1 MOTOR SUMMIT 07 More energy efficient electric motor systems and rapid market penetration 5 th international Summit for energy efficiency powered by S.A.F.E. Energy efficiency improvement is crucial to a sustainable energy future, including energy security, economic development and environmental protection. Electric motors and motor systems in industrial and building pump, fan, compressor, and traction applications use 40 % of total electricity. Existing and new technology designs offer the potential to reduce the typical energy demand of motor systems across the global economy by upwards of 30 % with short payback periods, if market barriers can be overcome. The Swiss Agency for Efficient Energy Use (S.A.F.E.), in collaboration with the international harmonization initiative SEEEM (Standards for Energy Efficiency of Electric Motor Systems) and the swissenergy program, is pleased to announce the Motor Summit 2007, to be held April 2007 in Zurich, Switzerland. The Motor Summit 07 continues in the tradition of the Light Summit 02, the Appliance Summit 03, the Electronics Summit 04, and the Light Summit 05, providing a forum for international authorities on motor system efficiency issues to discuss innovative technological developments, the current state of market penetration and strategies and actions to overcome barriers to the uptake of high-efficiency motor systems. The Motor Summit 07 will bring together selected experts from research, government and the private sector, with the intent of supporting various ongoing processes, such as the work of the IEA under the G8 Plan of Action for Climate Change, Clean Energy and Sustainable Development, the International Task Force on Sustainable Products, the EU Energy Efficiency Action Plan 2006, and the Asian Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate. S.A.F.E. wants to contribute to the effort of swissenergy to reduce energy demand and stabilize electrical energy consumption by Partners Motor Summit 07 is supported by: Faktor Publishers, MotorChallenge, EnAW, Swissmem, SwissTnet
2 Date 10 and 11 April 2007 Organization S.A.F.E. Swiss Agency for Efficient Energy Use Tel +41 (0) Tel +41 (0) Fax +41 (0) Host S.A.F.E. (organization) SEEEM SwissEnergy Partners Energie-Agentur der Wirtschaft Faktor Publishers Motor Challenge Europe Swissmem Swiss Technology Network Sponsors Swiss Federal Office of Energy S.A.F.E. Awel Canton Zurich Conference and Hotel Accommodation: Hotel Marriott Zurich Neumühlequai 42 CH-8001 Zurich +41 (0) Registration Conference Please register by 1 March (english) (english) (deutsch) Hotel Single room CHF 248 (including breakfast) Mail before 1 March 2007 to: (please mention «Motor Summit» to profit from the group arrangement) Documentation A documentation of executive summaries will be handed to all participants at the conference.the full presentations in slides, etc. will be made available shortly after the conference to all participants and the public under and Conference fee (including conference documentation): Complete registration for 10 & 11 April 2007 (including dinner 10 April 2007) Registration for 10 April 2007 International Strategy (without dinner) Registration for 11 April 2007 Swiss Implementation CHF Euro Registration for dinner 10 April Members of S.A.F.E., SEEEM, Swissmem or SwissTnet will receive a discount of 20 %. Payment You will receive payment instructions after registration. Conference overview Swiss Agency for Efficient Energy Use Schaffhauserstr. 34, CH-8006 Zurich Tel./Fax +41 (0)
3 MOTOR SUMMIT 07 MS 07 International Strategy, Tuesday 10 April Coffee Introduction Welcome and introduction to MS 07 Conrad U. Brunner, S.A.F.E., Switzerland Swiss energy policy: Motors as focus in a new energy efficiency program International Developments Chair: Conrad U. Brunner, S.A.F.E Global motor system energy demand: Opportunities and initiatives Walter Steinmann, Director SFOE, Switzerland Paul Waide, IEA, France Indian motor policies: Status report S. Ramaswamy, Bureau of Energy Efficiency, Government of India US industry experience and future directions of DOE policy Robert Boteler, Emerson, NEMA, USA Motor Challenge Program in Europe Jacques-Olivier Budin, Ademe, France Technical Harmonization Issues Chair: Anibal De Almeida, University of Coimbra, Portugal Comparison of efficiency testing procedures (IEC 60034, CSA C390 and IEEE 112) and impact of measurement uncertainty New efficiency classes and marking schemes in IEC : Now motors above Premium Towards more efficient electric motors and systems: Manufacturer s possibilities Lunch Policy Issues Lessons Learned Anne Arquit Niederberger, A+B International, USA Dale Friesen and Pierre Angers, Hydro Quebec, for Natural Resources Canada Brian Fletcher, Baldor Switzerland Steve Rudell, General Manager, ABB United Kingdom Status & prospects for MEPS Neal Elliott, Industrial Program Director, ACEEE, USA EU Energy Efficiency Action Plan and ecodesign of Energy-using Products Directive Ismo Grönroos-Saikkala, EC DG Tren, Belgium Long-Term Agreements in the Netherlands Frank Hartkamp, SenterNovem, Netherlands Polish motor policy Szymon Liszka, FEWE, Poland Korea Motor Efficiency Policy Seo Huseok, KEMCO, Korea Future SEEEM Activities SEEEM Work Plan Conrad U. Brunner Stakeholder outreach Hans de Keulenaer, European Copper Institute, Belgium Panel discussion End Reception and Dinner University of Zurich: Tower Restaurant
4 MOTOR SUMMIT 07 MS 07 Swiss Implementation, Mittwoch 11. April Kaffee Ziel: Eliminierung ineffizienter Elektromotoren und -systeme Begrüssung und Tagungsziel, Ergebnisse des internationalen Tages EnergieSchweiz hat einen Effizienzschwerpunkt MOTOREN Lernen von Europa Measures to promote motor system energy efficiency preventive maintenance Österreichisches Programm zur Steigerung der Energieeffizienz in der Industrie «Initiative EnergieEffizienz» Information, Beratung, Motivation zur effizienten Stromnutzung in Industrie & Gewerbe Motoren Schweiz Elektrische Antriebe im Programm energieschweiz Forschungsaktivitäten bei elektrischen Motoren/Antrieben in der Schweiz Elektrische Antriebe: Heutige und künftige Effizienzpotenziale in der Industrie Vorreiterrolle in der Energieeffizienz: Die Wirtschaft als freiwilliger, proaktiver Partner Mittagessen Fallbeispiele und wirtschaftliche Bedeutung Umsetzung «Motor Challenge Programm», Praxisbericht von Novartis in Basel