Leeds School of Business TeamLocation: Pepsi Beverages Company DenverAttendees: Doug Waechter, Lee Allaire, Eric Bartram, Makenzie Bryk, Daniel Grant

Meeting SummaryReview of the PBC Process Outline posted by MakenzieLook through the snapshot software to establish error rate for different pieces of equipment.“Check for insulation”: ammonia compressor lines and the ice-making compressor lines as well as AC compressor lines. More insulation will allow the compressors to work more efficiently.Ammonia compressor room, they restrict access so we may not be able to get that today.Office Refrigerators may want to be metered for a day. The problem is that they are all old salvage or scrap from refurbishment center.

Separating Production Against WarehouseOnce we have a process diagram, at the brainstorming session, suggest things like turning off the power in certain sections.Doug did layers in the swim-lane diagram. He then put in bolder, thicker lines over the TOP as a recommendation.(Consider changing the responsiveness of the existing light sensors. You’ll want to take estimates on it).

Outside LightsYou may want to determine the area you want lit and then use that information to find what outside lights you want.

Action Item(s):Get current process for the ammonia compressors. Do they start at the same time? Doug: (2 compressors per line.)Contact with PBC Accountant?Doug: has contact info for contractor of the outside lighting.Contact: Paul Gonzales. 720-641-5348. Doug will contact him first.



Meeting Minutes

PBC Beverages Company- Electrical Conservation ProjectOct. 12, 20103:00PM—4:30PMMeeting called by Leeds School of Business TeamLocation: Pepsi Beverages Company, DenverAttendees: Dan Frauenfelder (D), Makenzie Bryk (M), Lee Allaire (L)

Meeting SummaryWhat we wanted to do.

Get information on the opaqueness of sky lights Discuss solar tubes and their potential placement Discuss any feasibility of solar panels Understand ammonia compressor processes Discover more information on motors Better understand ice making process

What was done. Skylights discussed, along with solar tubes, and solar panels Acquired information on ice making, motor lists, plant downtime electrical usage, and

water usage Ammonia compressor process discussed Discussed geothermal opportunities Discussed shutdown processes, and possible quick wins involving sensor timers

What needs to be done. Geothermal researched Solar panel estimate Solar tube companies researched Photometer readings of specific areas in plant Information on average sensor timers in plant and in offices One on one scheduled with Jim

Regarding Ice ProductionM: Eric sent you a status reportD: Yeah, I sent him some data; don’t have the ice equip data yetM: I need to know how much is stored, temperature, schedule of events.



D: In winter ice making is pretty much turned off, in the summer they will up production, and make it ahead of the events to make sure they have enough, one person is responsible for it(the ice production schedule), we have a log.D: (While looking at log) you can see the production here, $20 days are where the cooler is just running, other days are where we are actually making ice. L: What temp is the room and what temp does it actually need to be is the question we really have.D: That’s a good question, how will we turn that into BTU and put a number on it is my question, as far as I know he has the cooler on all the time, even if it for just a few bags. I will send you the log.M: There is a breaker over by the ice panel and a meter, is that meter for the ice maker?D: YesM: Combined with ice making, a process exists of recapturing the cooling from ice making to help A/C. What compressor is being used to cool the call center (that is close to the ice machine)?D: There are 4 air compressors right over the call center on the roof, are we talking using the heat, or capturing the cold?M: Capturing the coldD: I think you are on to something there, I was also thinking of geothermal. They dig holes in the ground, and run liquid cooling down through the ground and back up, you pull the coolness out of the ground and use it for A/C. That way you can have a much smaller cooler on the roof. Need a temp somewhere between 40-70 degrees. I wonder if you could use the reject on the RO, if you could collect that discharge from it (cooling in the summer, heating in the winter) you might be able to bypass actual geothermal. You’ll have to do some research. I would say you couldn’t do it throughout the whole building, with the office complexes alone I have about 30ton (Dan took a call here and did not finish the thought)…. Geothermal would be a great idea to use. PBC has a 68(summer)-78(winter) degrees [This is a reference to standard temperature in the offices]. But we usually go warmer (in the summer) and colder(In the winter).

Regarding the RO waterM: I have a number, 60,000 gallons a day. Is that right? [In regards to RO discharge]D: (Dan sends us a water usage log) RO water meter, this is the daily reading, 15% of RO being made is usually lower than that. M: How do you know percent to sewer?D: I have a meter on water leaving the building. You could use that water coming out to correct energy too, but you would have to find a way to get that back into the building, the PH plant is way out in the back. I would not have that water going through the building, I would run a



glycol tube down there and back, but it is way out there, maybe about 2 city blocks away. It’d be a huge journey.

More on geothermalM: Then as far as geothermal goes, where on the grounds would be acceptable to drill into? Perhaps the parking lots would work.D: Well all areas are asphalted, so you would have to be ready to repave.

