Energy Efficiency Coaching at SEMPACT AG

1. When you first meet with a new customer, what expectations do you most often encounter?

This is difficult to answer in general terms, as every customer has different expectations. Both the size and stage of development of each customer vary. Large companies have usually already addressed and grappled with the issue of energy consumption. Small and medium-sized companies are often still very focused on production and are only now considering the potential of building infrastructure and supply processes, and need advice in this regard.

The general expectation is to achieve maximum energy savings with the least possible investment. For so-called "low-hanging fruit," it is relatively easy to optimize energy consumption through simple measures. Depending on the company's stage of development, the investments also increase, because the more potential the company has already leveraged, the more cost-intensive it becomes – for example, if machines have to be replaced, processes linked, or entire systems need to be renewed. This implementation can only work if the focus is shifted from the pure pursuit of the highest possible return on investment (ROI) to taking other factors into account and thinking long-term.

2. What expectations do you directly address in your consulting work?

Our clients primarily expect ideas and an economic assessment of their potential. Our recommendations and assessments of future developments are important to them. We support our clients throughout the entire process by monitoring the implementation of measures, obtaining quotes for them, and considering funding opportunities. We are entirely on the client's side here, as we are vendor-independent. This allows us to ensure successful project development and achieve set goals.

3. What are the most common deficiencies that arise in companies during analyses?

In principle, it is not very productive to consider individual areas as independent processes rather than the entire system. Analyses often reveal that individual areas can be effectively linked (e.g., heat recovery from compressed air to support the heating system). As mentioned earlier, a pure ROI assessment cannot be applied to energy-saving measures. It is the wrong tool, especially when it comes to larger measures. Energy-saving measures often pay for themselves over a longer period of time, so ROI often gives a false perspective on the measure

It is better to calculate with a dynamic net present value, which is more meaningful in the long term. Furthermore, a purely economic evaluation is too one-dimensional. Issues such as CO2 emissions, the company's future viability, employee well-being, and other environmental impacts are ignored. Authenticity requires serious investment rather than carbon offsetting. For many measures, subsidies can also be applied for, the extent of which many companies are unaware of. 

4. What changes and savings have the environmental managament systems DIN ISO 50001 and EMAS had on companies, and what lasting effects do you see in these companies?

We have had little contact with EMAS so far. Our focus is more on ISO 50001. Changes depend heavily on how seriously the company implements its management systems. When companies implement them seriously, you can see clear developments. Companies that started investing early today have clear advantages over others. ISO 50001 provides a holistic perspective. It looks at the entire system and proceeds step by step. 

When ISO 50001 is implemented conscientiously, employees are more involved in processes and company developments and are better informed. They can contribute. The effect of this is increased motivation and appreciation. In addition to the ecological and social aspects of sustainability, employees are also recognized here, as employees are heard, can contribute, and have a voice. The seriousness of the approach is lived and becomes clearer. With regard to the EU taxonomy, this lays an important foundation for preparing for future political and legal framework conditions, such as reporting obligations.

5. In which technology do you see the greatest savings potential for the future?

This must be considered individually and cannot be answered in general terms. Renewable alternatives to heat supply offer savings potential in terms of CO2 emissions – which must be considered at least as important in the future as the economic aspect. Here, significant savings potential will also be possible through automation and digitalization. 

Open exchange and the elimination of competitive thinking between companies could accelerate savings potential and innovation. For example, if one company can use another's waste heat. If knowledge is shared, or even the vehicle fleet. Locally networked PV systems also have great potential. The cloud concept should be implemented not only digitally but also in practice. In my opinion, the greatest savings potential lies, as mentioned earlier, in stopping purely economic evaluations and considering other factors. So many technologies are currently coming onto the market that it would be wrong to limit ourselves to one.

6. From an initial analysis and assessment of a company's situation to successful implementation, it's a long road. How long do companies realistically need to plan for?

This depends on the individual measures to be implemented. At SEMPACT, we offer our customers the full range. From individual savings measures to a complete transformation into a climate-positive company. Every step counts. To truly make a difference, everyone involved needs time to consider and plan measures holistically. However, experience has shown that quick measures are not the most effective. We want to get to the root cause, not fight the symptoms.

7. In almost all companies, energy is converted into heat and released almost unused into the atmosphere. What options are available to customers here?

First, it must be determined whether the company could use the heat for other purposes. How, for example, can the heat be concentrated? One option here would be to connect a central water cooling system to machines (e.g., injection molding machines) instead of decentralized air coolers, thus preventing the waste heat from being released into the ambient air but feeding it into a centralized network. The extracted heat could then be used to support heating and at the same time the energy requirement for air conditioning would be reduced.

8. Keyword: Cooling from heat?

This requires a basic prerequisite: The heat must be available free of charge (waste product, residual heat, waste heat) and not be generated specifically for this purpose. That would be completely inefficient, as heat loss always occurs during the conversion. Therefore, if heat is available free of charge and cannot be used for other purposes, as explained in your last question, then cooling generation can be considered. 

There are adsorption and absorption chillers for this process. These require different temperature levels and have different investment costs. However, the temperature level must generally be very high (absorption from approx. 85°C/adsorption from approx. 65°C). The use of these machines must be carefully calculated and depends primarily on the operating hours of the heat availability and the temperature level of the cooling demand, as the machines are significantly more expensive than conventional chillers. All in all, many criteria must be met for the use to be worthwhile. Here, it is again essential to consciously consider the entire system and not to think in terms of individual processes.

9. A final thought?

In summary, I can say that as consultants, it is important to us to meet and interact with our clients on an equal footing, to analyze the company's processes in detail, and to develop specific and customized solutions. To operate efficiently in the long term, all of the company's systems must be integrated. The realistic success of the measures always depends on everyone involved pulling together. This is the only way to enable change.