Grossverbraucher im Kanton Zürich sparen Strom Conrad U. Brunner, S.A.F.E., Zürich Michael Kaufmann, Vizedirektor BFE, Leiter energieschweiz, Bern Hugh Falkner, AEA Market Transformation Program, Didcot UK Konstantin Kulterer, Austrian Energy Agency, Wien Annegret-Cl. Agricola, Deutsche Energie- Agentur, Bereichsleiterin Energieeffizienz, Berlin Felix Frey, BFE, Leiter Marktbereich Elektrogeräte, Bern Roland Brüniger, BFE Forschungsprogramm Elektrizität, Ottenbach Walter Baumgartner, basics, Zürich Walter Stalder, Swiss Technology Network, Luzern Silvio Kenel, Ayron Energy GmbH, Werksenergiebeauftragter Novartis, Basel Christoph Gmür, Awel, Kanton Zürich, Zürich Energieoptimierung Lonza Roger Holzer, Leiter Stromversorgung, Lonza AG, Visp Antrieb energetisch optimieren, wenn das System angerührt wird Jürg Nipkow, S.A.F.E., Zürich Die Industrie braucht bessere Motoren Thomas Stetter, Energieagentur der Wirtschaft, Bereichsleiter, Zürich Effektiv und effizient der richtige Motor am richtigen Ort Schlussdiskussion Aperitif Walter Müller, Swissmem, Zürich
5 Motor Summit 2007 List of Participants 10/11 April 2007 Name First Name Organisation Country Agricola Annegret-Claudine Dena Germany Albert Reinhard Umweltbundesamt Germany Angers Pierre Hydro Québec Canada Arquit Niederberger Anne A + B International USA Asch Daniel TU Wien Germany Awe Ben Adebanjo Dunamis Dunatos Nigeria Bärtschi Christian Wasserversorgung Wädenswil Switzerland Baumgartner Walter Basics AG Switzerland Beglinger Fritz Electrosuisse Switzerland Benecke Jochen Sollner Institut Germany Berg Daniel Baldor AG Switzerland Bergauer-Culver Bettina FMEL Austria Bigler Hanspeter Nestlé PTC Switzerland Biland Hans-Jörg Elektron AG Switzerland Blöchliger Roger Clariant (Schweiz) AG Switzerland Bonnett Austin Consultant USA Boteler Robert B. NEMA/Emerson USA Brechbühl Bernhard Universität Zürich Switzerland Bretscher René Novartis AG Switzerland Broger Hans-Peter ewz Switzerland Bruhin Raffael Weidmann-Infra AG Switzerland Brüniger Roland R. Brüniger AG Switzerland Brunner Conrad U. A + B International Switzerland Brunner Freddi ewz Switzerland Brunner Stephan S.A.F.E. Switzerland Budin Jacques-Olivier ADEME France Bühler Guido Cilag AG Switzerland Bürki Thomas Thomas Bürki GmbH Switzerland Bush Eric Bush Energie Switzerland Christensen Jörn Ove Danfoss Switzerland Christiansen Soncke Danfoss Denmark da Silva Quintaes Paulo Renato WEG Brazil Dae Wook Kang KERI Korea De Almeida Anibal University of Coimbra Portugal De Keulenaer Hans ECI Belgium Deprez Wim KU Leuven Belgium Dredge Markus MGB Switzerland Elliott Neal ACEEE USA Elmiger Eugen Maxon Motor AG Switzerland Erzinger Stefan Georg Fischer Piping Systems AG Switzerland Falkner Hugh AEA UK Favez Jean-Yves EMPA Switzerland Fletcher Brian Baldor UK Frey Felix BFE Switzerland Friesen Dale Meridium Power Inc. Canada Fuchs Andreas Marquardt Verwaltungs GmbH Switzerland Gaisford Charles Market Transformation Programme UK Gmür Christoph AWEL Switzerland Graber Kasimir ATB Schweiz AG Switzerland Grönroos-Saikkala Ismo DG Tren Belgium Gutzwiller Lukas BFE Switzerland Haener Daniel Kimberly-Clark Switzerland Switzerland Hartkamp Frank Senter Novem The Netherlands Hartmeier Werner Maschinenfabrik Rieter AG Switzerland Hegglin Raphael Oerlikon Journalisten Switzerland Herzog Lukas Alteno AG Switzerland Hingorani Anil Atlas Copco Belgium Holzer Roger Lonza Switzerland Humm Othmar Oerlikon Journalisten Switzerland Jäger Silvio Kies-Beton AG Switzerland Jakob Martin ETH-Z Switzerland Kaufmann Michael BFE Switzerland Keller Urs DSM Nutritional Products AG Switzerland Kenel Silvio Ayron-Energy Switzerland Kensington Esmond IP Group UK Koegler Mathieu Novartis AG Switzerland
6 Motor Summit 2007 List of Participants 10/11 April 2007 Name First Name Organisation Country Koevoets David Atlas Copco Belgium Konishi Kei JEMA Japan Kulterer Konstantin Austrian Energy Agency Austria Lebot Benoit UNDP GEF France Leumann Christof Leumann & Uhlmann AG Switzerland Lhenry Michel ABB Motors France Lindegger Markus Circle Motor AG Switzerland Liszka Szymon FEWE Poland Loeliger Peter SwissTnet Switzerland Mazenauer Peter ABB Schweiz AG Switzerland Merz Emil Jansen AG Switzerland Meyer Bea S.A.F.E. Switzerland Montani André EKZ Switzerland Mthombeni Tsakani University of Cape Town South Africa Müller Walter Swissmem Switzerland Nipkow Jürg S.A.F.E. Switzerland Nordmann Thomas TNC Consulting AG Switzerland Oerskov Pedersen Henrik Grundfos Denmark Oesch Andreas Jansen AG Switzerland OHK Yong Yun KEMCO Korea Ottiger Patrick ewz Switzerland Paris André Alteno AG Switzerland Pesenti Tom EnAW Switzerland Poulsen Preben Grundfos Denmark Prade Adalbert HS-Antriebssysteme AG Switzerland Radgen Peter ISI FH Germany Ramaswamy Srinivasan Energy Efficiency India India Rath Ursula Consiste Germany Rebelein Friedrich Clariant (Schweiz) AG Switzerland Rohner Franz Cilag AG Switzerland Rohrbach Hans-Ulrich ATB Schweiz AG Switzerland Rom Michael Siemens Schweiz AG Switzerland Ruddell Steve ABB UK Ruggieri Gianluca Università dell'insubria Italy Sahlin Per-Ake ABB Sweden Sauer Thomas ebm-papst Germany Schalcher Max HTW Chur Switzerland Schletti Bruno Neosys AG Switzerland Schmid Felix EnergieSchweiz für Infrastrukturanlagen Switzerland Schmitz Rolf Electrosuisse Switzerland Schneeberger Werner ebm-papst Switzerland Schneiter Paul S.A.F.E. Switzerland Schnyder Gilbert Schnyder Ingenieure AG Switzerland Schuch Dieter Franklin Electric Europa GmbH Germany Selg Jörg Stadt Zürich Switzerland SEO Huseok KEMCO Korea Siderius Hans-Paul Senter Novem The Netherlands Sieder Claude ebm-papst Switzerland Sigloch Uwe ebm-papst Germany Stalder Walter Swiss Tnet Switzerland Steinemann Urs Ingenieurbüro Switzerland Steinmann Walter BFE Switzerland Stetter Thomas EnAW Switzerland Stierli Thomas Leumann & Uhlmann AG Switzerland Tobler Ruedi Kies-Beton AG Switzerland Waide Paul IEA France Wavre Nicolas Consultant in Motor Design Switzerland Wicki Kurt Ringier PrintAdligenswil AG Switzerland Widerström Glenn Swedish Energy Agency Sweden Wiesner Heinz Novartis AG Switzerland Windisch Erhard Kimberly-Clark Switzerland Switzerland Zindel Bernhard Kies-Beton AG Switzerland