Solar panels, solar tubes, and skylightsD: I looking into solar a year ago, they were saying 2mil, 30 years. The way the truss are, the only way we can put solar on is to go straight down the column row, which on both sides, is kind of a sizable area. Pretty much all the building is built this way. If you have a solar company come in, give me about a weeks’ notice, give me as the contact too. There isn’t really a place elsewhere on the grounds you could put solar. On the 3 of the 4 sides we are right on the property line. The only open area is over by the Ph and it is packed, if we do any growth that is the only area we can do it at.M: There are a lot of sky lights, but we have noticed they are really located correctly locatedD: 110,000 sq feet, has 60~ sky lights in it, back in the day when they put them in, they were pretty basic. We might be able to replace the skylights with solar tubes which supposedly have about the same power as a halogen bulb.M: We could replace the skylights, or put new tubes in-between.D: yes you could do either of those, over high traffic areas too. That would also require a light sensor to turn other lights on and off when those are working.M: Yes, we were thinking of that, can we get a photometer to check to see where in the plant is getting the right amount of light.D: Yes, I have one that measures foot/candle, you could walk the warehouse with my manager and we could.

Regarding lights over productD: The product where it is now might be an aisle tomorrow. The lights above them have sensors, what you could do, would be to get into the sensors and tweak how long they stay on. 6 bulbs in a fixture, 32watts (I think). Then you could figure out the time savings.M: Yeah, then we can figure out which locations need less time, same with the offices.D: Yes, the offices too, probably not the hallways, but the rooms. You can average it out, you won’t need to count every office in order to find savings.



Back to skylightsM: Sky lights; is there any requirements for the opaqueness of the skylights?D: Yeah, we could change the shell, that’s a good idea. Make them more effective if possible. That’s a good idea. Also what would it do just to clean them? That could be a quick win.M: Will need to schedule an appointment to use the photometer to gauge usage both inside and outside.D: Did you call Synergy Inc? They have done most of the lighting in the building.

Motors and ammonia compressorsM: Lastly, the motors, you don’t have a list currently for the motors? What can we do to get a list, or at least a sense of what kind of motors are in the facility, so we can determine what the best replacement for the motor is when it needs to be replaced based on cost and rebate incentives, we could be a replacement schedule.D: I have a motor list for can line 1 and bottle line 2, can line 2 is probably very similar to CL1. I was also looking at battery charging, is there a way we can turn off the battery chargers when they are done charging? But also, if you took those two lines you could average them. Just be aware that not all of those run all the time. Full can and case conveyor and filler run all the time, packer (80%) and palletizer aren’t always on. Make some educated guesses based on typical production of how those are probably running.M: Ammonia process, we haven’t gotten a chance to look at it, I want to know how the process works of how the compressors run with respect to production and not production.D: I will ask Jim to meet with you. The process is automated. We want that product to be as close to 32 deg as possible, the close to 32 the less foam, we get it about 34-36 degrees. It is all associated with pressure X pressure = X temp. Let’s just say we need it at 25lbs (pressure) and one compressor can do that, then its fine. But if it can’t, the next one will turn on to get to that 25lbs from 25%-50%-75%-100% and more lines will turn on as they need. After they unload they slow it down, once it is done unloading it will go down, then idle a little. Then turn off. That process is simple, but not hard to modify. You can adjust pressure and temperature. There are 11 compressors in the room, usually 2 per line. 2 liters take more pressure. Are we doing proper maintenance on the evaporators on the roof? When we take the heat out, if that cooling tower is not clean, it might make it harder to take that heat out. The gist is, is the operation set for optimal use? We’ll sit you down with Jim for a one on one. That same process is the same for AC and a boiler. A boiler, did I fix all my leaks? Is maintenance proper for fixing those things? D: If you look at my facility maintenance and look at utility use, look at my electrical use log. Say Oct 4th and 5th, look at what we run on a weekend, not a damn thing running and we are still at 11-20k, challenge our shutdown process. There needs to be a shutdown process. How can we



get the AC to go on with the light sensor? Why does the AC need to be on when no one is there? Maybe a button to override the AC is needed, to turn it on for an hour, or half hour. There is no one here, and stuff is running, we are wasting energy. Personally, other than maybe the geothermal, I don’t think there are any big wins. I’ll tell you what the sensors are set to soon.



Meeting Minutes

PBC Beverages Company- Electrical Conservation ProjectOct. 13, 20107:30 PM – 8:00 PMMeeting called by Leeds School of Business TeamLocation: None. Meeting held via phone callAttendees: Doug Waechter, Eric Bartram

Meeting SummaryAgenda Topics

ROI vs. Payback Waste Water (from RO)

o Dan said the pH facility is nearly 2 blocks out and would be a long journey back to the facility.

o Use a glycol tube to transport water back to facility?o Possible to use micro turbines at the pH facility?

Process for Recycling Spoilageo Plastic bottles recycled and liquid drained?o Can we filter out the sugary syrup from the waste to use?

What kind of sugar generally? Sucrose and Fructoseo Anaerobic Digestion vs. Fermentationo Cost-benefit of Waste-to-Energy system (Bio-Energy Recovery System)

Define how the client wishes the Project Team to Progresso Dan mentioned no “big wins”. What do we consider “big wins” vs. “quick wins”?o How to document rejected ideas

Accomplished and DiscussedROI vs. Payback

Generally, our Project Team’s goal is to create a synopsis of each potential solution. We will want to focus on payback mostly. It will be the next semester project team’s goal to calculate more of the detailed costs associated with the solutions when trying to implement our ideas (i.e. depreciation and maintenance costs, etc.).

Waste Water There is no “holding tank” at the pH treatment center. Doug was not sure if the water

was being pumped down to the pH center (and subsequently into the drain) or was a gravity-pull system.



