The energy efficiency assessment that doesn't stop the line

• 9 days ago (2026-07-07)
• Junior Isles

Africa 374 Asia 1044 Australasia 67 Battery 4 Biofuel 2 Biomass 9 Biomethane 1 Clean energy 1 Climate change 24 Coal 369 Cogeneration 3 Concentrating solar 7 Cyber security 9 Decarbonisation 3 Decentralised energy 7 Demand side management 3 Demand side response 3 Digitalisation 12 Distributed energy 12 Distribution 167 Electric vehicles EVs 5 Emissions 70 Energy management 3 Equipment 2 Ethanol 1 Europe 1174 Gas 476 Gas engine plant 94 Gas fuel 3 Horizon 2 Hydroelectric 17 Hydrogen 76 Hydropower 164 Latin America 104 Maintenance 6 Marine 1 Metering 2 microgrid 5 Middle East 371 North America 1084 Nuclear 739 Offshore wind 132 Oil 26 Operations 4 Policy 9 Regulations 3 Renewables 829 smart grid 2 Smart meters 2 Solar 356 Storage 52 substation 8 Tepco 2 Tidal 2 Toshiba 4 Transmission 248 US Senate Washington 4 Waste-to-energy 1 Wind 294

---

Erich Labuda , President, Motion Services division, ABB

Ask any industry leader why their organization hasn't moved faster on energy efficiency, and it’s the risk of disruption to operations that consistently ranks as a top answer. That’s not hyperbole; our new “End-to-end Energy Intelligence” global study confirmed it. Nearly a third (32%) of industrial decision-makers cite downtime, outage and continuity concerns as a top barrier to greater efficiency, making it the second most common obstacle after cost itself.

In manufacturing, process industries and critical infrastructure, unplanned stoppages are expensive, reputationally damaging and sometimes dangerous. The instinct to protect uptime above all else is not irrational, it is the result of hard experience. But the data shows that it creates a catch-22.

Our research found that the organizations most exposed to energy cost volatility are often the ones most reluctant to conduct the assessments needed to reduce it. Energy still absorbs an average of 25 percent of operating costs across global industry, and nearly 60 percent of companies say rising costs continue to threaten profitability. Yet the very tools that could help, systematic energy assessments, are repeatedly deferred because of the disruption they are assumed to require.

The good news is that assumption is increasingly out of date.

A different kind of assessment

It’s true that, while traditional on-site energy audits are valuable, they come with real practical constraints. They require physical access to equipment, interruption to processes, and coordination across multiple teams, often at a time when operational pressures make any planned downtime feel unaffordable.

Remote energy appraisals work differently. Rather than requiring engineers on-site with clipboards and shutdowns, they draw on data that industrial facilities already generate - readings from sensors and smart meters, records from control systems and process historians, outputs from building management and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) platforms. That data is analyzed remotely to identify inefficiencies, model improvement scenarios, and build detailed business cases, without a single production line being stopped.

This distinction matters more than it might initially appear. Because remote appraisals work within existing data infrastructure, they can be conducted not just without disruption, but continuously, generating a real-time, whole-site picture of energy performance rather than a periodic snapshot. The result is a fundamentally different relationship with energy data: not an annual review that sits in a drawer, but an ongoing feedback loop that flags performance degradation as it happens, prioritizes interventions by impact and feasibility, and tracks savings as they accumulate.

Appetite is high but barriers persist

The appetite for more frequent assessments is clearly there. ABB's global survey shows that 83 percent of organizations already conduct energy appraisals frequently or often, suggesting the concept is well understood and widely adopted. Yet when asked what prevents them from doing them more often, the answers are revealing:

·       31 percent cite insufficient staff resources to manage the process

·       30 percent say assessments are too expensive

·       28 percent point to disruption to operations as a barrier

·       29 percent say they lack the data needed for remote analysis

·       26 percent are unclear on the Return On Investment (ROI) or payback period

Remote, data-driven appraisal models directly address the first three of these constraints. They require less staff coordination than on-site audits, they can be structured to deliver a clear ROI model as part of the output, and, by definition, they eliminate the disruption concern entirely.

The data and ROI barriers are real, but they are also solvable. Organizations that invest in connecting their existing data sources into a unified, accessible view consistently report faster assessment cycles, clearer business cases, and stronger investment follow-through. Our study shows that among those already using digital solutions, 57 percent expect investment to increase significantly over the next five years. Among those not ready for over a year, that figure drops to zero percent.

From appraisal to action at CERN

The gap between identifying efficiency opportunities and acting on them is where many programs stall. A well-designed appraisal doesn't just diagnose; it creates the business case that unlocks the investment needed to act.

ABB's partnership with CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, demonstrates what is possible when data-driven diagnostics are applied at scale, and without operational disruption.

CERN operates the largest particle physics laboratory in the world, with significant energy consumption due to its extensive cooling and ventilation systems. ABB was brought in to deliver energy savings, reduce operational costs and contribute to sustainability goals.

The results exceeded expectations. By screening over 800 motor-driven systems the team identified a savings potential of 17.4 percent, surpassing CERN's original target (15%). In absolute terms, that translates to potential annual energy savings of up to 31 gigawatt-hours (GWh): enough to power more than 18,000 European households and avoid four kilotonnes of CO2 emissions annually, equivalent to planting over 420,000 trees.

Diagnostics as the entry point

With a payback period of under two years for certain applications, the CERN project illustrates a principle that’s relevant to applications beyond particle physics laboratories. For any large industrial site with a significant installed base of motors, which is to say, virtually every major manufacturer, utility, food processor, pharmaceutical plant or data center, there is no need to wait to benefit from cost reductions and lasting financial gains. The challenge is finding the potential for material savings efficiently, and making the business case compelling enough to unlock investment.

This is where the design of the appraisal process matters as much as the technology behind it. A good energy appraisal service is built around end-to-end energy intelligence: starting with remote diagnostics that work within existing data infrastructure, identifying the highest-impact opportunities across the whole site, and building a clear, prioritized business case for each. That business case then feeds directly into targeted modernization, motor and drive upgrades matched to the specific efficiency gap identified, supported by intelligent software that continuously monitors and optimizes performance after installation, and lifecycle services to sustain gains over the long term. That’s our preferred approach.

Flexible, outcome-based financing removes the upfront capital barrier that prevents many organizations from acting even when the ROI is clear. This matters because there is a persistent disconnect between how companies want to evaluate energy efficiency investments and how decisions are actually made. While 81 percent agree that total cost of ownership (TCO) should guide investment choices, only 37 percent say they consistently apply this logic.

Starting without stopping

The research points to a consistent pattern. Organizations that assess frequently, and act on what they find, report stronger investment ambition, better performance outcomes, and clearer pathways to their net zero commitments. Those that defer assessment because of disruption concerns tend to remain in an experimental, fragmented mode: doing many small things simultaneously without the diagnostic foundation to prioritize, sequence, or prove the impact of any of them.

The technology to change this is available today. Energy appraisals that work within existing data infrastructure, continuous digital monitoring that replaces periodic snapshots, and structured upgrade programs with clear payback timelines have removed most of the practical barriers that once made efficiency assessment feel risky or disruptive.

For organizations hesitant to commit to large-scale efficiency programs, a remote appraisal offers the right starting point: high-quality diagnostics, actionable quick wins, and a credible ROI model, all without touching the production schedule.

This article draws on findings from ABB's "End-to-end Energy Intelligence" report, based on a survey of 2,700 industrial decision-makers across 15 countries and 15 industries, conducted in partnership with Sapio Research. The full report is available here .