Clear answer
Clear answer, explained.
Manufacturing facilities with high daytime electricity loads and significant peak demand charges tend to achieve payback toward the lower end of that range — because the project addresses both energy volume and demand charges simultaneously. The Ce De Candy program achieved a blended payback of 4.2 years across all 11 projects.
A project-specific financial model is required to determine where your facility lands — the variables are too facility-specific for a generic estimate to be meaningful.
Key points
What this means in practice.
- Completed GI manufacturing projects have delivered payback in the 4–7 year range
- Manufacturing facilities with high daytime loads and significant demand charges reach payback toward the lower end
- Projects addressing both energy volume and demand charges simultaneously produce the strongest returns
- The Ce De Candy program achieved a blended payback of 4.2 years across all 11 projects
- Ce De Candy: efficiency and generation planned in sequence delivered $7.2M in lifetime savings
- A project-specific financial model built from utility interval data is the only reliable basis for payback estimation
When this applies
Best-fit environments.
- You are evaluating commercial solar for your manufacturing facility and need a realistic payback range
- Your CFO or board needs a manufacturing-specific payback benchmark before approving an energy project
- You want to understand what factors move a manufacturing project toward the lower end of the payback range
- You are comparing GI's manufacturing project track record against generic industry estimates
Q·01