Eric requested that Doug check and confirm if there the waste water is being pumped anywhere. Opportunities for micro-turbines might be possible from this analysis.

Spoilage and Bio-Energy Recovery System Currently, there is a 500 gallon tank of spoilage. The product is crushed; the liquid is

drained into the holding tank and the plastic bottles are recycled. The super-sugary slurry is then siphoned into the waste water slowly to maintain

nominal water composition. Doug mentioned that the most likely inhibiting factor against this possible solution

would be the sheer cost of the system. Eric mentioned that space requirements may also prevent this idea from being possible. Eric mentioned that he has been attempting to contact Pure Process Solutions, the

design/engineering firm that served Anheuser-Busch its Bio-Energy Recovery System. Eric said they have yet to contact him back.

Other Material Discussed Doug asked how comfortable the group was with achieving the 5% energy reduction

target. Eric responded that, at present, the team does not have enough cost-saving figures on its potential solutions to be able to justify whether the 5% goal is achievable yet.

When told that Project Team was informed by Dan that it may not actually be able to achieve any “big wins” and that it should perhaps focus more on achieving as many quick wins as possible, Doug advised that doing so would be good for the project write-up. He suggested saying to the staff, “you’re on the right track for X amount of energy consumption, but in order to reach that goal, the following are items you can work on…”

When asked to define “Big Wins” versus “Small Wins”, Doug mentioned that, ON AVERAGE, each employee costs $200,000/yr. As such, the more “employees” one could potentially cover with cost savings, the bigger the win.

Agenda for Upcoming Period Finish and review Brainstorming Session Agenda Continue on Process Diagram and Swim-lane. Continue research on proposed solutions so far. Action Items:

o Send Status Report on Friday, Oct. 15 to Doug. Requested from Team to Doug: waste water pumps vs. gravity; how much spoilage is in

the holding tank on average. Requested from Doug to Team: nothing.

Meeting Minutes



PBC Beverages Company- Electrical Conservation ProjectOct. 21, 20107:30 PM – 8:00 PMMeeting called by Leeds School of Business TeamLocation: Leeds Business SchoolAttendees: Doug Waechter, Eric Bartram, Lee Allaire

Meeting SummaryAgenda TopicsInformation Requested:What temp is ice-maker storing ice?What is Ice-making and storing process/requirements? When/how much, how long is it stored?What are the time settings on the lighting sensors? Switch plate sensors vs. fixture sensors?Contact information for maintenance tech in charge of ammonia compressors?Contact information for IT?Number of computers locations?Refurb Center Meter? What about warehouse space lighting PBC uses in Refurb?Review List of Possible Solutions and ask Feasibility of Optimal Solutions:Potential Action Plans:

Lighting- LED pilot for outdoor, time/motion sensors, ballast/transformer replacement, intermittent lighting, photo-meter audit, replace light bulbs in the Office, timing PROCESS change (i.e. turning off unnecessary lights at night/after shift)

Refrigeration- sequencing or controller for ammonia compressors, variable frequency drives installed on fan motors (see ORC System, use of waste heat)

Ice Making- Recapture cooled ice air and send to A/C (probably unlikely)o Change the ice-making process (i.e. timing, etc.)

Air Compressor- Recapture blow molder air, constant pressure for compressor on the new air compressor (this will probably already be done)

Extra Air coming into the low-pressure compressor: find a use.0 Solar- Check leases and rebates, get estimates Solar refracting tubes, skylight opacity, Motors- develop replacement schedule for maintenance. Xcel will provide motor

rebates on efficient motors. Micro-turbines for waste water Anaerobic Digestion System (Bio-Energy Recovery System) for Spoilage Organic Rankine Cycle Turbine-Generator System using Industrial Waste Heat



Geothermal well(s) and/or Geothermal Cooling (i.e. running pipes under-ground to keep the pipes cool)

Natural Gas Generator (i.e. Natural Gas may be cheap enough to pump directly into the plant and used to generate electricity)

Potential Quick Wins: Double this amount of electricity we sell back (Currently 500 Megawatts @ $30/KW) Batteries- are all chargers needed? Suggest charger model for replacement as needed Office Fridges- recommend replace/remove office fridges with better option Reduce A/C- Reduce temp of A/C in offices, chiller insulation Process change- Develop checklists, suggest replacements of components as needed,

determine locations of new breakers/switches Shut-down process change Ice making- Create ice making schedule for optimal production Air Compressor- constant pressure control Computers- checklist, software and rewards for powering down computers during non-

use Smart Thermostats – seasonal temperature changes, production-dependent cooling (i.e.

turning off the A/C at night after shifts) Refurb Center: turn off outdoor lighting fixtures inside, place timers/sensors in inventory

area, Clarifications

Is the 5% savings explicitly for the PBC Beverages Company? Or does it apply to the entire business unit of PBC?

Will the stakeholders be bothered if we trade consumption from one area to another?o Our justification: we don’t believe the energy is being accounted for accurately.

If you are able to account for this more accurately, then you may be able to plan ahead better.

o The easy answer: propose setting up a meter for this area only (to better justify what they are being charged.)

Accomplished and Discussed Ice-maker temperature: Doug will check this; however, he mentioned there might be a

food-safety requirement. We may want to discontinue the ice-maker action plan. Ice-maker is owned by Special

Events and is run autonomously from normal plant operations. Transformer cost saving: 5-10%, updating to more efficient models from older models.



