1998 MECS User Needs

Mail/Electronic Survey Results

A mail/electronic survey was conducted as part of the process to collect information on the data needs of MECS customers. The collection time frame was May 1 through July 31, 1998. The survey portion has been completed, and the total results are now available.

During this three-month period, the electronic user-needs survey received about 207 hits. Yet, only 15 of those hits resulted in the transmission of a completed survey.

Exactly 239 surveys were mailed to customers on the mailing list of the MECS publication. A total of 50 completed surveys (21% response rate) were returned, 32 of which resulted from a follow-up mail request.

Only two surveys were returned by the 11 trade associations that were identified as MECS users. Where appropriate, the replies of those two TRADE ASSOCIATIONS have been duly noted by the use of capitalization.

Of the 17 mail surveys in which Mr. Dwight French, Energy Consumption Division Director, signed personalized salutations on the cover letter, 11 were returned.

Following are the results of the 15 electronic and 50 mail surveys (total count of 65). When respondents identified themselves or their employers, it's been duly noted in the write-in responses.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1A) Have customers ever used the MECS web site?

• 25 of the 50 mail returns reported they have never used the MECS web site (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1B) Did electronic customers find the information that was needed from the MECS web site?

• 4 of the 15 electronic returns reported they did not, as follows:
• 1 utility employee did not find info on consumption/costs for specific SIC and for specific end uses;
• 1 student did not find info on consumption/costs for specific fuel and fuel-switching capability;
• 1 academia employee in Italy did not find info on energy production and its composition (oil,coal, gas, nuclear, etc.) in China;
• 1 unidentified respondent did not find info on energy consumption in health, transportation, agriculture.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2) What types of MECS information are customers seeking?

• 52 of the 65 returns reported energy consumption and/or costs for specific SIC (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION);
• 44 reported energy consumption for specific end use (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION);
• 43 reported energy consumption and/or costs for specific fuel (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION);
• 30 reported energy data by specific U.S. geographic area (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION);
• 30 reported types of general technologies present in establishments;
• 29 reported average prices of purchased energy;
• 26 reported data on cogeneration of electricity;
• 14 reported data on fuel switching (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION).
• 11 other categories were reported as follows:

- energy intensity by industry by region;
- energy production and its composition (by fuel type) in China;
- commercial and industrial energy management market data, specifically in software market;
- energy consumption in health, transportation, agriculture;
- elasticities of fuel switching;
- manufacturing equipment data, for example, number of plants with air compressors;
- energy use per square foot;
- energy use per employee;
- byproducts;
- state-level info;
- energy consumed in trucks in transport of products produced.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3A) Was MECS information easy for customers to understand?

• 46 of the 65 returns said the information was easy to understand (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3B) Why wasn't the MECS information easy for customers to understand?

• 14 of the 65 returns reported these reasons, as follows:
• 1 EPA employee had trouble interpreting Table 2.3 in 1996 AER (Number of Establishments by Total Inputs, 1994), especially the "other energy" column;
• 1 utility employee just calls whenever there's a question and is unsure if the existing documentation can be bettered;
• 1 student would like a better explanation of what he's looking at;
• 1 government employee feels the level of understanding is dependent on the type of computer operating system;
• 1 consultant could not find the prices at which firms would switch fuels;
• 1 ACEEE employee feels the appendix tables can be confusing as to what's included and what's the basis for the table, so that choosing the appropriate table is challenging, especially for those unfamiliar;
• 1 Edison Electric employee wants more graphic comparisons by SIC or region and the number of data points in a Census region;
• 1 consultant believes the footnotes (in the tables) can be confusing;
• 1 consultant wants clarification of the differences in tables and what's included in consumption;
• 1 consultant would like improved header descriptions for each column (in the tables);
• 1 consultant complained that some regional or divisional data are of no use since most had to be withheld due to lack of diversity in samples;
• 1 energy-industry employee feels that the data are listed too many ways - Btu versus kWh for different fuels;
• 1 library employee says the patrons, who are not specialists, look for fuel costs in the State (Louisiana) compared with other States, and they don't know how to find it or what it's called;
• 1 government employee sought MECS data reconciliation with SEDS.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4A) What are customer concerns if the MECS eliminates fuel-switching questions?

