Industrial Opportunity Screen
A mid-size manufacturing plant, benchmarked against the real thing
- Opportunity screen. Twelve measures ranked by payback. Click a measure name to see what is behind it, and hover the chart to compare cost against savings.
- Follow-through. The number worth arguing about: less than half of these measures ever get installed, and that gap is what the software is for.
Illustrative product demo. No client is shown, named or described here, and no figure on this page reflects any client’s measured results. Composite plant and measure benchmarks derived from the public DOE Industrial Assessment Center database.
Every figure on this page comes from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Industrial Assessment Center database: 22,858 assessments and 169,642 recommendations at real manufacturing plants. This page uses the 6,176 assessments and 43,712 recommendations from fiscal year 2015 onward, because a 1990s dollar and a 1990s measure mix would flatter the answer.
The plant described above is the median of that set. It is a composite rather than a real site with the name removed, which matters: one plant stays recognizable from its floor area, spend and measure mix, and a median across six thousand of them is nobody.
The arithmetic closes. The spend shown is this plant’s own usage multiplied by its own rate (3,210,914 kWh at $0.0659/kWh, plus 8,584 MMBtu at $6.94/MMBtu), not a third median pulled from a different column. Those are different numbers, and quietly using the second is how a figure that looks exactly right turns out to be wrong.
| Gross floor area | 121,392 sf |
| Employees | 100 |
| Annual sales | $30,000,000 |
| Electricity | 3,210,914 kWh at $0.0659/kWh = $211,599 |
| Natural gas | 8,584 MMBtu at $6.94/MMBtu = $59,573 |
| Total energy spend | $271,172 |
| Site energy intensity | 161 kBtu/sf |
| Recommendations per assessment | 7 |
Median of 6,176 DOE assessments, FY2015 onward. Source file ITAC_Database_20260805.xlsx, retrieved 2026-08-05.