Refurb Center: only use action plans that utilize the Refurb center if we need it to supplement energy reduction from other ideas.

Outdoor Lighting (LED): find an LED that fits the outdoor lighting standard and see if the ROI justifies its use.

Doug suggests we should start making more assumptions on what the numbers we can use and we can fine-tune our details later.

For warehouse lighting, ask around for Best-practices on lighting. Doug reviewed the list of ideas. He recommends we focus our attention primarily on: (1)

Megawatt sellback program, (2) updating/replacing plant-wide transformers, and (3) Outdoor LED lights. The rest we should push back for now, or finish out our justification for why they are not feasible.

Agenda for Upcoming Period Ask Doug to get Dan to give the Project Team the contact information of the Energy

Auditor who assessed the transformers. Action Item: temperature of the glycol before the Cooling Tower, check temperature of

ammonia compressor room.Action-Item for Project Team

Process Diagram (priority)



Meeting Minutes

PBC Beverages Company- Electrical Conservation ProjectNov. 3, 20105:30 PM – 6:00 PMMeeting called by Doug WaechterLocation: Leeds Business School, via conference call.Attendees: Doug Waechter, Makenzie Bryk, Eric Bartram

Meeting SummaryAgenda TopicsProcess Map Level of DetailEnernoc Website Data-mining for baselines on scenariosContact info for IT and Ammonia Compressor Tech, CES contact (we looked but can’t find the contact info)Heat Exchanger Temperature# of lights in the warehouse, # of lights in the offices (ballpark) – or number of fixtures if that’s easier to find out.AccomplishedSwim Lane Diagram Clarifications

- We feel there is a disconnect between the swim-lane diagram of the panels, and the ability for us to actually measure this stuff. We feel that the process of measuring the scenarios is a completely separate issue.

- Doug: we want to be able to identify likely processes so we can cost them. - We won’t be able to connect the panels with the processes during the life of this

project.- Make a Swim-lane: production support, facility support,

o i.e. in a production supporting process: air compressors, cooling towers,o Ice-making under Othero Office AC under Offices…o Want to look at Production, Warehouse, Facilities, Other.o Mixing Room (maybe under supporting production processes)

Scenario Clarifications- Do the scenarios through the website.

o Swim-lane: we want to color-code the processes to get the amount of kilowatts used (and what it costs).

- What we need from Doug are the dates that each of the processes ran so we can go through on the website.



Contact Info:- IT:

o CC Dan and Doug when you email her, qualify the email with “Dan Frauenfelder allowed us to email you…”

- Ammonia Compressor Tech- CES

o Jeff Rude

Ammonia compressor- Ask the Ammonia Compressor guy.

o Most heat will be above the heat tunnel,o Ammonia doesn’t have the same boiling point. In the exchange, as the heat boils

off, the excess heat from the ammonia won’t probably be high enough Sean told Doug:We’re using 30 watt bulbs inside; we want to switch out to 28 watt bulbs, which may save us $20,000.

- Contact Sean Crowell directly.- 8 watts per ballast.



Meeting Minutes

PBC Beverages Company- Electrical Conservation ProjectNov. 12, 201012:00 PM – 1:30 PMMeeting called by Project TeamLocation: PBC Bottling FacilityAttendees: Project Team, Dan Frauenfelder, Doug Waechter, Sean Powers (Facilities Maintenance Supervisor), Bob Dunst (Production Manager), Doug Frank (Maintenance Supervisor), Jim Sheridan (Maintenance Manager), Sean Crowell (Process Compliance Supervisor), Dave McMillian (Xcel), Jeff (CES)

BRAINSTORMING SESSIONCAPITAL EXPENDITURE PROPOSALS

Ammonia Compressorso Ammonia compressors are the largest consumer of electricity. Improve

sequencing, provide better insulation, or install KVAR system which would improve motor efficiency.

o Will Xcel support KVAR? Yes. Question is if it will save any power.o KVAR rates are based on worst KVAR systems. If you can minimize inductive load,

then you will be able to reduce your rate. Xcel doesn’t have a power reduction factor penalty. Bill on demand. Only

benefit would be the saved energy. If you go with a manufacturer, ask what they can guarantee. Is there a

penalty on the seller if you breach 3 year payback? Frito Lay put in KVAR systems. Savings were around 1%. Savings over a

30-day period was limited.o Proceed with Caution on capacitor banks. Xcel: cheaper to monitor electrical

load themselves, than have the individual clients use KVAR system. Lighting

o Issue on indoor: find bulbs that are cost-effective that are coated. Possible LEDs. Double the cost of regular bulb, however, their lifespan is 2-3X of a regular bulb. ½ Kw/H usage reduction.

o Outdoor halogen light bulbs inefficient. Better with LEDs.o Will the LEDs use the same fixtures?

It is possible with LEDs you don’t need a ballast. Removing the ballasts will be expensive. May be able to get salvage value from the ballasts.

Is it equivalent of a CFL? No, it is an LED.



