Client: A luxury hotel chain engaged NUS Consulting to help minimize its risk exposure while shopping for a variable electricity contract during the summer

Result: NUS minimized the client’s risk and also achieved significant savings of more than seven percent.

Summary: The client maintains sites in one of the most expensive electricity markets in the country. This particular market is expensive due to its geographical location and limited space, two elements which cause capacity constraints. As a result of these limitations, electricity is often delivered to the market from beyond its borders, adding a premium to already elevated prices. In order to offset the client’s risk, NUS proposed that the client purchase an on peak block for the summer months. With prices fluctuating between 14 and 26 percent, the client not only secured a stable price but also achieved more than seven percent in savings for the on peak summer months.

Client: A large radio and television broadcasting company with locations throughout the United States engaged NUS to provide a comprehensive energy management program.

Result: NUS Consulting achieved a refund of $105,000 plus an ongoing reduction of 25 percent of energy costs for the client.

Summary: As part of the services provided to this client, NUS constructed a database of all their vital energy data for each site. In addition to the data stored in the database, the website contained a number of comparative and analytical tools including a year-to-year comparison of usage, cost and other key performance indicators. In June 2009, the company switched from analog to digital transmission equipment which should have reduced energy use significantly. In reviewing the year-to-year comparison for one of their sites located in the Southeast, we found that the expected reduction never occurred. After first confirming that the equipment change did occur, NUS launched an investigation with the utility and discovered that the client was erroneously billed for another company’s meter. As a result, the client received a refund in excess of $105,000 and all future billing was reduced by approximately 25 percent.

Client: A major financial institution with a large rental space in a building in the Northeastern United States engaged NUS to review its energy charges billed by their landlord pursuant to a lease.

Result: NUS Consulting attained a refund of $850,000 USD plus ongoing savings of $175,000 per annum for the client.

Summary: In this case, NUS reviewed the section of the client’s lease which set forth the methodology for calculating the energy charges. As part of the revision, NUS also requested copies of the landlord’s energy bills as they typically form all or part of the basis for calculating the energy charges. After reviewing the lease language and associated formulas along with the landlord’s energy bills, we determined that the billing methodology applied to our client’s bills did not agree with the lease language. After detailing our findings in a written report and letter to the landlord, we conducted a number of meetings/discussions with the landlord and their consultants. We provided the landlord and their consultant with NUS’s detailed calculations of the proper billing that should have been issued pursuant to the lease and upon further discussion, the lease language was modified as per our findings and a refund was issued in the amount of $850,000 to the client. They also realized ongoing savings in excess of $175,000 per annum.

Client: A global manufacturer of plastics and aluminum enlisted NUS Consulting to provide a risk management strategy for its natural gas purchases.

Result: NUS Consulting achieved year on year savings of 20 to 25 percent on behalf of the client.

Summary: In this case, the client hired NUS Consulting to provide active management of its natural gas purchases on the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX). Prior to NUS’s involvement, the client was on a basis contract and hedged calendar year strips. This strategy exposed the client to unnecessary seasonal premiums (i.e. paying up for winter contracts long before delivery, which carry seasonal and time related premiums). To avoid these costs and minimize exposure to seasonal volatility, NUS Consulting recommended the client hedge for shorter time periods. Towards the end of the year, market sentiment indicated that the economy would improve, implying increasing demand and higher energy prices for the coming year. However, NUS anticipated flatter economic growth and identified an oversupplied market. Consequently, NUS recommended the client continue hedging short term. Prices for the first three months of the year fell substantially, contrary to the expectations of market participants. Through NUS Consulting’s experience and insight the client was able to save 20 to 25 percent year on year.

Client: A refuse recycler located in the Mid-Atlantic United States engaged NUS to review its energy expenses.

Result: NUS Consulting secured a cost savings in excess of $250,000 per year for the client.

Summary: This client was particularly concerned about an expiring natural gas contract at one its main processing facilities located in the Northeast. Since natural gas is vital to its operations and has a significant impact on its overall budget, the client required a firm supply at competitive pricing. At the time of engaging NUS, natural gas was being purchased from a third-party marketer with the local utility company providing its transportation to the facility. After reviewing and analyzing the client’s historical invoices and the proposed renewal contract from the marketer, NUS concluded that the renewal price offered by the marketer was competitive. However, NUS discovered that the transportation arrangements with the local utility were unfavorable given the client’s unique usage patterns. NUS submitted a recommendation to remedy the situation and after a thorough review of the situation with the client and utility company, the NUS recommendation was implemented and saved in excess of $250,000 per year.