easiapes

By not focusing our efforts upon any one type of electrical load, and instead addressing every substantive electrical load in a facility, we are able to distribute the uncertainties involved in any electrical efficiency treatment project among a large number of different technologies and applications. Companies that focus only upon one type of electrical load, such as motors or lighting, cannot distribute these uncertainties; if their estimated performance on that one type of load falls short of expectations, the entire projects fails.

Our approach eliminates the risks of project savings shortfalls. We know from the start of a project that some of our individual treatments will produce substantially less savings than we anticipate, and that some of the treatments will produce much higher savings than we anticipate. By simply accepting the fact that these individual load treatments are incalculable, and budgeting to a total system savings that is derated for conservatism, we are able to provide our customers with consistently reliable savings on all of our projects. This is why our trade association has been able to insure the savings we estimate for all of our projects, and why there has never been a single claim filed against this insurance program.

Because of our facility wide averaging of anticipated savings, and because our experience has proven that individual load treatments are, at best, simply guesses at the most likely savings, we have adopted our own methods for calculating the savings to be realized from a project. We know from our experience that reducing the reactive and harmonic current drawn through a building’s electrical distribution system will translate into KW and KWH savings for our customers. But the standard engineering calculations for these savings do not hold up to the realities encountered within actual operational commercial and industrial facilities. Essentially, we could attempt to apply traditional power efficiency calculations to a project, and produce results that are in line with normal engineering thinking, but these projections would then be woefully inaccurate in practice. Or, we can simply apply the calculative approaches our own experience has born out as being reliable. We have chosen to use our non-traditional, yet accurate methods.

Since 1978, we have seen many projects implemented by traditional electrical engineering firms, many with readily recognized names, fall well short of projected savings, as well as cause new electrical and operational problems. We have had accepted engineering calculations applied to our own work, only to see these calculations generate predictions later shown to have been totally inaccurate for our project, with the actual savings matching our own calculations rather that the engineering calculations.

For these reasons, we will continue to implement our time proven methods in determining the savings to be realized from our projects, and will not apply standard engineering calculations to this process. It is a disservice to our customers to ignore our internally generated knowledge, gained from over 70,000 successful projects, and to, instead, apply an approach we know to be wrong. Our customers demand and expect better performance from us than this would provide.