Do you put it in the same fixture? No, take the ballast out, and hook the wires up to the LED. With outdoor, LEDs outdoor is better. Talk with Jeff from CES. Want to talk with Greg and what types of

obstacles we’ll face to remove ballasts. 90% of factory lights are motion detector equipped. Will have to see if

they are compatible with the LEDs need a heat sink? New fixtures? CES: don’t think LEDs generate

heat. Battery life on the solar-structure outdoor lights. What is the lifetime of

the structure? These structures can last 10 days without sunlight as power. For the purpose of our project, you need to narrow it down to just

one application (i.e. what is the cost of one structure, for instance).

Sensors: want to short some of the cycle times. Want a smart controller; switch the time cycle for weekends

versus production times. If you have an override, you’ll want it to be on a timer (otherwise they get left on).

Building automation control? We do, but we’d have to tie into each light.

LonWorks Technologies What is the building automation control: used for HVAC.

Capability to do whatever. Cost: $10K+ per new module you want to establish on.

Can we run them into existing panels? No cost. You may need to add power-line fixtures. You can do timed and conditions on them.

Problem: you have to make sure that you have an override on them (i.e. a switch). Any metering on this system? Yes, this is how we track the air compressor. With add-ons, you can add an infinite number of things on LonWorks. The component is cheap, what’s expensive is the programming the module and nay hardwiring that may be necessary.

Solar Powero Proposals for 2 different systems:

Problem can be payback: 500 Kw with KVAR system. Payback: 4 years.



Is there any value in the reduction of CO2 pollution? Dan: challenge Vibrant, what is the lifespan of the equipment? Roof-load capacity problem: We know that some of the roof is at max

capacity; however, we’d have to do more engineering to determine the areas that would be able to bear the load.

Xcel: rebate and capacity payments, get system down on 500 Kw system to 7 years. Cap rebates at systems of 100 Kw. I think it is a PR stunt more than saving energy. What Lee concludes: KVAR is the only thing propping up the payback on the solar project.

Transformerso Replacing transformers most beneficial if we can identify transformers that are

being under-utilized. It’s possible that you might even be able to take them out entirely. Optimal efficiency is when they are fully-loaded.

o Xcel: we figure 1% loss across a transformer. If you’re going to buy new transformers, pay the differential to get the more efficient one, but DON’T replace them unless you really need to.

QUICK-WIN PROPOSALS Air Compressor

o New process of high pressure air compressor. Excess air will be recaptured by the low-pressure blow molder. Plan: constant pressure system, or VFD on that air compressor to limit the draw that it has during those times that it’s trying to fill its tank.

o With the new system, wasted air is piped back into the system. It is already on a VFD. When the air is piped back in, it should automatically self-regulate.

o As long as the blow-molder is operational, we recapture the blow-air, and eliminate the use of the low pressure machine entirely. When it doesn’t run, we have to have the other machine working. The current machine is soft-start, no VFD. Valves should create a constant load already. Difficult to get cost-savings from the compressors. Lost air is very costly. But the Maintenance team already does periodic audits for lost air.

Maintenance Shut-down Processo On the checklist, it’s pretty hard to train everybody to turn off lights. Dan: put a

SINGLE switch going to a relay-bank so that it is simple and easy. LonWorks program: tie the switch into LonWorks and automate the process.

LonWorks: if there are specific times you know when people won’t be there, you can automate; otherwise, you’ll need an override.

Motor Replacement Schedule



o Xcel: doesn’t matter what brands you buy. More HP, get less rebate, Less HP, higher rebate. If you replace them with in-house labor. Rebate capped at 60% of cost. If you include labor, you can add cost into there to get the full cost of rebate.

o Rebates are getting less as differential costs increase. We encourage you to get high efficiency motors.

Automated Computer Shutdown through ITo Xcel: Quest just bought a new system. 2 year payback. Automatic shutdown

process. Differential savings between sleep-mode and actual shutdown was significant.

o Send: email address – VENDOR for who did Quest. Smart-Thermostats

o May save more natural gas than electricity, but in the summer we may get savings from reducing unnecessary A/C.

Batterieso Forklift batteries: we know there’s not a lot to be done except propose new

systems. o Dan: the fleet-maintenance manager already looked into this. Ask Dan for this

INFORMATION.o Xcel: you can get a pre-approved rebate on new batteries.

Enernoc Energy Sell-back Programo Xcel: Interruptible Service Option – credits are double.o Advantage of Enernoc: Enernoc has more flexibility.o Xcel: You have to reduce. For 1500 Kw, $100,000. Pay back ½ capacity payment.

Second time, let go.o As the amount gets larger: it gets hardero Xcel: PowerSecure. Install generation for you, they take all the risk. Go on

generation during an event. Don’t save any money, but what you get is more secured service. If you have an outage, generator comes online.

o Outages come during peak production seasons. Half the outages come in spring and fall.

o Bluebox: self-contained generator. Office Awareness Plan

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS NEAR THE END OF THE SESSION