• 16 of the 65 returns expressed specific concerns or uncertainties about the proposed elimination of the fuel-switching collection from the survey, as follows:

"This is important information in determining industries' flexibility." (govt. employee)

"We do not use this info as much as the other categories, but we believe this will be of major interest to ESCOs targeting industrial customers." (utility employee)

"Currently conducting a study for U.S. EPA on boilers, IC engines, turbines, incinerators, and preheaters. Need to know industries' capabilities to switch from certain fuels to alternative fuels, such as natural gas. The MECS is the best info source we've found by far. It would be a shame for such info to disappear, especially since fuel-switching info may see a surge in demand in the future." (consultant)

"Can help to determine overall Btu usage." (Edison Electric employee)

"This is important to the electric industry because the generation resource is often owned by others. If a large investment is made in plant and transmission, and the customer changes, that is stranded assets and lost revenue. Knowing fuel-switching capabilities is required to protect against lost load." (utility employee)

"Necessary to evaluate options and impacts from short-term energy supply disruptions from natural disasters, weather, emergencies, etc., as well as to evaluate flexibility of end-use markets to respond, physically and economically, to long-term energy supply trends." (govt. employee)

"Keep it." (Dr. H. Merklein)

"Would like to have this info for calculations 1) of potential load loss/gain and 2) impacts of fuel switching (environmental, other)." (TRADE ASSOCIATION)

"Yikes. In the past, we've had projects focused on fuel-switching analysis - mostly oil to gas/electricity/alternatives or gas to elec; not vice versa. Number of firms and Btu were most useful to us. MECS is the only source for fuel-switching data (beyond the AGA partial survey focused on residential and commercial customers). Why eliminate it?" (consultant)

"We will lose our backup information for peak winter and summer demand emergency planning (e.g., fuel oil in winter and electricity in summer)." (govt. employee)

"We are concerned that this information is important for emergency preparedness planning in the event that either oil supply or natural gas supply is interrupted. There are also economic advantages to fuel-switching capabilities that we might want to track in the future." (NYSERDA staff)

"If MECS eliminates the fuel-switching capabilities, it would eliminate the only unbiased source for manufacturers' fuel-switching capabilities." (govt. employee)

"Do not eliminate - loss of ongoing historical data base." (govt. employee)

"This (data) may have some relevance, but I suspect that capability would rapidly change if conditions changed, and so I think the data has little real value." (utility employee)

"This could be a problem with deregulation." (academia employee)

"My research needs vary from time to time, but fuel-switching capability info has a great potential for studies of economy-wide and sector-specific vulnerability and price elasticity." (academia employee)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4B) What are customer concerns if the MECS eliminates motor questions?

• 17 of the 65 returns expressed specific concerns or uncertainties about the proposed elimination of the electric-motor collection from the survey, as follows:

"Motors are one of the largest (and the most easily characterized across industries) sources of energy-efficiency potential in the industrial/manufacturing sector. Elimination of any info on this end use would affect the ability to target and capture that efficiency." (utility employee)

"The electric motor data can be useful in our state." (govt. employee)

"This has proven very valuable, and will be more valuable now that the Xenergy study is available. It's critical input to Motor Challenge evaluation." (ACEEE employee)

"I do have concern. Being involved in the Motor Challenge requires us to help people find info on motor systems, and the MECS has been a valuable source." (library employee)

"Electric motors are the biggest users of electricity in many manufacturing plants. Info about the use of high-efficiency motors is very important." (Edison Electric employee)

"This also affects DSM potential - knowledge of how much horse power is available gives clues to the market of variable-speed drives. It also is useful in regulating the transmission system." (utility employee)

"Big problem - 60-75% of electric energy use in sector is for motors. To eliminate this would seriously hamper analysts' capabilities." (Prof. F. Sparrow)

"We've had projects focused on electric motors exclusively. With an OIT program, a Climate Action initiative, and lots of voluntary actions, it's an important area for industrial analytical studies and voluntary compliance program design." (consultant)

"It is probably the only source of publicly available data for use in market assessment, market transformation, energy-efficiency program design, etc. Please do not delete." (consultant)

"Some quadrennial reports will have less info based on DOE information." (govt. employee)

"It is useful and important to separate energy use in process areas versus motor systems." (consultant)

"We may lose the ability to monitor advances in efficiency and energy savings using an outside source." (academia employee)

"This is important. Motors account for 75% of energy used in manufacturing. This should be kept." (academia employee)

"Do not eliminate." (govt. employee)

"I have not used that (motor) data, but it may be useful to our marketing folks in the future." (utility employee)

"Yes (I have concerns), this is important to be able to forecast potential savings." (utility employee)

"Motors dominate industrial electricity consumption. Due to this dominance and the relatively high cost of electricity, motor detail should be maintained." (researcher)



• One encouraging response was received, as follows:

"Considering the variety of motors at a plant and the nature of response made to your questionnaire at the plant, the information you have gathered is of very limited value, and it is being misused by analysts." (Prof. M. Ross)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5A) What are customer concerns if the MECS adds purchased-electricity questions?

