If you look at the whole system, it’s not.” If you look at the components, yes, the water heater is more efficient than the boiler. “That’s the difference of looking at the system versus the components. Plus, you’re going to reduce the money you’re already spending to get rid of the heat from the refrigeration system,” Taylor says. “If we redirect the heat from the refrigeration system to preheat the water, we might get to 150% efficiency while keeping the old boiler. This includes finding all the heat sources and heat sinks in a facility, and redirecting the heat sources to the heat sinks. One of the goals is to look for what Taylor calls “match-making” opportunities. In contrast, the systems approach reviews all of the company’s systems. This may offer thermal efficiency of 97%. A conventional component-based assessment may suggest improving the efficiency by replacing the boiler with a direct fired hot water heater. It has a thermal efficiency of 80% (this means 80% of the energy gets transferred to the water, while the remaining 20% is lost to the environment). Think of a company that uses a boiler system to heat its water. “If you want to learn the other 40%, you have to study every other system it interacts with.” Example of the systems approach “The idea is that if you study any system, you can actually only learn about 60% of it,” Taylor says. Systems thinking involves looking at a company’s energy use as a whole, instead of only focusing on individual items of equipment or processes. The four principles of the systems approach 1. Sometimes called process integration, it is based on four key principles. The systems approach uses principles of operational efficiency and lean production to help businesses get greener by becoming leaner.

Taylor says that conventional sustainability projects, such as switching to electric vehicles, building retrofits and solar power, can cost as much as $100 per tonne of greenhouse gas avoided. Growth & Transition Capital financing solutions Kauffman Fellows Program Partial Scholarship Venture Capital Catalyst Initiative (VCCI) When the group runs out of ideas, focus attention to areas in the chart where ideas are thin.Industrial, Clean and Energy Technology (ICE) Venture Fund.Layers of branches indicate causal relationships. Continue to ask “Why?” and generate deeper levels of causes. Write sub–causes branching off the causes. Ask the question “why does this happen?” again.Causes can be written in several places, if they relate to several categories. Ask: “Why does this happen?” As each idea is given, the facilitator writes it as a branch from the appropriate category. Write the categories of causes as branches from the main arrow.For instance, it might make sense to start with these generic headings: methods, machines (equipment), people (manpower), materials, measurement, and environment. Brainstorm the primary categories of causes for the problem.Write the problem statement at the center right of the flipchart or whiteboard, box it, and draw a horizontal arrow running to it.The group should agree on a problem statement (effect).

Ishikawa diagram water and sanitation