The following were final comments made by attendees concerning potential new ideas or feasibility or proposed actions.Dan: Your question is: define where the meters need to go. Maybe use portable meters to test locations out.Xcel: Meter the batteries. We can then pay $.1 for self-direct rebate. Paid on what you save. To get rebates for metering. Focus metering on areas where you can do something about it. If it is an area that you’re not using than it is useless.Jim: opportunities in the Refrigeration system – 11 8-cylinder machines, some are old, some are newer. Older ones are 50% unloadable; compress all the time. Balancing the load is difficult because I don’t have fully unloadable capability. You can slow the machines down with VFDs, match the loads across. I don’t know paybacks. Put VFDs on older ones, (replacing w/new ones would be too expensive). De-aerators: network them together.Jim: Lighting – I’d investigate office lighting. It is too difficult in the production facility. Office with 2 fixtures in it would be a good place to start. Make sure it won’t affect production.Maintenance Mgr: motors drive vacuum pumps. Shut-down procedure for the de-aerator? LonWorks? No production running, yet …. Lighting – no complaints of too much light. Have gone out and taken lights out. We have tried to upgrade the bulbs to the 28W bulbs. There are 2 fixtures, 3 bulbs each. Now the brightness level is better because it is dimmer.Xcel: lighting – will pay for lighting redesign (rebate). Consultant can do it. Best locations. Rebate is % of cost (75% of cost will be rebated).Batteries, compressed air system – buy some portables, start small, and take it from there.Wireless: doesn’t work well in the facility. Control systems can be put on wireless IF you can make it work. One fault is unacceptable which can be a high risk.Facility Maintenance: batteries. There’s a lot of batteries that are idle and suck up power all-day long. Find some time of shut-off that we could utilize.Other: fridges. Are there any timers you can put these fridges on? Replace all company ones (not allowed); buy efficient fridges for community areas. There is potential for massive push-back from staff.



Appendix D: Status Updates

Electrical Conservation Project TeamStatus Report for period ending October 8, 2010

Work completed since last period: Sent an action item list to Dan. Received many answers to questions. Project Team members have been researching potential solutions. After Dan’s email

response, the team has decided to pursue alternate locations for solar panels should these spaces exist.

Project Manager has been compiling a process diagram for Dan to review at next week’s scheduled meeting (Tuesday, Oct 12 at 3:00 PM at the PBC plant).

Planned but not accomplished: We are currently waiting to receive more information on ice-maker schedule from Dan. Project Team members will continue to research information on potential solutions.

Issues requiring assistance: With the news that the roof may not support solar panels and the development that a

list of motor details is not available, the Project Team will need to meet with Dan and/or Doug to discuss how to proceed with the project from here. This item will be discussed in next weeks’ status meetings.

Work to be completed during next period: Makenzie and Lee will be meeting with Dan at the facility on Tuesday, Oct 12 at 3:00

PM. Agenda: TBD Eric and Daniel will be meeting with Doug at the facility on Wednesday, Oct 13 at 5:45

PM. Agenda: TBD The Project Team will continue working on collecting more research on proposed

solutions as well as working on the process diagram.




Work completed since last period: Makenzie and Lee met with Dan at the facility on Tuesday, Oct. 12 at 3:00 PM.

o Topics discussed were: (1) solar panels, solar tubes, skylights; (2) Ice-maker details, motor list for CL and BL, water usage; (3) Ammonia compressor; (4) Geothermal; and (5) shutdown processes.

Eric spoke with Doug over the phone on Wednesday, Oct. 13 at 7:30 PM.o Topics discussed were: (1) ROI vs. Payback; (2) Is water being pumped to the pH

treatment center? If so, can we possibly implement micro turbines along the process? (3) Spoilage tank.

Project Team members have continued research on possible solutions.Planned but not accomplished:

Project Team is currently re-evaluating the process of which solutions should be considered after reviewing the original project charter. The charter does not define “big wins”; as such, the project team may move towards focusing on the details of the numerous “quick wins”.

Project Team is currently working on a tentative brainstorming session agenda. Daniel is putting the agenda together and has requested cost-justifications from the other team members on their researched solutions.

Makenzie is continuing to work on the process diagram/swim-lane diagram.Issues requiring assistance:

Daniel has noted a discrepancy in the interior light bulb product types given to the Project Team by Dan (via email) and the light bulb taken from Sean’s office via Doug.

o Light bulb in Sean’s office: Phillips f32t8/tL735 high vision.o Light bulb details via Dan’s email: F28T8XLSPX41CVG Fluorescent Bulb $6.25

each. F34CW/RS/WM/ECO Fluorescent Bulb $0.92 each. No coating. Eric has been researching potential waste-to-energy systems and has requested 2 items

from Doug: (1) is the waste water being pumped to the pH center? (2) on average, how much spoilage is in the spoilage tank?

Work to be completed during next period: The Project Team hopes to have its brainstorming session agenda complete and ready

for review sometime this upcoming week. Eric has been researching Organic Rankine Cycle turbine systems and will be requesting

information on the heat exchangers used in the plant.Electrical Conservation Project Team



Status Report for period ending October 22, 2010

Work completed since last period: Project Team met with Doug at the Leeds School of Business on Thursday, 10.21.10. We

discussed information on the ice-making process, ammonia compressors, as well as reviewed our list of possible action plans and quick wins.

After reviewing the list of action plans, Doug recommended the Project Team to pursue the following as having more priority over other possible action plans:

o Outdoor LED lightingo Replacing old transformerso Megawatt Sell-back program

Various other solutions were identified and eliminated during the Thursday meeting with Doug. For instance, use of water turbines, Anaerobic Digestion systems, NG-Energy (Natural Gas) systems among others, were discounted due to high cost and space restrictions.

Planned but not accomplished: The Project Team is currently trying to produce the process-diagram for Doug. The Project Team is also trying to finish the agenda details of the Brainstorming Session.