7 Motor Summit 2007 Introduction to the International Strategy Day Conrad U. Brunner 1 Coordinator of SEEEM, S.A.F.E. Zurich Switzerland Electric Motor Systems consume 40% of Global Electricity Demand Over 300 million electric motor systems drive pumps, fans, compressor and mechanical traction systems (apart from the motors in household appliances) world wide. Almost 30 million new motors are put into service every year. Motors are a crucial element in industrial production systems and in building technologies. Their energy efficiency has developed in the last decades considerably with the introduction of better design tools for system integration, high efficient motors (premium motors) and adjustable speed drives (ASD) to accommodate for variable load. Today a motor system can be operated more efficiently over a longer period of time with considerable reduction in energy consumption. Electric motors hold a crucial key in world wide greenhouse gas emission reductions. Lowering the Barriers for Efficient Motor Systems Efficient motor systems need more precise sizing, better adapted motor properties, improved production precision, some more costly materials (copper, etc.) to build efficient motors and additional components like ASD. Added material, quality manufacturing and additional components result in higher initial costs that are usually paid back within one to three years by lower energy cost. Still this higher initial cost is - besides low knowledge on efficiency potentials - the major barrier to a speed up in efficient replacement and new systems. Motors are paid for by industry owners with operating costs being accounted for in different parts of the corporate economy. This again is a barrier to optimizing in-house expenditures. Large quantities of motors are not sold by the manufacturers to the end user directly but via distributors and OEMs. This means that in many of these cases life cycle costs is not taken into account in total cost of ownership. Motors are manufactured in one place and shipped across continents with China becoming a major net exporter. International trade of complex pieces of machinery need clear quality standards: This requires especially harmonized testing procedures, energy efficiency classes and respective marking schemes and labels. Only an international motor quality label will allow industrial and developing countries to increase the share of efficient systems sharply in the years to come. Standards for Energy Efficiency of Electric Motor Systems (SEEEM) SEEEM was launched in June 2006 in London during EEDAL'06 as a multi stakeholder initiative. With SEEEM the development of internationally agreed and harmonized standards for electric motors and motor systems should be advanced and minimum performance standards (MEPS) should be put into law by individual nations. SEEEM has spread in a short time to a large community of practice. After the original meeting that Paolo Bertoldi had convened to discuss the harmonizing of standards at EEMODS'05 in Heidelberg Germany, a number of important steps have been taken by various partners around the world: IEC as the leading international Standards organization for electric equipment has launched - based an industry initiative - a new standard for Energy Efficiency Classes IEC that has been sent for country comments due by April It contains three level of efficiency for electric motors between 0.75 kw and 370 kw, with 2-, 4- and 6 poles, running at 50 Hz and 60 Hz. The 1 Conrad U. Brunner is also Coordinator of SEEEM
8 most efficient 3-Star motor is approximately equivalent to NEMA Premium Motors. The 2-Star is approximately equivalent to the Eff 1 motor. This standard should be ready and published by early Currently 10 to 13 countries world wide have already MEPS for electric motors. USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand have the most experience and the largest market share with Premium motors, with the USA leading with 20% of the motor sales in IEC is also revising its motor testing procedure in a new IEC (edition 4) that will account for stray load losses. This is the prerequisite to harmonize US IEEE 112 B standard with the old IEC standard that did not fully account for additional losses. It is expected that the new standard will be ready by NEMA has pushed for Premium motors becoming the mandatory procurement standard of US federal agencies in early Now NEMA together with ACEEE has launched the drive to raise the existing EPAct MEPS in the US to Premium. DOE has been preparing for this move since The European Union has launched a major drive for Ecodesign of energy using products (EuP): This was necessary after the Voluntary Agreement with CEMEP was able to reduce the market share of EFF 3 motors drastically but did not succeed in getting more than 10% Eff 1motors on the market. In EuP lot 11 2 electric motors, pumps and fans are put through a systematic life cycle analysis. On these results the European Commission is ready to base MEPS by The Global Environmental Facility (GEF) is considering launching a project by UNEP/UNDP for SEEEM in developing countries. The IEA has moved to gain leadership on advanced energy efficiency under the G8 programme; a new Implementing Agreement for electric equipment has been launched that will include motors. China - as a major producer and exporter - has revised its existing MEPS 2002 for domestic motors in 2006 and made Eff1 (2-Star) motors mandatory by Considerable efforts are also made to include pumps and fans and operating procedures in a series of regulations combined with incentives for a Reach Standards with Premium motors (3-Star). India is proposing to make Eff 2 (2-Star) a mandatory standard. Japan is watching the international development carefully and is preparing to adapt its testing standard and to introduce the IEC new energy efficiency classes. The Next Steps The Motor Summit on 9 to 11 April 2007 organized by S.A.F.E. in cooperation with SEEEM and SwissEnergy wants to bring the message of much more energy efficient motor systems into Europe. Three Working Groups in SEEEM are under way: WG 1 Harmonization Issues, WG 2: Policy Issues, WG3: Stakeholder Outreach & Support. EEMODS'07 on 10 to 13 June 2007 in Beijing will gather participants all over the world and discuss 100 papers. It will also have three most relevant side events on 13 and 14 June 2007: 13 June afternoon: SEEEM meeting open to the interested public 14 June morning: SEEEM Steering Committee, Technical Advisory Group and Working Group meetings. 