• 8 of the 65 returns expressed specific concerns or uncertainties about the proposed addition of the purchased-electricity collection to the survey, as follows:

"My thoughts on electricity prices - basically, I believe it is none of the government's business where power or fuel is purchased nor what it costs." (manufacturing employee)

"As a reporter, I am opposed to expanding the survey. Specific sites likely will not know this information unless they are doing their own purchasing. I believe there is enough data on utility/nonutility generation for any necessary analysis." (utility employee)

"My own feeling is you need to expand coverage of self and cogenerated electricity, not purchased." (Prof. F. Sparrow)

"Existing questions and information are adequate. Additional efforts cannot be justified." (manufacturing employee)

"This information is unlikely to be valuable this time due to the transitional nature of the electrical utility market. To be useful, it would be necessary to have state-level data." (ACEEE employee)

"Yes (I have concerns), but these purchases won't be on long-term contracts, and the price volatility will be eliminated in an 'annual' or 'average' price. Interest is in futures, spot, and emergency purchases. And there'll be lots of differences. How will you reconcile the costs to present a rational table?" (consultant)

"If one has an agent or marketer providing electricity, it could come from many sources and be very burdensome to supply." (TRADE ASSOCIATION)

"My concern is whether your plant-level respondents can answer a question reliably. In this case, using billing data, they may be able to." (Prof. M. Ross)



• Some encouraging responses were received, as follows:

"A discussion of types of rate structures would be of interest." (consultant)

"This is very important! However, I might add that joint ownership of onsite generation, or even onsite power owned by other entities, is an important issue that should be carefully tracked. The issue of who the establishment is and how much 'over-the-fence' action is going on is important, too!" (Dr. G. Boyd)

"OK to add as long as you define the term 'utility' and 'nonutility' appropriately." (consultant)

"This (collection) would ease some of the data backup and cross checking with data that we independently collect." (govt. employee)

"We think this (collection) is necessary to make the data useful in the future." (consultant)

"Nonutility source info is becoming essential." (academia employee)

"This information could be valuable in benchmarking and following the cost implications of electric industry restructuring." (researcher)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5B) What are customer concerns if the MECS adds greenhouse-gas questions?

• 21 of the 65 returns expressed specific concerns or uncertainties about the proposed addition of the greenhouse-gas collection (emissions/reductions) to the survey, as follows:

"No to collection of GHG data. This is a troublesome proposal in that many of us do not have measuring or estimating methodologies for these substances. It will be a burdensome exercise to ask sites to report such data for 1998. Probably a two-year or three-year advance warning with hearings and a comment period should occur before any attempt to collect this data from the many thousands of establishments surveyed. EIA is perfectly capable of imputing these GHG emissions from available fuel data and other sources and is already doing so for existing GHG inventory reporting purposes (even the EPA can do it). The accuracy of such data estimation is probably reasonable ..." (manufacturing employee)

"As a reporter, I am opposed to further reporting. Greenhouse gas emissions are not required to be monitored, and data are not necessarily available. Sufficient information has already been published, and carbon emissions can be calculated from the fuel data." (utility employee)

"Collecting this information would be a waste of funds." (utility employee)

"Not useful - it can be calculated from energy use. A separate survey is not needed. Nitrous oxides and carbon dioxide are only a portion of the problem. Besides, atmospheric and oceanographic effects may mask many of the effects." (consultant)

"Existing data is adequate. Carbon dioxide predominantly comes from fuel combustion, and those use numbers are already obtained, just calculate the carbon dioxide with standard factors. Nitrous oxides are already estimated by EIA/EPA and reported by source through 1605(b). Additional efforts would be duplicative." (manufacturing employee)

"Ugh. We can calculate this, knowing the factors for each fuel. Waste of paper and no brainer." (consultant)