Issues requiring assistance: Doug is currently researching the temperature above the heat tunnel. Eric will ask Dan to clarify the waste-heat coming from the ammonia compressor room. Doug will ask Dan to give the Project Team the contact information for the Energy

Auditor that suggested replacing the old plant transformers for cost-savings.Work to be completed during next period:

The Project Team’s top priority right now is to finish the process diagram for Doug so that we can use it in combination with the online database to identify production scenarios in order to calculate base-levels of energy consumption.

The Project Team will continue to do cost-benefit analysis on the above three proposed solutions.




Work completed since last period: Project Team has created a cost schedule that predicts the cost of electricity per

kilowatt that will be applied to all action plans for more accurate payback. Project Team began researching transformers in-depth. Project Team contacted Fletcher McCormic of Enernoc and discussed the possibility of

PBC re-nominating for a higher kilowatt commitment level. Project Team identified possible replacement LED outdoor light bulbs and has begun to

generate cost-benefit analysis figures on the LED lights versus the existing outdoor lights.

Planned but not accomplished: Project Team attempted to contact and meet with Doug during the week to discuss the

swim-lane diagram in relation to the scenario list, but was unsuccessful. Project Team contacted Infinity Turbine Inc. to inquire about details of their IT250

waste-heat turbine generator system but was not given any details by the company president. Eric requested the temperature above the heat tunnel and ammonia compressor room from Doug and is currently waiting to hear back so he could re-contact Infinity Turbine.

Issues requiring assistance: Project Team needs to meet with Doug to discuss swim-lane diagram and scenario list. Project Team has requested the temperature generated above the heat tunnel and the

ammonia compressor room. Project Team has also asked if the plant uses heat exchangers with thermal oil.

Work to be completed during next period: Project Team will continue to attempt contact with Doug to discuss the swim-lane

diagram and the scenario list. Project Team will continue to generate cost-benefit analysis figures on Transformers,

LED outdoor lights, and Enernoc kilowatt pay-back program. We expect these numbers to be finished by the end of this week to allow the Project Team to judge if the 5% goal is attainable.

o Project Team has contacted the Environmental Auditor about the transformers and is currently awaiting a response.

Project Team will begin writing awareness plans for PBC staff.Electrical Conservation Project Team



Status Report for period ending November 5, 2010

Work completed since last period: Project Team is working on preparing cost-benefit analysis on LED outdoor lights. Project Team has completed cost-benefit analysis on re-nominating to a higher kilowatt

sell-back program with Enernoc. Energy savings equivalent to 5.2% are possible with the capacity payment of $45,000 alone.

Project Team was contacted by Doug on Wednesday, Nov. 3. Reviewed items for the brainstorming session, PBC’s heat exchange system, and inquired about contact information for IT and a maintenance expert on the Ammonia compressor system.

Project Team spoke with Dave McMillian, PBC’s contact with Xcel Energy, about the possibility of replacing transformers. The team was informed that the process is expensive and savings tend to be minimal if the transformers are less than 10 years old.

A date for the brainstorming session with PBC management was scheduled for Friday, November 12 from noon to 1 PM.

Planned but not Accomplished Project Team consulted with Doug about the swim-lane diagram and how color-coding it

after the team identifies baseline energy consumption levels for major processes may be useful. As such, the team is waiting on Doug to deliver a schedule of days he believes major processes are being operated at the plant so the team can go through the Enernoc website and find baselines.

Project Team has the details set for the brainstorming session, and will continue to plan how to execute the session.

Project Team will begin to start writing up a staff Awareness Plan, and a Shut-down Maintenance check-list.

Project Team will continue to research efficient motors and create a motor replacement schedule including relevant Xcel motor rebates.

Project Team was informed by Doug that a recent conversation with Maintenance Manager Sean Crowell revealed the possibility that the plant will want to replace their indoor lights soon. Daniel will finish the indoor lighting plan and pass it by Sean.

Items Requiring Assistance The Project Team is currently waiting on Doug to supply the team with a production

report for us to establish baseline readings from.Electrical Conservation Project Team

Status Report for Brainstorming Session held on November 12, 2010



CAPITAL EXPENDITURE PROPOSALS Installation of a KVAR system: savings may be minimal (~1%). Frito-Lay installed a similar

KVAR system and had low savings. Lighting: Project Team will have to do additional research on how indoor LED lights are

installed. It is possible that the existing ballasts would have to be replaced or removed.o Project Team may focus on replacing office lighting instead of interior factory or

warehouse lighting. A complication that arose with possible LED replacement lights in the factory is whether LED installation would be compatible with the existing sensors on the fixtures.

Project Team will contact Jeff from CES for more guidance on this issue.o Two issues came up regarding outdoor LED replacement lights: (1) would the

LEDs require new fixtures with heat sinks? (2) For the proposed solar-powered light fixtures, the Project Team will need to do additional research to find out the battery life of these lights as well as the cost differential from existing structures.

o Xcel has rebates covering 75% of cost for new lighting redesigns. Building Automation System – LonWorks: Current system used for HVAC only. It is

possible to have automation of lights, but the cost of adding functions will be expensive ($10K per new function – programming and any necessary hardwiring required). If this system is utilized to automate lights or other functions, each new function will require a manual override protection (a switch for example).