14 June afternoon: Motors and CDM, hosted by DG JRC and A+B International. Thanks to all the Supporters The drive for more efficient motor systems of SEEEM has been supported by UNDP, Eurelectric, ACEEE, IIEC, CNIS China, CLASP, Austrian Energy Agency, UK Market Transformation Programme, Australian Greenhouse Office, ICA, IIT India, Natural Resources Canada and A+B International. It would not have been possible without the continuous financial support of AGO Australia, MTP UK, ICA and SenterNovem, S.A.F.E. likes to thank the Swiss partners of the Motor Summit 2007 SwissTnet, Swissmem and EnAW, and SwissEnergy, Awel Canton of Zurich and the international industry supporters Baldor, DKI, ebm-papst and ABB. Thanks to all the renowned speakers who contribute to the high level of information and personal exchange of experience. Thanks to all the participants who eventually will want to bring the knowledge to bear fruit for the global environment and their national economy. 2 EuP Lot 11 contains electric motors (Anibal T. de Almeida), fans (Peter Radgen), pumps (Hugh Falkner) and circulators (Charles Gaisford)
9 Eidgenössisches Departement für Umwelt, Verkehr, Energie und Kommunikation UVEK Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication DETEC Bundesamt für Energie BFE Swiss Federal Office of Energy SFOE Motor Summit 07, Tuesday 10 April 07 Swiss energy policy: Motors as focus in a new energy efficiency program Dr. Walter Steinmann, Director, SFOE Like the whole industrialized world Switzerland is now starting a broad debate on security of supply in electricity and climate change. The Swiss government took the following decisions concerning its future strategy. New targets must be formulated for the period after 2010 because both the Swiss Energy program as well as the CO 2 law will expire in After 2020 the first nuclear power plants will close down and the long term contracts with France end. In our energy perspectives we present the energy and electricity demand for 2035 looking at 4 possible scenarios. By 2035, in a business-as-usual way, we will get a 2% increase in energy demand and 29 % in electricity demand. On the other hand if we follow a sustainable scenario we can reduce the energy demand by 26% and the electricity demand will go down by 2%. We therefore need to discuss the possibility of a gap in energy and also electricity supply in the next decade and how to counter it. The government decided that a strict energy efficiency policy will be needed and we will have to formulate a concrete Action plan for energy efficiency until the end of the year. We intend to propose general instruments such as energy steering fees with reimbursement of the revenues. Our target is to internalize external costs and to make sure that the polluter has to pay. In the building sector we propose the harmonization of the 26 cantonal construction laws for buildings and the introduction of the highest quality and energy efficiency standards for all news buildings. It will not be easy to set standards for the renovation sector because of the high percentage of old buildings in the industrial as well as the private housing sector. We think that a labeling system for all existing buildings could be an incentive to discuss more about the energy consumption of the users. Another important part of our efficiency strategy is the sector of appliances. Our labeling system has to be extended to all household equipments and the standards have to match the technical progress. We also need a market regulation to prohibit inefficient appliances. On the other side, we think that there is a need for incentives for the development and the use of innovative technologies. In 2006 Swiss Energy started a national campaign in efficient production and storage of compressed air. As a next step we will discuss the following issues: fans, pumps and motors for industrial processes. Mühlestrasse 4, CH-3003 Bern
10 Eidgenössisches Departement für Umwelt, Verkehr, Energie und Kommunikation UVEK Federal Department of the Environment, Transport, Energy and Communication DETEC Bundesamt für Energie BFE Swiss Federal Office of Energy SFOE Looking at this it is very important to learn from other countries and institutions. I m very happy to open the Motor Summit 07. I wish you interesting debates and a lot of new ideas about the introduction of energy efficiency in this sector. Mühlestrasse 4, CH-3003 Bern
11 Motor Summit Zurich Global motor systems energy demand: opportunities and initiatives Paul Waide 1 Energy Efficiency and Environment Agency, International Energy Agency Abstract In recent years it is evident that the challenges facing the energy sector have become more acute. Concerns about the environment, energy security and economic prosperity, long identified as the three Es that inform and guide the mission of the IEA, are all challenged by current energy trends. Over the last few years, global energy demand has outpaced the capacity of new supply to reach markets, and in the longer term the reliance on non-renewable energy sources will, by definition, be unsustainable. But before that point is reached it is now clear we face the pressing and growing problem of energy s impact on the climate. The work being done by the IEA and elsewhere is increasingly focused upon how best to address these multiple challenges and how best to meet our future energy needs in a more sustainable manner. In the last few years there has been a growing appreciation that there are great opportunities to be realized in exploiting untapped end-use efficiency reserves. This has led to a renewal of interest and activity in demand-side policy, which holds the hope of saving highly significant additional amounts of energy in the years ahead. We can see this through the analysis presented in the IEA s World Energy Outlook Alternative Policy Scenario, which is based upon an assessment of over 1500 policies under consideration around the world. Of the 6.3 gigatonnes of CO 2 savings identified in the 2006 Alternative Policy Scenario compared to the Reference Scenario by the year 2030, some two-thirds are attributable to end-use efficiency gains. Roughly half of these concern improvements in electrical end-use efficiency such as lighting and industrial electric motors and half improvements in direct fossil fuel end-uses such as vehicles and space heating. Most importantly, the WEO analysis and others like it demonstrate that efficiency gains are also the most cost-effective