When industrial firms invest in energy efficiency, the effect may go beyond energy cost savings and produce additional non-energy benefits as well. However, there is a lack of knowledge regarding experiences in non-energy benefits and the extent to which these are acknowledged by industry. This study attempts to explore firms' perspectives on non-energy benefits of industrial energy-efficiency investments and if and how non-energy benefits are considered in the investment process. Moreover, this study also explores investment motives and critical aspects of adopting energy-efficiency investments. Based on a questionnaire and interviews with representatives of Swedish industrial firms, the results indicate that energy efficiency seems to be an important issue for the firms, but profitability and payoff appear to be the most important factors for adopting an investment, implying that it is often difficult to meet the payoff requirements with energy cost savings alone. In the meantime, various non-energy benefits are observed, but there seems to be a lack of knowledge of how these should be quantified and monetised. To facilitate such an assessment of non-energy benefits and to include them in the investment analysis, a measurement framework is provided. It is concluded that including nonenergy benefits in the investment analysis can contribute to a framing of energy-efficiency investments that can meet the firms' requirements for profitability assessment, which can further enhance opportunities for energy-efficiency investments in industry. Thus, the study contributes with new insights into the energy-efficiency investment process and the extent to which nonenergy benefits are considered, along with the methods for measuring them.

No abstract

Increased global competition and resource scarcity drives industrial companies to cut costs. Energy can be a significant component of such cuts, particularly for energy-intensive companies. Improving energy efficiency in industry is complex, as it pertains to various energy-using processes that are heavily intertwined. One such process is the compressed air system (CAS), which is used in most industrial companies worldwide. Since energy efficiency improvement measures for various types of energy-using processes differ, technology-specific measures might encounter different barriers to and drivers for energy efficiency. The same applies to the nonenergy benefits (NEBs) related to energy efficiency improvement measures; since measures vary between various energy-using processes, the perceived NEBs might be different as well. The aim of this paper is to study the barriers to, drivers for and NEBs of CAS energy efficiency improvement measures from the perspectives of three actors. Carried out as an interview study combined with a questionnaire, the paper merges the perspectives of users, audit experts and suppliers of CASs. The results showed that the major barriers are related to the investment, or are of an organisational character, and that organisational and economic factors seemed to be important for making positive decisions on energy efficiency investments and measures in CASs. Major NEBs for CASs include productivity gains and the avoidance of capital expenditures. The results of this study also address the importance of having a comprehensive approach to recognise additional effects of energy efficiency improvements in CASs.

No abstract

Improvements in industrial energy efficiency demonstrated various additional effects beyond pure energy savings and energy cost savings. Observed on many levels, these additional effects, often denoted as non-energy benefits, constitute a diverse collection, for instance, effects related to firms' production or improvements in the work environment and the external environment. Previous studies showed the potential of including quantified and monetised non-energy benefits in energy efficiency investments. However, there seems to be a lack of methodological overview, including all the steps from observation to monetisation and inclusion in investments. This study systematically reviews the academic literature on non-energy benefits relating to methods for observation, measuring, quantification, and monetisation of the benefits. The most commonly applied research design was a case study approach, in which data on non-energy benefits were collected by conducting interviews. Furthermore, the primary methods used to enable quantification and monetisation of observed non-energy benefits were based on classifications, indexes in relation to the energy savings, or frameworks. Calculation methods, databased tools, classification frameworks, and ranking were applied to evaluate the benefits' potential in relation to energy efficiency investments. Based on a synthesis of the review findings, this article contributes a novel scheme for improved utilisation of the non-energy benefits of industrial energy efficiency.Energies 2018, 11, 3241 2 of 27 various sizes [5,7,[9][10][11][12]. To improve energy efficiency, different kinds of measures can be undertaken, for instance, the implementation of new technology or organisational and behavioural changes. Studies indicated that this diversity among energy efficiency improvement measures also affects their adoption; i.e., measures are facing different barriers due to their type and characteristics [13,14].Studies on the driving forces for energy efficiency improvement measures gave a deeper understanding of what fosters adoption. Drivers for industrial energy efficiency are subject to empirical research in several regions and sectors, and the main drivers found include commitment from top management, cost reduction from reduced energy use, long-term energy strategy, people with real ambition, and the threat of rising energy prices [10,[15][16][17][18][19]. In addition, similarly to barriers, the characteristics of the energy efficiency measures also seem to possess driving effects [13,14].When implemented, energy efficiency improvement measures were shown to give rise to various additional effects beyond the energy effects, such as energy savings and energy cost savings [20][21][22]. These additional effects, often known as non-energy benefits, were observed on many levels and constitute a diverse collection [20,23,24]. For instance, these effects were seen in firms' processes and related equipment, but could also improve the work environment, as well as the external environment [21,...