Proven savings from past clients across industries. Each case measured at the plant.

Each anonymized case states the baseline, work performed, management record, result, and limitations.

Relevant operating experience

Casework across energy-intensive facilities

Selected client relationships. Scope varies by organization. Confidential assignments remain unnamed.

Results with scope and operating context

Each case can be reviewed online. A short business form provides PDF access.

Completed outcome · Central Mexico18%

reduction in delivered electricity cost

The engagement connected the plant demand profile, tariff conditions, and procurement options in one management record for operating and finance review.

Review and request PDF ↗Completed outcome · Northern Mexico12%

total energy cost reduction

The facility received a combined view of utility system performance, operating conditions, and the financial sequence of improvements.

Review and request PDF ↗Completed outcome · Mexico City22%

energy cost reduction

Technical and commercial measures were evaluated against one baseline before management committed resources.

Review and request PDF ↗Modeled opportunity · MexicoMXN 161.7M

projected annual savings

A documented facility baseline was used to model cogeneration and utility system economics, payback, and projected emissions impact.

Review and request PDF ↗

From a completed Level 2 audit

What a Level 2 audit looks like

Pages from a completed audit of a Mexican manufacturing plant. Client name, address, and account data have been removed. Everything else is presented as delivered.

A full Level 2 audit package combining field evidence, engineering analysis, and implementation priorities for management review. Page from a Mexico Energy Partners Level 2 industrial energy audit — A full Level 2 audit package combining field evidence, engineering analysis, and implementation priorities for management review.

Average hourly electricity demand by month, 2021 to 2023, reconstructed from three years of CFE billing history. Page from a Mexico Energy Partners Level 2 industrial energy audit — Average hourly electricity demand by month, 2021 to 2023, reconstructed from three years of CFE billing history.

Reference-year baseline across two CFE contracts and onsite solar, with base, intermediate, and punta energy, billable demand, and power factor by period. Page from a Mexico Energy Partners Level 2 industrial energy audit — Reference-year baseline across two CFE contracts and onsite solar, with base, intermediate, and punta energy, billable demand, and power factor by period.

Pump selection for the chilled-water system, including equipment dimensions, hydraulic performance curves, operating point, and materials specifications. Page from a Mexico Energy Partners Level 2 industrial energy audit — Pump selection for the chilled-water system, including equipment dimensions, hydraulic performance curves, operating point, and materials specifications.

Summary of eight measures: energy saving, annual pesos, investment, and payback in years. Page from a Mexico Energy Partners Level 2 industrial energy audit — Summary of eight measures: energy saving, annual pesos, investment, and payback in years.

Inside the plant: process equipment documented in the field and connected to operating context before recommendations are developed. Page from a Mexico Energy Partners Level 2 industrial energy audit — Inside the plant: process equipment documented in the field and connected to operating context before recommendations are developed.

Figures shown are for one facility with its own baseline and tariff. Identified savings have not been verified under M&V. MEP does not guarantee savings.

Review the depth of the deliverable, then speak with MEP about the facility, the decision, and the appropriate next step.

Request a facility review View the curated sample

Engagement record

Sample engagements

Each card states what MEP measured, what changed, and the operating condition that decided the result. Ranges are measured across plants of the same type; the figure for one site depends on its own baseline and tariff. Client identities are confidential.

Industry

Region

Showing 8 of 8 engagements

Completed engagement · Northern Mexico

Automotive OEM assembly

6–11%lower total electricity cost

Scope: Fifteen-minute interval analysis, peak demand controls, power factor and power quality screening, and submetering of the utility systems.
Also measured: 8–15% lower peak kW and fewer nuisance trips during voltage events.
Simple payback: 9 to 18 months

What decided the resultPeak savings depend on how spiky the top five intervals are and how strictly operations can hold a demand cap.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Completed engagement · Bajío

Automotive Tier 1 machining

20–45%lower compressed-air kWh, system level

Scope: Leak survey and pressure reset, sequencing controls, and a screening of heat-of-compression recovery.
Also measured: 3–8% lower total site kWh.
Simple payback: 6 to 16 months