means of delivering energy services. So energy efficiency is clearly a win-win strategy and its enhanced delivery must form the focus of our governments efforts. But what of motors? Electric motors in industrial and large commercial sector applications are thought to account for roughly 40% of all global electricity use, making motors comfortably the largest single electric end-use above the next biggest of lighting, which accounts for 19%. Globally, electric motors are thus indirectly responsible for the production of about 4.5 Gigatonnes of CO 2, which is about 16% of all energy-related CO 2 emissions or the total emissions of Europe. Depending on the market the current technological potential to improve the energy efficiency of new electric motors varies from just a few percent to over 10%; however, these potentials are extraordinarily cost effective. Internal rates of return of over 300% are not unusual from preferential investment in a high efficiency motor 1 Paul Waide is also chair of SEEEM WG 2 Policy Issues
12 compared with one of standard efficiency. The fact that such investment decisions are not made as a matter of choice by industrial actors is a clear sign of market failure and belies, in a spectacular manner, the myth that private sector investment decisions tend to be optimized. Clearly there is a need for policy but how should it be applied and focused? While measures to stimulate demand for high efficiency electric motors have been in place in a few economies for many years and have been demonstrably successful they have been slow to be replicated. Ironically it is the two most energy-efficient economies in the world, Japan and Europe, which have had the most laissez-faire attitude to industrial electric motor efficiency policy. While both economies can boast manufacturers that produce electric motors that are of as high efficiency as can be found anywhere a large proportion of the new motor market is relatively inefficient compared to those of peer economies who have regulated motor energy efficiency. Changes may be in the air, however, as work is underway via the European Eco-design Directive on electric motors and the Japanese government considers options for new measures to promote energy efficiency. In the broader international context progress is needed on two fronts: more rapid adoption of efficient motors and more rapid adoption of efficient motor driven systems. Full realization of the cost-effective potential could reduce global annual electricity demand by 10%, or some two thirds of all nuclear or hydro power production. Were this attainable by 2012, although in programmatic terms this is almost certainly no-longer a realistic objective, it would avoid x Mt of CO 2 emissions or roughly y% of the total Kyoto Protocol commitment of Annex 1 signatories. So what s the problem? As usual when the lid is lifted on cost-effective energy efficiency opportunities, they are manifold. Reforms are needed in the motor and drive supply chain to ensure that products and motor driven applications better reflect life cycle costs. Motor efficiency standards can drive out inefficient motors but can t deliver efficient motor driven systems; moreover, even when systems are technically capable of matching output power to variable loads proper control of the system needs to be assured for the savings to be realised. A mixture of motor efficiency standards, sustained motor driven system supply chain market transformation efforts, and better application of energy management practices and techniques is probably required to bring a significant share of the obtainable savings to fruition. Creating the conditions for this to happen is the challenge of the policy community. But is anything concrete already planned or underway? In the near term momentum is growing for the development of new international industrial energy management standard via the International Standards Organisation. Slightly closer to home, at least speaking personally, the IEA is developing a new Implementing Agreement for Energy Efficiency in Electrical End-Use Equipment which may well include an annex addressing electric motors.
13 Indo German Energy Programme, IGEN Motor Summit 2007 Srinivasan Ramaswamy 1 Indian Motor Policies Status Report Abstract: Typically from the whole family of motors that includes AC- LT & HT, DC, LT squirrel cage & slip ring, flame proof etc., the 3 phase, LT squirrel cage induction motors are widely used in the industries unless and otherwise any special purpose applications demand for any other type of motor. Out of the total squirrel cage LT 3 phase induction motors, 95% - 96% of the motors are up to 15 kw, 4 pole motors (covering from 63 to 160 frame sizes). Frame wise production of LTSC Squirrel Cage induction motor is shown in table 1 and since over 95% of the motor population fall in the range up to 15kW (+<160 frame size), this size has been identified for introduction of standards and labeling programme. Table 1 2 Frame size kw Numbers % < 7.5 1,933, > 9.3 = , > 22 =37 58, > 45 =200 29, >=400 > Total 2,180, Government of India through the Energy Conservation Act formed the Bureau of Energy Efficiency with the aim to reduce energy consumption by various actions including setting of norms, audits, labeling etc. It is propagating higher standards of efficiency for various equipment and appliances. Performance tests 3 were carried out on a sample of 2.2 and 3.7 kw motors in NABL accredited laboratory. The test results for efficiency indicated that 35% of the samples conform to EFF 2 even with out the tolerance. 36% of the samples conform to EFF 2 levels taking into account the tolerances provided in the IS. 29% of the samples did not conform to EFF 2 standards. Following testing, motors were then stripped for assessment of constructional features, and the quantity and quality (composition) of active materials (steel, copper, aluminum). Specific iron loss of stator core was measured Adviser (Energy Efficiency), Indo German Energy Programme, c/o Bureau of Energy Efficiency 4 th Floor, Seva Bhavan, R. K. Puram, New Delhi , India Phone: , Mobile: , Source: IEEMA production statistics & AFF Fergusson survey February, 2006 The test and analysis for arriving at minimum energy performance for motors were carried out by PPP between GTZ, BEE, Thyssen Krupp Electrical Steel, and International Copper Promotion Council of (India).