"The scientific evidence on trends in global warming is so uncertain it does not appear warranted to collection of any detailed information on these emissions at the present time." (consultant)

"Depends on what type of emissions. If you're going to put actual data in, put it all in - NUGs, utilities (public and private)." (utility employee)

"We don't need this directly now, but the suggestion begs the question of whose estimates of these emissions will you use, and are these emissions from power generation or from any source, such as the use of natural gas in an end use?" (utility employee)

"Useful, but it may be unlikely that plants will be able to provide meaningful info. This information can be approximated from fuel-consumption data." (ACEEE employee)

"As people use the spot market for generation supply, emissions could change on an hourly basis. Also, you have to add in emissions from onsite generation and processes to get the whole story." (Edison Electric employee)

"I don't think this is necessary unless you want to succumb to the 'Greenies.'" (utility employee)

"Estimating carbon dioxide emissions from fuel use is easy, hence almost redundant to include in MECS. Other GHG emissions estimates would be useful if good data is actually collected, not estimated from 'rule of thumb.'" (Pacific NW Lab employee)

"Will you do this based on regional fuel mixes?" (consultant)

"Should be an EPA concern." (Dr. H. Merklein)

"Why would you collect? If you have energy data, easy to estimate with decent accuracy. Seems burdensome for industry. Also, in their interest not to report too much! How reliable??" (govt. employee in Canada)

"Carbon dioxide emissions are easily obtained, non-CO2 gases might be helpful. I doubt we could get meaningful reduction estimates, but would love to see it if we can!" (Dr. G. Boyd)

"Do firms have data on nitrous oxides? Or will it be 'guesstimates?'" (academia employee)

"This is a burdensome requirement. There is a voluntary reporting system available. Including this information in MECS moves it from voluntary to required. Don't do this until a treaty is ratified." (TRADE ASSOCIATION)

"Wonder how this data would be measured and provided. Most industries have air emission permits, and I would be concerned about (industry) willingness and accuracy of data provided in this 'second' channel. This is a question of who and how - versus whether it would be valuable (it would)." (researcher)

"My concern is whether your plant-level respondents can answer a question reliably. I doubt the value of this information. How would your respondent know (about emissions and reductions of greenhouse gases)?" (Prof. M. Ross)



• Some encouraging responses were received, as follows:

"Very important in determining carbon emissions." (govt. employee)

"Sort by onsite and utilities generating electricity. List carbon emission factors, regional electricity emission factors." (consultant)

"Useful - types of equipment and cost to eliminate gases helpful, not just what gases are emitted." (library employee)

"Excellent idea! Ask what technologies (types of environmental control equipment) are used to reduce emissions (i.e., scrubbers, combustion, etc.)." (energy-industry employee)

"This will improve some reporting functions that will be growing. The legislature is increasingly interested in state and regional information. Current information is calculated." (govt. employee)

"Useful information. Would be good to include expenditures on reduction, if possible." (consultant)

"This is a most important topic. Information is essential here." (academia employee)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6) What is customers' trade-off preference: SIC detail vs. geographic detail

• 30 of the 65 returns would prefer to get energy data on more industries at 4-digit SIC level, while sacrificing geographic detail (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION);
• 11 expressed no preference (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION);
• 11 expressed no change to the present balance between SIC and geographic detail;
•   9 would prefer to get data at more precise geographic detail, while sacrificing the number of 4-digit SICs;
•   4 gave no response.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7) In customers' opinion, how useful are ... (from 65 returns)

7A) Establishment Counts:

• 18 Very Useful
• 25 Somewhat Useful (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
• 11 Not Useful
•   4 No Opinion (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   7 No Response

7B) End-Use Consumption:

• 44 Very Useful (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
• 10 Somewhat Useful
•   3 Not Useful
•   4 No Opinion (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   4 No Response

7C) Floor-Space Footage:

• 11 Very Useful
• 26 Somewhat Useful
• 17 Not Useful (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   7 No Opinion (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   4 No Response

7D) Energy-Management Activities:

• 17 Very Useful
• 26 Somewhat Useful
• 12 Not Useful (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   5 No Opinion (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   5 No Response

7E) Cogeneration Technologies:

• 29 Very Useful
• 19 Somewhat Useful (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   6 Not Useful
•   6 No Opinion (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   5 No Response

7F) General Technologies:

• 23 Very Useful
• 25 Somewhat Useful (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   9 Not Useful
•   3 No Opinion (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   5 No Response

7G) Specific Technologies:

• 27 Very Useful (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
• 15 Somewhat Useful
• 10 Not Useful
•   8 No Opinion (includes 1 reply from TRADE ASSOCIATION)
•   5 No Response

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8) What type of customers (by type of employer) responded to the MECS user-needs survey?