What decided the resultThe highest returns came where leaks and poor sequencing were present at the same time.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Completed engagement · Central Mexico

Auto parts heat treat

8–18%lower steam fuel use

Scope: Steam trap audit, insulation repairs, boiler tune, and a review of the combustion controls.
Also measured: Improved temperature stability in the heat treat line.
Simple payback: 8 to 20 months

What decided the resultSteam trap failure rates rise sharply once maintenance cycles lapse, so the basics carried most of the saving.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Completed engagement · Northern Mexico

Electronics assembly, clean room

5–10%lower HVAC kWh

Scope: Clean-room air handler control tuning, chilled water optimization, and power quality logging with a mitigation plan.
Also measured: Line stoppages from voltage sags eliminated at this site.
Simple payback: 12 to 24 months

What decided the resultClean-room constraints limit setpoint flexibility. The gains came from controls and sequencing, not from relaxed conditions.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Completed engagement · Central Mexico

Food processing, dairy

10–20%lower refrigeration kWh

Scope: Floating head and condenser optimization, variable speed drives on fans and pumps, and defrost and sequencing tuning.
Also measured: 15–40% fan and pump savings where loads vary.
Simple payback: 12 to 26 months

What decided the resultRefrigeration is a large share of the bill in food plants, so each point of system efficiency is worth more.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Completed engagement · Bajío

Beverage bottling

20–40%lower compressed-air kWh, system level

Scope: Compressed air optimization, a leak management program, and demand smoothing on the packaging lines.
Also measured: 3–7% lower total site kWh.
Simple payback: 6 to 14 months

What decided the resultPackaging plants carry silent leak losses that compound over time. A standing program, not a one-time repair, held the saving.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Completed engagement · Northern Mexico

Cold chain distribution center

50–60%lower lighting energy

Scope: Refrigeration control tuning, LED retrofit, and design of the backup load hierarchy.
Also measured: 8–16% lower refrigeration kWh, depending on the site.
Simple payback: 14 to 30 months

What decided the resultThe resilience value sits in product integrity during grid events, which the payback figure does not capture.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Completed engagement · Central Mexico

Pharmaceuticals, GxP facility

5–12%lower total electricity use

Scope: Chiller plant optimization, air handler scheduling inside compliance constraints, and energy management system monitoring.
Also measured: Improved audit readiness through better metering.
Simple payback: 14 to 32 months

What decided the resultValidated setpoints are the constraint. Sequencing and part-load efficiency are the lever, and neither touches a validated condition.

Discuss a similar plant ↗

Your plant

The next entry in this record is measured at your site

Four fields to start. MEP returns a preliminary analysis of where cost and risk sit at the plant within 1 business day, before you commit to anything.

Request a facility assessment

Vendor-neutralCompensated only by the client
CEMCertified Energy Manager
CMVPCertified Measurement and Verification Professional
ISO 50001Lead Auditor
ASHRAEMember, ASHRAE 211 methodology
IPMVPVerified engagements
Since 2015Mexico City and New York

Feedback from operating and procurement teams

Organizations remain confidential. Verification contacts are available during qualified evaluation.

The energy audit recommendations were practical and supported by solid financial and operational rationale, making them easy to evaluate and act upon.

Lori C. Procurement Manager, Global Auto Parts Supplier

The energy study was very well done and delivered real results. The team took the time to understand how our plant actually operates and provided clear, practical recommendations.

Ismael H. Plant Manager, Global Mining Company

The support we received on our Power Purchase Agreement was excellent. The team conducted a detailed and professional review.

Héctor V. Plant Manager, Global Battery Manufacturer

Feedback from completed engagements. Client identities remain confidential. Individual results depend on facility profile, tariff, contract terms, and execution.

Request an assessment. Get a preliminary analysis in 1 business day.

MEP will show you where cost and risk sit at this plant before you commit to anything. Four fields to start.

Reply from a senior advisor, not a sales team
NDA available before any document is shared
MEP sells no equipment and takes no supplier commissions