14 Indo German Energy Programme, IGEN The active materials represent the biggest component of motor cost, typically 45% - 50 %. These costs have been estimated. While there are some differences in total cost by category, the average total costs are roughly similar. The lower cost of non-electrical steel is offset by use of greater quantity of steel and use of greater amount of copper which costs about 5 times more than steel. Hence, contrary to what is generally believed, manufacture of more efficient motors will not lead to substantial increase in cost of active materials. A possible reason for this surprising finding could be that the motors may have been designed at some time in the past, and the quantity of active materials and other design aspects would have been determined based on the rates prevailing at that time. However, costs of metals have changed considerably over time, and copper prices particularly have shown a sharp upward trend, resulting in the present situation being markedly different. Analysis of the test results indicate that for conformance to EFF 2, the non conforming manufacturers would have to modify motor design changes, manufacturing practices changes, and manufacturing equipment changes. Regional/local manufacturers would have the capability to make the required design changes (including reverse engineering) even though the result may not be the best or an optimal design. Changes in design changes would require changes in manufacturing practices, e.g. changes in dies for stamping electrical steel and lower manufacturing tolerances to ensure optimum air gap, etc. These changes will have to be made by the motor manufacturers and by their suppliers. The two options considered for minimum energy performance standard for motors are EFF 2 with measurement tolerance and EFF 2 without measurement tolerances level. While the EFF 2 levels of efficiency without recourse to measurement tolerances would be a win - win situation from cost benefit analysis, to comply to this level, many motor manufacturers would have to effect material changes, and would have make design changes, jigs, dies and tools which would require more time and costs. The above was discussed in the Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) meetings and it was decided that efficiency corresponding to EFF 2 level with measurement tolerances be adopted as the minimum energy performance standard for motors. The manufacturers have agreed to improve the efficiency levels to EFF 2 without measurement tolerances level and the same would be reviewed in two years time. The test procedures and developments at International Electro technical Commission (IEC) relating to upgrading IEC part related to measurement of efficiency and the draft IEC standard ( ) was discussed. Since India has about 400 small motor manufacturers it may not be feasible for immediate implementation as it involves different procedure and instruments of higher accuracy involving higher costs for setting up the test procedure. This was discussed at BEE meetings and it was consciously decided that India will go ahead with the earlier test method in the initial stages. That will allow manufacturers to get suitable equipments and experience with the new test method. Indian manufacturers will have to carry out own R and D efforts to find out real additional load losses on their own products and ways to reduce them. Large Indian manufacturers are mentally reconciling to the position that procedures similar to IEC will have to be followed in the long run if they have to compete. This would require establishing manufacturing methods which will deliver high efficiency with lower additional losses consistently with even lower costs than present EFF 1 motor costs.
15 Motor Summit 2007 The Progression of Motor Efficiency in the United States of America Rob Boteler 1 Director of Marketing, Emerson Motor Company, St Louis, MO. This presentation will cover the evolution of industrial motor efficiency in the United States beginning with the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of The paper will summarize and quantify the Energy Policy Act and its relative impact on motor sales in the United States. The overall progression of motor efficiency increases will be discussed. Beginning in the early 1990 s motor efficiency levels and scope of covered product has continued to grow. In 2007 a significant step was initiated to begin positioning for the move to the next level. NEMA s MG section began discussions with ACEEE to determine what manufacturers, environmental groups, utilities and state legislators would consider as the next logical step for motor efficiency. Several states were known to be in the process of drafting motor legislation for products outside of the existing EPAct regulations. The voluntary NEMA Premium adoption rate by the early adaptor appeared to have plateaued at about 25% of the units sold in the US. To rely on purely voluntary measures for adoption growth in the future would require an increased effort including more resources to educated and demonstrate efficiency values at the point of purchase. With over 1.5 million poly-phase motor units being sold in the US market each year, the logical next step to increased usage of NEMA Premium products was a progression from voluntary to regulation over time. The MG section members working with environmental and utilities created a plan to be presented to the US congress. The fundamental test, performance, labeling and enforcement procedures are all based on existing EPAct 92 regulations and federal code [CFR 10 part 431] thus allowing manufacturers and motors users to add additional product categories and NEMA Premium performance levels without a prolonged rule making process necessary for amendments to the actual regulations. Step one of the proposed changes will include the addition of seven product categories not in the original EPAct 92 regulation to meet MG [energy efficient levels] and moving the present horse power covered product to meet NEMA Premium levels [MG ]. In addition low voltage generalpurpose design B motors from 201 to 500 horsepower are proposed to meet MG minimum efficiency levels. Raising the motor efficiency levels in the US to NEMA premium and adding product categories and higher horsepower motors not included in the original 1 Rob Boteler is also member of the SEEEM Steering Commitee
16 EPAct 92 regulation should bring about a refocus in ploy-phase motor application. The present end user is faced with several decisions when faced with a motor replacement or purchase. When selecting a motor for new equipment the original equipment manufacturer must today decide which efficiency level to provide his customer. The new legislation will remove this decision and force the optimum motor efficiency to be used. This consolidates the motor selection and re-focuses the equipment designer s energy considerations on the overall system efficiency, giving rise to greater attention to system opportunities for savings. In the future end users will only have NEMA Premium level efficient product available thus moving their decision to determine the most economic choice between repair and replacement of a failed unit. Consolidation of products in the market will add to overall availability as the motor distribution channel moves from two efficiency product levels to one. Greater inventories nearer to the end users point of purchase will have a positive impact on his replace vs. repair decision further increasing the use of premium efficient products and reducing greenhouse gases. Implementation of the recommended changes to EPAct 92 is another step to further reduce end user concern and confusion about their poly phase motors decisions. Using regulations and NEMA standards jointly the members of the Motor Generator section and ACEEE have developed a very positive plan to improve motor efficiency performance standards that will benefit all. The US Department of Energy estimates US market energy savings. The US Department of Energy has reviewed the NEMA Premium motors potential energy savings over a ten-year period. The DOE has concluded that motors having a 20 to 30-year service life can significantly save end users money by reducing operating cost as well as increasing up-time through improved reliability. Because an industrial motor can consume 4-6 times its original cost in energy each year, the saving of even 3 to 4 percent is significant over the motor s life. DOE estimates that NEMA Premium, when applied by American industry, can reduce 80 million tons of carbon and 5,800 GWh over ten years or the equivalent of 16 million cars. Working together, NEMA members and environmental organizations such as ACEEE are continuing to explore additional ways to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gases through electrical motor efficiency gains.