• 17 Government
• 17 Consultant/Research
• 11 Energy Industry/Utility
•   7 Academia
•   5 Library
•   3 Manufacturing
•   2 TRADE ASSOCIATION
•   1 Student
•   1 Self
•   1 No Response

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9) What additional suggestions or comments were received from customers?

• 21 of the 65 returns provided additional comments, as follows:

"I would like to see commercial establishments by SIC codes, not just principal building codes." (utility employee)

"Eliminate all price collection from MECS. Why? It no longer has any validity (i.e., accuracy) for 'industrial' concerns that for the most part purchase their own gas and will soon buy their own electric energy, paying fees to utilities delivering the commodity. In addition to buying our own energy, some firms are buying resources in the ground (or generation assets), hedging, and using other financial instruments with the mix of these activities resulting in government-collected data that is useless for our class of consumer, as it soon will be for all classes of consumers. It certainly has no useful purpose for us! The rule of thumb should be, if a utility cannot provide the data, then it is not worth bothering the consumer for it. This would mean that the EIA will need to discontinue collecting consumer energy-price data because most consumers will, over time, stop paying the utility for the energy commodity. Rather than ask more questions of manufacturers, EIA needs to subscribe to a few energy publications to follow the real pricing trends in energy-commodity markets - these are sufficiently accurate for trends in 'producer' pricing." (manufacturing employee)

"I believe the major value from these types of surveys is the change across time, rather than a snapshot with a statistical variability that is greater than the change one would expect from the last survey. Sufficient sampling should be done to get the standard errors low enough on any data cell that a comparison to a prior survey is relevant." (utility employee)

"The cogen data (MECS pub - Table A13) is reported for facilities with a single type in place. If more than one type, the site is placed in the 'multiple' column. This makes tracking tech trends difficult. May be more useful to report all sites with each tech." (ACEEE employee)

"Show national and regional median values for use and costs along with averages, and possibly the standard deviation." (Edison Electric employee)

"I see there is a replacement for the SIC code. It is the NAICS. Maybe this should be phased in." (utility employee)

"MECS is the only comprehensive source of U.S. Industrial energy-use data. Please keep focused on making high-quality measurement of energy use by type and industry, nonfuel energy use, and components of electricity use." (Pacific NW Lab employee)

"If I can help in defending your budget, let me know." (Prof. F. Sparrow)

"More timely information!" (govt. employee in Canada)

"Industry information which is now SIC will need to be converted to NAICS. The timing of this is of interest to BEA." (govt. employee at BEA)

"Eliminate divisional or regional where withholding of data is more than just one or two areas. Too many subdivisions are attempted with very little value." (consultant)

"Consumption data at 4-digit SIC and state-level detail would be ideal." (govt. employee)

"I would love fewer W's and Q's. I understand why they're there, but it's incredibly frustrating if you're after certain numbers." (consultant)

"From my other comments, you can see that certain people (admittedly inexperienced) are going to have trouble using the site. I could not tell whether you have what I need, and I just don't know where to look, or whether you just don't have it." (library employee)

"The information in this (manufacturing) area is of most use to the engineers and Conservation Investment Program people. The rest of us (State of Minnesota - Dept. of Trade and Economic Development) are involved in annual and four-year reports for the legislature and general public." (govt. employee)

"Any additional detail on key process industries (e.g., energy consumption at 5-digit level) would be helpful." (consultant)

"MECS and EIA web site are great resources. More data and work are needed - not less." (academia employee)

"The current amount of data you are collecting, and the cogent highlighting of the important attributes of these data in the presentation as well as discussions of the evolving trends, is very impressive. Keep up the good work." (consultant)

"Keep the required inquiry as simple as possible!!!" (TRADE ASSOCIATION)

"Please make MECS available as a complete download, similar to CBECS." (utility employee)

"It's not useful to know that, at a plant, there is at least one heat-recovery device or variable-speed motor! On the other hand, the info you collect on fuels and byproducts used as fuels at 4-digit level is very useful." (Prof. M. Ross)