Solar Power: at this point, it appears that Solar will not be a viable proposal because it has minimal rebates and high payback costs. When combined with a KVAR system, the payback is still out-of-scope and the reliability of the solar panel power is questionable.

Transformers: Jeff from CES clarified that savings may come only from removing under-utilized transformers. This is because optimal transformer efficiency occurs only when the transformer is fully-loaded. Any transformer that is not fully-loaded will be wasting power. Re-routing power lines to optimize use of a minimal number of transformers may be costly.

QUICK-WIN PROPOSALS Maintenance Shutdown Schedule: it’s difficult to train all the last-shift employees to

turn off the lights in the breaker boxes. What PBC would like to see is a simple switch that can shut down unnecessary lights and equipment at the end of the shift.

Motor Replacement Schedule: Xcel offers motor replacement rebates capped at 60% of cost. If you include labor in the calculation for the rebate, you may be able to cover the entire value of the motor. There is a free software package called Program Motor



Management Plus which lists all motor brands. This will be useful in choosing optimal motors to replace existing ones with.

Automated Computer Shutdown: Dave from Xcel informed us that Quest just bought an automated system with a 2 year payback that does this. Project Team will contact Dave to get details and vendor info.

Batteries: Project Team was informed by Dan Frauenfelder that the Fleet-Maintenance manager has already looked into replacement battery chargers. Information was given to the team before they left the facility. Ideally, the team should also research replacement chargers that shut-off when finished charging.

Enernoc Energy Sell-back Program vs. Xcel Interruptible Load Program: The plant may have significant difficulty reducing their production load by 1.5 megawatts. Project Team may want to find a different level for the plant to re-nominate to.

o PowerSecure: Program through Xcel where an outside contractor installs a generator system in the plant. During outages, the plant could then run on generator power. Project Team will contact Dave McMillian with Xcel for details.

OPEN DISCUSSION NEAR THE END OF THE SESSION: The Project Team will propose metering all major processes. Dan F. pointed out that the

challenge in this will be to propose where the meters should be installed. Jeff from CES recommended using portable meters to test possible locations of permanent meters.

o A major win that may be possible is to meter the battery process. Xcel has a rebate for self-directed metering that is substantial.

Jim Sheridan suggested that the project team investigate installing VFDs on the older 8-cylinder refrigeration compressors to balance the load. This may be more cost-effective than replacing the old compressors with new ones.

Wireless in the facility is unreliable. There was discussion that wireless-controlled processes could be set up, but the risk of unreliable service may be too high.

Office Fridges: a possible solution will be to ban individual fridges and install more efficient community fridges. Project Team expects massive staff resistance of this idea. Another plausible solution will be to reduce the temperature of these fridges. These issues will be communicated to the staff through the staff Awareness Plan.

Electrical Conservation Project TeamStatus Report for period ending November 19, 2010



Work completed since last period: Project Team received feedback from the brainstorming session held the week of

November 12. Major proposals generated from the session include: (1)Removing unnecessary aerator pumps; (2) backup power generator through Power Secure; (3) Integrating existing systems into LonWorks.

o Project Team has contacted Power Secure and is finalizing the details of the proposed program. Dan Frauenfelder and Doug Waechter were CC’d on the email from Power Secure Regional Manager Paul Priepke in his communications with Eric.

Project Team is nearing completion of ALL cost-benefit analysis on items covered in the brainstorming session, plus the new proposals identified above.

Project Team has assigned project team members sections of the PPT presentation for the client for December 13. Draft presentations will be held in-class with Hitachi mentors the week following Thanksgiving.

Project Team assigned project team members sections to address in the Final Deliverable due December 8.

Planned but not accomplished: Makenzie scheduled a meeting with Doug for Saturday 11/20/10 to identify process

baselines in the Enernoc website. Project Team is expected to complete the draft presentation by the end of Thanksgiving

week. Project Team is expected to have the Final Deliverable ready for PBC December 8.

Items Requiring Assistance: Contact information for the following PBC staff has been requested: Matt McLaughlin,

Jim Sheridan. Project Team also asked Doug if the team should include the other PBC staff that attended the Brainstorming session (other than Jim Sheridan).

Electrical Conservation Project TeamStatus Report for period ending November 26, 2010

Work completed since last period:



Project Team met over the Thanksgiving break to continue to create slides and discuss the content of the upcoming draft Presentation on December 1.

Eric created an employee electrical consumption reduction awareness plan draft.

Planned but not accomplished Project Team has all write-up material; calculations are being made for potential

savings. Project Team is waiting on a few contractors for savings estimates and price quotes to

finalize action plan write-ups.o Upon collection of these estimates and quotes, Makenzie will have a finalized

version of the Swim Lane diagram. Project Team expects to have the presentation complete by the next scheduled meeting

(Sunday, 11/28). Project Team expects to have all content of the Final Deliverable aggregated and

organized into a draft Final Deliverable in the next few days. Before the end of next week, the Project Team expects to have a fully formatted draft Final Deliverable ready for review before the due date.

Items Requiring Assistance No assistance required at this time. However, the project team will be ready to present

a draft Final Deliverable by the end of next week.

Appendix E: Final PresentationSee attached Data CD for Final PowerPoint Presentation


Pepsi Beverages Company -...

Documents

Transcript of Pepsi Beverages Company -...