17 Motor Summit 2007 The European Motor Challenge Programme through the example or the project DEXA-MCP (Dissemination Extension and Application of the Motor Challenge Programme) Jacques-Olivier BUDIN - ADEME Within the framework of the European policy for improving the energy efficiency, the motor systems are one of the most important items to focus on, offering high possibilities to achieve important energy savings. The European Motor Challenge aims at helping the enterprises and especially for the industrial sector to understand the existing possibilities to improve their motor systems and to make energy savings. This programme is an initiative of the European Commission, and is developed into 26 countries by national Entities, in order to adapt it for the national conditions. The project DEXA-MCP for Dissemination, Extension and Application of the Motor Challenge Programme, is formed by a consortium of 11 countries participating at the Motor Challenge Programme. The key objectives of this project are to make energy efficiency in the Motor Driven Systems becoming more visible by the industrial sector and seen as a clear opportunity. The consortium of the project is built around national agencies, technical centres and universities and it is developing its activities with others partners at European or National levels. Working with the others actors and creating a European action with national implementations is one of the goals of DEXA-MCP. Acting under a common banner, with national collaboration and European coordination: this is the way taken by DEX-MCP to contribute to the MCP extension. I The EU Policies and Programmes for Energy Efficiency The main energy priorities announced by the European Commission are: 1. Increasing energy efficiency 2. Achieving a properly functioning internal market for gas and electricity 3. Promoting renewable energy 4. Strengthening nuclear safety and security 5. Security of Europe s energy supplies and further developing external energy policy relations 6. Improving the links between energy policies and environmental and research policies The increasing of energy efficiency is the first point, and its importance can be seen in the following points: Competitiveness An effective energy efficiency policy could therefore make a major contribution to EU competitiveness and employment, which are central objectives of the Lisbon agenda. Environmental protection and the EU s Kyoto obligations. Energy saving is without doubt the quickest, most effective and most cost-effective manner for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as well as improving air quality, in particular in densely populated areas. It will therefore help Member States in meeting their Kyoto commitments. Security of supply. Today the European Union imports about 50% of its energy. If nothing is done, 70% of the EU energy would be covered by imports by By 2030, on the basis of present trends, the EU will be 90% dependent on imports for its requirements of oil and 80% dependent regarding gas. This EU policy has been developed during these last few years in several publication and actions: The Green Paper: if the current trend continues, gross energy demand could increase by 10% by Growth in electricity demand could also reach 1.5% per year. Today s consumption in the EU could reach 1900 Mtoe within 15 years (2020), compared with 1725 Mtoe in Estimates indicate that we could reduce consumption by 20% by 2020 that is a saving of 60 billion euros a year, which would secure 50% of the necessary reductions of CO2 emissions and strengthen the competitiveness of the EU economy and facilitate the creation of one million jobs in Europe. The Action Plan for Energy Efficiency (October 2006) which develops the following objectives: 1 Dynamic energy performance requirements for energy-using products, buildings and energy services 2 Improving energy transformation 3 Moving on transport 4 Financing energy efficiency, economic incentives and energy pricing 5 Changing energy behaviour 6 International partnerships The target is to realise the over 20 % estimated savings potential in EU annual primary energy consumption by The Energy Service Directive: measures from until end of year 9 % target (1% annual savings) which is indicative but carefully monitored & reported. - It fixes the amount of energy saving objective (in TWh) as 1% of the 5-year average of unadjusted final consumption. - The early actions <1995 (1991) can be taking into account. - All measures must be verifiable and measurable or estimable. (Details Annexes I, II, III & IV.) - The Commission to consider the existence of the White Certificates
18 II - The EU tools/programmes and policies for Motor Driven Systems Based on the ECCP findings, motor systems are responsible for 69% and 38% of the total electricity consumption in industry and in the tertiary sector, respectively, and are responsible for about 30% of total EU electricity consumption in the European Union. The aim of the policy instruments implemented at EU level is to achieve a market transformation, i.e. to foster the supply and use of more efficient products and systems and thus reduce energy use, while preserving the internal market. These policies measures include: - information tools; - minimum efficiency standards through Directives; - negotiated agreement; - energy classification/labelling and/or quality mark Some tools have been developed: Information: the EuroDEEM database and software for motors has been available on line since Classification: the EU/CEMEP motor classification has started in 1999; Standards/Agreements: a voluntary agreement by motor manufacturers to gradually phase out low efficiency motors has been in place since 1999; The Motor Challenge Programme is a whole European Programme, creating its own tools but also disseminating the previous ones. It is a common banner for improving the energy efficiency in the Motor driven systems in Europe. III - The Motor Challenge: example of DEXA-MCP The programme Motor Challenge is the result in Europe of many studies at national or European levels showing the high potential for energy savings in the motor driven systems. The Motor Challenge has first been launched in 2003 with the following goals: - offering a visibly for the motor driven systems with a European wild programme; - offering a visibility with a label, and the partner status, given to the companies which commit to a progressing way for making energy savings in these motor driven systems; - offering a visibility, and the endorser status for the companies wishing to push for the development of energy efficient practices; - organizing a highly developed network for improving the energy efficiency in the motor driven systems, with the participation of the European Commission, all the main national agencies and organization and creating a strong link with the different market actors in the industrial sector. The project DEXA-MCP for Dissemination, Extension and Application of the Motor Challenge Programme started at the beginning of 2005 and will end in June 2007 in order to launch a real development in Europe of the Motor Challenge to achieve the above mentioned objectives. ADEME is leading this project which represents a consortium of 11 countries which are Italy, Greece, France, Austria, Germany, The Netherlands, Portugal, Slovenia, Lithuania, Sweden and Finland. The key objective of this project is to make energy efficiency in the Motor Driven Systems becoming more visible by the industrial sector and seen as a clear opportunity. The consortium of the project is built around national agencies, technical centres and universities and it is developing its activities with other partners at European or National levels. Working with the other actors and creating a European action with national implementations is one of the goals of DEXA-MCP. The communication, training, development of tools are the keys for reaching its goal. The first results, after 2 years working inside the project and before its end the following figures can be showed: - 26 Workshops organized, 44 articles written in the different countries and press releases, 2 press Releases, 68 Interventions in seminars/conferences, 6 Posters, 3 Brochures and 4 leaflets presenting the motor challenge programme, 11 Websites, 14 Trainings sessions, 2517 Meetings, interviews and MCP presentations, ing and mailing information about MCP, 2 24 hours Hotline about MCP, 147 Audits and MCP presentations As a result of this active dissemination of the programme, 24 new partners and 8 endorsers have joined the programme at the end of 2006 and more and more are interested to enter into the programme and the programme continues. An important event, the 2 nd European workshop on of the Motor Challenge Programme, with the participation of about 25 countries, with the national contact points, with the main endorsers and partners of the programme, have been organized the 27 th of February 2007 in Paris. During this event, 5 Motor Challenge Partners received the 2007 MCP award: ACRAF SpA (It), Alpenmilch Sbg. Ges.m.b.H (Aus), Brasseries de Bourbon (Fr), SKF-GmbH Luchow TRB (Ger), Somelos Fios s.a. (Port) 1 Motor Challenge endorser was also awarded for its activities in disseminating the best practices and developing the Motor Challenge: Sattler energie consulting GmbH (Aus) The Motor Challenge Programme shows today that the dissemination of better efficiency practices in Motor Driven system is possible with: - 26 National contact points, 44 Partners, 41 Endorsers A common banner, the Motor Challenge, a common effort with the Coordination at the European Level of the European Commission and at the National level of very active national contact points is an efficient organisation to disseminate the best practices, and best available techniques and to help to reach the European policy objectives, for such diffused but important items that are the Motor Driven Systems.
19 Motor Summit 2007 Technical Harmonization Issues Anibal T. de Almeida 1 ISR, University of Coimbra, Dep. Electrical Engineering 3030 Coimbra, Portugal The different motor efficiency test standards, efficiency classification schemes and minimum efficiency performance standards (MEPS) in use around the world today have presented themselves as a major obstacle to promote the widespread use of energy efficient motors. This problem concerns key stakeholders, including: -manufacturers, who produce motors for the global market -energy agencies wishing to promote motor market transformation -customers that sometimes find it hard to understand the differences and similarities of different standards -equipment manufacturers who want to differentiate their equipment performance with premium components (e.g. high efficiency motor) This situation is barrier to free trade and prevents the application of energy efficient motors in situations in which their application could save a huge amount of energy. The SEEEM (Standards for Energy Efficiency of Electric Motor Systems) project WG 1 is directed at the harmonization of energy efficiency testing procedures, efficiency classes and marking schemes for motors, a necessary condition to achieve a global market transformation strategy to promote efficient industrial electric motor systems worldwide. One of the major drivers of this harmonization effort is the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) with the development of both efficiency test standards and efficiency classification standards. These two standards are an essential step towards having a transparent market and to promote energy savings. The efficiency test standards IEC ed. 4 (draft approved in March 2006, with 81% majority) contains three different test methods for the measurement of induction motor efficiency: A direct method similar to IEEE 112 Method B; an indirect method similar to IEC 61972, with stray load losses determined by an assigned variable allowance based on realistic assumptions; and another indirect method with stray load losses determined by the Eh- Star Method. Eh-Star is an inexpensive method with good accuracy where stray load losses are calculated mathematically. Eh-star is based on an asymmetrical feeding of a three-phase induction motor, so this method is based on reverse field component (negative current sequence). Independent comparative tests carried out by several Universities, between direct test methods and Eh-Star method, show a good matching of the test results and comparative accuracy. Because of its relative lower costs to test the large number of motor models already in the market, motor manufacturers see this method as a cost-effective alternative to upgrade the efficiency tests of those motors. The same sort of uncertainty characterizes motor efficiency classification around the World. Existing efficiency classification schemes (e.g. CEMEP, EPAct and NEMA Premium) use different testing methods and are related to motors operating with a different supply frequency (50 Hz or 60 Hz). Two major tests methods are in use today: IEEE 112-B which is a direct 1 Anibal T. de Almeida is also chairman of SEEEM Working Group 1 Harmonization Issues
20 method and the IEC in which the stray load losses are assigned an unrealistically low fixed value (0.5% of full-load input power). These two test methods deliver significantly different results and therefore efficiency levels are not straightforwardly comparable. Furthermore, the measurement tolerances vary in the different test methods, and the impact of the supply frequency (50 Hz or 60 Hz) used during the test on the final test results complicates things further. A first transitional step was taken in Australia by the adoption of a standard which presents different efficiency tables depending on the test method used (direct or indirect). Of course this solution makes more difficult compliance and verification. IEC is developing the standard IEC that will hopefully end the current confusion regarding efficiency classification schemes. The standard proposes four efficiency levels: Below standard efficiency (no star); standard efficiency (1 Star); high efficiency (2 Stars); and premium efficiency (3 Stars). Efficiency and losses shall be tested in accordance with IEC using the summation of losses test procedure with stray load losses determined either from residual loss measurement or from Eh-star test. The 50 Hz values of standard (*) and high efficiency (**) are similar to the existing CEMEP- EU eff2 and eff1. However the values have been adjusted to take the different test procedures into account (the CEMEP values assume that the stray load losses represent a flat 0,5% of input power). Since in this standard the stray load losses determined from test or are estimated by the Eh-star method the CEMEP values are adjusted down accordingly. The 50 Hz values for premium efficiency (*** Star) are newly designed values. These values were set such that the premium motors have 15 to 20% lower losses than high efficiency motors (** Star). The 60 Hz values were derived from the 50 Hz values taking the influence of supply frequency on motor efficiency into account. This approach will enable manufacturers to build motors for dual rating (50/60 Hz) with dual efficiency labelling. Several different minimum energy performance requirements are in use around the world today, mandatory and voluntary. Countries which introduced mandatory schemes with relatively high efficiency levels (such as the USA) have achieved a relevant market shift towards higher efficiency motors, that now have a large cut in the sales (e.g. High efficiency motors, including Premium Motors represent 70% of sales in the USA). In the EU, in 1998, a voluntary agreement supported by European Committee of Manufacturers of Electrical Machines and Power Electronics (CEMEP) and the European Commission was established and signed by 36 motor manufacturers, representing 80% of the European production of standard motors. The original target of CEMEP/EU agreement was to reduce joint sales of EFF3 motors by 50% after agreement period (2003). The aim was completely achieved, since EFF3 motor sales decreased from 68% in 1998 to 4% in However, the penetration rate of EFF1 motors is very modest (9% in 2005) and deserves to be improved.